1500 ATP Minimums for 121

[Screaming_Emu]

Mine is kinda small (shamefully)

well played

Speaking of (and way off subject) what's with people who finish using a urinal in a public restroom who don't zip up until they're turned around and walking away. I don't need to see that.

Just an observation I made today

 

[SpiceWeasel]

I'd be very interested in finding out the grandfather limitations of this bill.... I've flown 180 hours this year so far and my TT is around 1100 or so.... So if I'm flying 360 hours a year (projected), it'll take me until 2011 to get to the magical 1500 time.

 

[jtrain609]

You know what??

No tri hole experience here...although I have jumpseated on the L1011

I am at Ryan out of RFD on the 76..How about yourself?

Just another furloughed regional guy, gettin' out of the industry.

Surprising you think everything with this job is so easy even a caveman could do it.

 

[captnem]

well played

Speaking of (and way off subject) what's with people who finish using a urinal in a public restroom who don't zip up until they're turned around and walking away. I don't need to see that.

Just an observation I made today

I think some people just want to see if you look "down there" and if you do they will prance after you and track you down. I know I really dont want to see some 67 year old trying to zip up while his Mr.Happy is flopping.

 

[ProudPilot]

Surprising you think everything with this job is so easy even a caveman could do it.

I was waiting for this!

well played

Speaking of (and way off subject) what's with people who finish using a urinal in a public restroom who don't zip up until they're turned around and walking away. I don't need to see that.

Just an observation I made today

I'm mad when I see pilots, in a pilot lounge, piss on the toilet seat and then don't clean it up. I get REALLY mad when I see a pilot not wash their hands, then go fly an aircraft and then I have to fly it after them,

 

[ladder360]

If you want to call a spade a spade, then somebody who has never stepped foot in a 135 or 121 cockpit is arguing the merits of low timers into a type of operation that they've never actually witnessed or been a part of.

But I don't like that argument very much, and I don't think it has a whole lot of merit in most situations. That being said, I've trained folks before, and I know at this point in the game (and I'm still a low timer, in my opinion) when I look back, I didn't have a clue at 250 hours. Heck I didn't have a clue at 650 when I went to Amflight, or 900 when I got to Express. Further, I still don't really know what I'm doing, and I kind of wonder when you really get it all figured out and you suddenly transcend everything aviation and become one with the job that you do. Maybe when you retire, who knows. But I DO think those that say they have it ALL figured out at 1,400 hours are the dangerous ones.

All that being said, I had no business being in a transport category jet at 250 hours. I could barley stay in front of a student doing steep turns, let alone a jet moving at 450 knots.

Definitely a fair argument! As well as those from USMCmech and Arnie. And I couldn't agree more with the most dangerous guys being the 1400 know-it-alls. In any industry, the biggest liabilities are the semi-proficient ones who forgot that there is always something to learn.

Having said all that, I'm all about the creation of a scenario where pilots are required to demonstrate a proficiency level commensurate with the task with which they are charged. To me, this includes physical skill, experience and perhaps most importantly, a well developed critical thinking acumen.

My main point here is that I see a Pandora's Box being opened if creating higher time requirements is really a cloak for creating a demand scenario to boost pay. But then again, I don't really know squat. Just trying to learn.

 

[jtrain609]

I think the problem with just passing a PC is that all you're showing is that you can fly out of a V1 cut (kind of a joke), run some flows (even a caveman could do this) and generally not crash the airplane in a very controlled environment.

The real trick is what you do on the line, day in, day out. How you respond to abnormals, what you do when things hit the fan, blah blah blah. Some will argue, but I'm not sure we have a checking system in place (for FO's) to see that they are able to do this BEFORE they hit the line. Simply put, you're not going to know some of these things until you actually get put into the airplane.

So with that, having some previous experience helps to make sure you've "been there and done that," at least in some fashion. My first emergencies were not declared with 50 people riding behind me, they were done in Cessna 172's and Chieftains and I think those experiences helped me a lot when I got to a transport category jet.

I think most people that simply shrug this stuff off don't remember how rough it was for them to get on top of things, or want to act macho and not show any signs of a possible weakness in their own training.

I also look at this a lot differently after having flown the line and having trained people to fly the line (different companies). Pilots all think their crap don't stink. I found as a trainer, most people's do, it's just a matter of getting them into a position where they can safely deal with their problem areas (we all of them) and complete the mission.

 

[Firebird2XC]

Definitely a fair argument! As well as those from USMCmech and Arnie. And I couldn't agree more with the most dangerous guys being the 1400 know-it-alls. In any industry, the biggest liabilities are the semi-proficient ones who forgot that there is always something to learn.

Having said all that, I'm all about the creation of a scenario where pilots are required to demonstrate a proficiency level commensurate with the task with which they are charged. To me, this includes physical skill, experience and perhaps most importantly, a well developed critical thinking acumen.

