1500 ATP Minimums for 121

[subpilot]

So, many pilot these days are. He had enough "airline experience" to know what he was doing. His "pilot mill" days were long behind him at this point. Sorry, I just don't get why that's an issue.

From the research I've done on the Colgan 3407 accident, Capt Renslow was tired, perhaps more than usual, during his flight into Buffalo. He had over 3,500 hrs, an ATP cert (obviously), and less than 200 hrs in type (between 100 and 200 hrs), but he had PIC time in Saabs. He eff'd up and failed to recover appropriately and now we should pass legislation to have an ATP cert to get hired for a Part 121 gig because of it?! Crew rest legislation, maybe, but not necessarily 1,500 ATP mins for a job.

But then I'd have to ask, what of all the accidents at other than regional airlines? Again, I don't believe that by passing this law you're going to solve this problem.

I predict that you are low time? I can't figure out why you would be so against this otherwise. So some high time people are not good pilots and some low time people are great pilots. Those are the extreme ends of the bell curve.

For the majority: more time = more experience = better judgement = SAFER PILOT.

 

[cmill]

But then I'd have to ask, what of all the accidents at other than regional airlines? Again, I don't believe that by passing this law you're going to solve this problem.

I partly agree with you. The FO's aren't really the problem, its the captain. Although the FO is definitely culpable for not speaking up and saying anything. And you can scream and yell about fatigue all you want, but when it comes right down to it, she didnt even realize there was a problem. To fatigued to look at an airspeed indicator? Im not buyin that. Either way, i dont want a 250 hour pilot sittin in the right seat.

Or, even worse, a 2000 hour pilot with 250 PIC calling the shots.

Do you want either of those people flying your family around at night, in imc, with a dirty plane? I dont.

 

[JKJCKSN]

I predict that you are low time? I can't figure out why you would be so against this otherwise. So some high time people are not good pilots and some low time people are great pilots. Those are the extreme ends of the bell curve.

For the majority: more time = more experience = better judgement = SAFER PILOT.

I have over 2,200 hrs. I guess that makes me a low-timer, sure. But that's not my "beef". I just don't think the punishment fits the crime, is all. They want to pass legislation to ensure that 121 hires meet ATP mins, but the lack thereof is not what caused the accident--inadequate crew rest, which probably led to poor judgement, and not applying the appropriate stall recovery techniques is what did.

In every facet of our lives, you gotta start somewhere. Surgeons, Police Officers, Attorneys, Air Traffic Controllers, etc. If Part 121 accidents were running rampant AND were cause by "low-time" pilots, then hell yeah, I'd be all for this, but using this accident as an opportunity to pass legislation that won't even solve the problem to begin with is not the best solution.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

This is not a punishment. The only difference between a captain and a first officer in all airlines I know about is seniority. If you don't need an ATP to be a captain why do you need one to be a captain?

 

[JKJCKSN]

I partly agree with you. The FO's aren't really the problem, its the captain. Although the FO is definitely culpable for not speaking up and saying anything. And you can scream and yell about fatigue all you want, but when it comes right down to it, she didnt even realize there was a problem. To fatigued to look at an airspeed indicator? Im not buyin that. Either way, i dont want a 250 hour pilot sittin in the right seat.

Or, even worse, a 2000 hour pilot with 250 PIC calling the shots.

Do you want either of those people flying your family around at night, in imc, with a dirty plane? I dont.

What I want is to be set for life and to never want for anything ever again--since you asked. ;0)

Did you know that 16-year olds are driving cars. On the highway even!! At speeds of up to 75+ mph! At night! Sometimes in snow!! AND, get this. They cause accidents just like people twice or three times their age, but nobody's passing legislation to stop that. AND you're more likely to get into a car accident than be involved in a plane accident.

Seriously, all clowning aside. I want someone who exercises good judgment, regardless of how much flight time they have. I don't what ANY pilot with gobbs of PIC time in type and gobbs of total-time flying me, you, or anybody else, for that matter, if they can't exercise sound, proper judgement. The Colgan crew should of called in sick and/or fatigued; they didn't and we all know the end-result.

Let's focus our energies on better crew rest regulations, is all I'm saying.

 

[cmill]

What I want is to be set for life and to never want for anything ever again--since you asked. ;0)

Did you know that 16-year olds are driving cars. On the highway even!! At speeds of up to 75+ mph! At night! Sometimes in snow!! AND, get this. They cause accidents just like people twice or three times their age, but nobody's passing legislation to stop that. AND you're more likely to get into a car accident than be involved in a plane accident.

Seriously, all clowning aside. I want someone who exercises good judgment, regardless of how much flight time they have. I don't what ANY pilot with gobbs of PIC time in type and gobbs of total-time flying me, you, or anybody else, for that matter, if they can't exercise sound, proper judgement. The Colgan crew should of called in sick and/or fatigued; they didn't and we all know the end-result.

Let's focus our energies on better crew rest regulations, is all I'm saying.