My main point here is that I see a Pandora's Box being opened if creating higher time requirements is really a cloak for creating a demand scenario to boost pay. But then again, I don't really know squat. Just trying to learn.

Much of what is going on is politics, and if there was ever a place where things can't be taken at face value, it's politics.

 

[JKJCKSN]

Forget this legislation B.S. to have 1,500 ATP mins for a Part 121 gig!! If the U.S. Navy can train guys right out of college to fly a jet at over Mach 2.0, drop bombs on targets with pin-point accuracy, dog-fight, fly long missions, land on a bobbing aircraft carrier at night in crappy weather, etc., etc., AND do all this single-pilot--it all sounds like it comes down to quality training and a good head on your shoulders!

And I don't give a toot about the fact that we carry passengers in the back, vice the military. I've got a far greater vested interest in the safe operation of my aircraft than some paying passenger back in the cabin. AND I've got the means to do something about it since I'm the one flying my aircraft.

Out of all the regional flying (i.e. take-offs and landings) that most of us in the 121 industry do on a daily basis, without mishap, I might add, we single out one accident to prompt legislation for change in how we hire pilots. Which won't stop accidents from occuring anyway (since it never was the cause of the accident to begin with)--it's all about appeasing ignorant citizens that know, and probably care, nothing about how our side of the industry works, just as long as they can get there in the cheapest and faster manner possible. "Gotta give the impression that I'm doing something, so I can get re-elected" is all that's going on here.

Companies need to hire good people, provide them good equipment and fair working conditions, allow them to excerise the good judgement that you hired them for without fear of reprisal, and many of our problems should disappear.

Just a thought. The "soap box" is now free for someone else to use.

 

[captnem]

I think the problem with just passing a PC is that all you're showing is that you can fly out of a V1 cut (kind of a joke), run some flows (even a caveman could do this) and generally not crash the airplane in a very controlled environment.

The real trick is what you do on the line, day in, day out. How you respond to abnormals, what you do when things hit the fan, blah blah blah. Some will argue, but I'm not sure we have a checking system in place (for FO's) to see that they are able to do this BEFORE they hit the line. Simply put, you're not going to know some of these things until you actually get put into the airplane.

So with that, having some previous experience helps to make sure you've "been there and done that," at least in some fashion. My first emergencies were not declared with 50 people riding behind me, they were done in Cessna 172's and Chieftains and I think those experiences helped me a lot when I got to a transport category jet.

I think most people that simply shrug this stuff off don't remember how rough it was for them to get on top of things, or want to act macho and not show any signs of a possible weakness in their own training.

I also look at this a lot differently after having flown the line and having trained people to fly the line (different companies). Pilots all think their crap don't stink. I found as a trainer, most people's do, it's just a matter of getting them into a position where they can safely deal with their problem areas (we all of them) and complete the mission.

Good Post. PC's are a joke. The only thing that changes is the check airman. The only thing I would argue against is: does it matter if 250, 50 or 1 person is behind you? "I" really dont want to die in a stupid airplane. "I" really want to save my life as well as those behind me. It could be argued that an emergency in a jet with TWO pilots is a much better environment to have, than in a 172, hard IFR, Partial Panel, GPS out, thunderstorms galore, turbulence beating you silly, SINGLE PILOT.

 

[captnem]

Forget this legislation B.S. to have 1,500 ATP mins for a Part 121 gig!! If the U.S. Navy can train guys right out of college to fly a jet at over Mach 2.0, drop bombs on targets with pin-point accuracy, dog-fight, fly long missions, land on a bobbing aircraft carrier at night in crappy weather, etc., etc., AND do all this single-pilot--it all sounds like it comes down to quality training and a good head on your shoulders!

And I don't give a toot about the fact that we carry passengers in the back, vice the military. I've got a far greater vested interest in the safe operation of my aircraft than some paying passenger back in the cabin. AND I've got the means to do something about it since I'm the one flying my aircraft.

Out of all the regional flying (i.e. take-offs and landings) that most of us in the 121 industry do on a daily basis, without mishap, I might add, we single out one accident to prompt legislation for change in how we hire pilots. Which won't stop accidents from occuring anyway (since it never was the cause of the accident to begin with)--it's all about appeasing ignorant citizens that know, and probably care, nothing about how our side of the industry works, just as long as they can get there in the cheapest and faster manner possible. "Gotta give the impression that I'm doing something, so I can get re-elected" is all that's going on here.

Companies need to hire good people, provide them good equipment and fair working conditions, allow them to excerise the good judgement that you hired them for without fear of reprisal, and many of our problems should disappear.

Just a thought. The "soap box" is now free for someone else to use.

Agreed. Now people will say "but the military is highly selective with its candidates" and the training is out of this world great. I agree. But, just like anything, the weak don't survive very long.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Companies need to hire good people, provide them good equipment and fair working conditions, allow them to excerise the good judgement that you hired them for without fear of reprisal, and many of our problems should disappear.

But that's not happening at most companies, is it? The fact is, these companies have had many many years to police themselves into stricter regulatory compliance than the FARs stipulate. In the 135 charter world, I keep harping that there are outside agencies that customers can use to ensure certain metrics are met in regards to the company, crew, and aircraft they are chartering. These are outside third party vendors that do this. No such thing exists in 121, and as such, even Colgan management told the board, "everyone else does it". They have no motivation to make things safer than they are for the passengers. Enter the oftentimes inefficient, overly bureaucratic government. The changes that they seek as a result of the accident will make make life safer and better for the pilots.... and since we're often the first at the scene of an accident, better for the passengers too. I don't go to work on a daily basis with a death wish.

 

[JKJCKSN]

But that's not happening at most companies, is it? The fact is, these companies have had many many years to police themselves into stricter regulatory compliance than the FARs stipulate. In the 135 charter world, I keep harping that there are outside agencies that customers can use to ensure certain metrics are met in regards to the company, crew, and aircraft they are chartering. These are outside third party vendors that do this. No such thing exists in 121, and as such, even Colgan management told the board, "everyone else does it". They have no motivation to make things safer than they are for the passengers. Enter the oftentimes inefficient, overly bureaucratic government. The changes that they seek as a result of the accident will make make life safer and better for the pilots.... and since we're often the first at the scene of an accident, better for the passengers too. I don't go to work on a daily basis with a death wish.

I disagree. Once the government gets involve with this legislation that their proposing, it's all over--things won't get any better and life as you know it in the airlines will change for the worse. Colgan's 3407 accident was a result of poor judgement, which, being a pilot, is a prime requisite for the job. Legislation cannot fix that; that rests with each and every individual.

To explain a bit further; it was dark, there was ice building up, they were tired, etc., so they weren't in the best situation to handle what was happening, and what transipred. But that's when you really have to step up your judgement-call game and do what you can you gain back the advantage.

Hind-sight, of course, is 20-20, but when I find myself behind the eight ball in the cockpit, I give it all that I have to ensure my performance is up to par--that means, in reference to the accident, that you cut out the B.S. chatting; you ensure all checklist are complied with AND completed; you focus on flying the airplane, etc. The Colgan crew treated this as just another "walk in the park"--and many times, because of our operating routines, it seems like it, but this time is wasn't. Another walk in the park to an airline pilot is not what they were experiencing by any means (e.g., daylight, VFR conditions, aircraft free of contamination, etc.).

It all comes back to having AND excercising good judgement, which people, being human, fail to do from time-to-time. Legislation just can't fix that, but allowing the gene-pool to be weeded out can.

 

[mtsu_av8er]

The outcry for mins to be raised is not about safety, it's about pay.

It's about weeding out a lot of people that shouldn't be there. If a guy doesn't have the patience and strength to go out there, bust his butt in the pattern as a CFI, and/or throw some boxes, and/or whatever it takes to get the time and experience (s)he needs, then I know I don't have much use for them.

Some people are too nice to say it, but I really don't mind.

 

[Socal321]

All that being said, I had no business being in a transport category jet at 250 hours. I could barley stay in front of a student doing steep turns, let alone a jet moving at 450 knots.

I was one of them. You just have to not kid yourself and know what you're doing. It's not very hard.

A lot of people showed up and failed because the fact that the company hired them at 250 hours made them think they were qualified to fly. It's not a try out.

 

[H46Bubba]

It's about weeding out a lot of people that shouldn't be there. If a guy doesn't have the patience and strength to go out there, bust his butt in the pattern as a CFI, and/or throw some boxes, and/or whatever it takes to get the time and experience (s)he needs, then I know I don't have much use for them.

Some people are too nice to say it, but I really don't mind.

We love you too Lloyd!

 

[USMCmech]

IIt all comes back to having AND excercising good judgement, which people, being human, fail to do from time-to-time. Legislation just can't fix that, but allowing the gene-pool to be weeded out can.

Requireing an ATP for 121 flying is a very effective way of weeding out the pilot gene pool.

 

[Baronman]

It's about weeding out a lot of people that shouldn't be there. If a guy doesn't have the patience and strength to go out there, bust his butt in the pattern as a CFI, and/or throw some boxes, and/or whatever it takes to get the time and experience (s)he needs, then I know I don't have much use for them.

Well said.

 

[JKJCKSN]

Requireing an ATP for 121 flying is a very effective way of weeding out the pilot gene pool.

Part 121 PIC flying already requires an ATP certificate.

 

[jhugz]

I have no problem building up experience to 1500TT and ATP mins except for the age requirements. That really needs to be lifted. I think it would be a good thing for the industry.

The only problem I see with the bill is the blame is being passed mostly down on unexperienced pilots. Which is again not a big deal having some experienced in both seats would be great but the blame also needs to land on the companies lap. Better work rules (Duty Days, Commuting, PAYYYY!) should all be regulated just like they are increasing regulation on the pilots.