I see your point, we all want pilots who exercise good judgment, but I'll be the first to say, my judgment wasn't spot on with 400 hours, its probably still sub par with 2000 hours, but at least I can admit it, and if i bought the farm, at least it would be just me. I still find myself looking back and going wtf did i do that for? And the majority of the time it was because of get it done attitude. The nice thing is, this attitude is going away, because I dont live in fear of retaliation from my company.

So what if i have to drop 30 bucks on a motel, so what if they reprimand me, and really so what if they FIRE me for not doing something i didnt consider safe. That co-pilot knew she wasnt safe to fly, but she did anyway because she either didnt want to/or couldnt afford to drop the dough on a motel room. Im sure if she could go back and do it she would see it as a wise investment. Unfortuneatly, it looks like her bag of luck ran out before she filled up her bag of experience.

like subpilot said: time=experience=judgement= safer pilot.

 

[BTAcola]

Also people.. dont forget.. ATP minimums is one thing... requiring an ATP certificate is another. Meaning... 1500tt is one thing, but dont forget.. also 500hrs cross country, and per the FARs, 500hrs XC is straight line of 50nm, not point to point as in part 135 requirements. So... if the legislation is passed, to have 1500TT is one thing... to have an ATP certificate before you can be 121 hired is another story. Lets hope the detials are sorted out a little bit more and we can read the WHOLE legislation proposal before its voted on. Im curious to see what ALPA and other orgnaizations think of this... AOPA anyone?

 

[granlistillo]

No question about it! But are there enough CFI and 135 gigs to support the future needs of filling regional crew seats? People refer to the "old days" when it was unheard of for someone to be flying passengers around without at least a few thousand hours of TT - of course, that was also back when there were more opportunities (as well as attrition) in the military.

Okay,
I can rattle of the name of dozens, literally dozens of former Navy squadron mates, and several Air National guard squadron mates that have have at a minimum 1000 hrs heavy jet or turboprop and most over 1500 hrs that are age 35-45 and love flying. I can name 1 each that fly for Continental, Southwest, and American, and Xjet, one other is at a mainline which I can't remember. Two more are furloughed from AA (one won't ever go back). That is 7!!! About 2/3 of the remainder are in the biz world. The other 1/3 are o-5/6s, not looking to go to the airlines, or won't have the recent experience to compete with a well seasoned regional captain. Why won't the other 25-50 (that I somewhat keep up with) not go to the airlines? Because of pay and quality of life that they would have to go through as a JR FO in either the regionals or mainline carriers. They ain't doing it. Now, if they could have 17 days off a month and make $65K a year to start as a FO they would probably do it in a heartbeat. Now what about the experienced ex 121 pilots that love the flying aspects of the job but hate the CRAP that goes with it?
There is no shortage of pilots, even high quality pilots... As stated ad naseaum there is only a shortage of pilots willing to except crap wages and working conditions.

 

[subpilot]

What I want is to be set for life and to never want for anything ever again--since you asked. ;0)

Did you know that 16-year olds are driving cars. On the highway even!! At speeds of up to 75+ mph! At night! Sometimes in snow!! AND, get this. They cause accidents just like people twice or three times their age, but nobody's passing legislation to stop that. AND you're more likely to get into a car accident than be involved in a plane accident.

Seriously, all clowning aside. I want someone who exercises good judgment, regardless of how much flight time they have. I don't what ANY pilot with gobbs of PIC time in type and gobbs of total-time flying me, you, or anybody else, for that matter, if they can't exercise sound, proper judgement. The Colgan crew should of called in sick and/or fatigued; they didn't and we all know the end-result.

Let's focus our energies on better crew rest regulations, is all I'm saying.

A lot of states are imposing regulations on teenage drivers. Some examples are no driving at night, no passengers, etc. Some states are even making them wait until 18 now to get a license. Why, because statistically this age/experience group is much more likely to be involved in a motor vehicle accident.

Now, back to aviation... This proposal is only one of many on the docket. The big items are reduced duty days, increased rest periods that are based on scientific data, and training that is more tailored toward the pilots skill level. It is a new dawn for the regional airline business model that is upon us and it is going to make this industry safer (that is after all the main objective). Will it prevent all future accidents... of course not, but it will improve the statistics.

 

[Polar742]

This will have absolutley no impact on pay. Remember when ASA's mins were 2500? Starting pay was still 16k, and you had to pay for training.

Good point, I was going to bring up the same at CHQ. It was 2500TT (time contractually required to be a CA), PFT 10k for a job to fly right seat in a metro or J31 for 16k a year. (about the late 80s to about 98)

And I can say from running the training records, when the dam broke for expansion, OE was all about the same. The range didn't change from the normal 25-35 hours.

You can legislate anything. If you think a CFI is hungry at 600TT, just think what they'll jump at when they have 2k+ and need that next step in the job.

The history is there to study.

 

[deadstick]

Also people.. dont forget.. ATP minimums is one thing... requiring an ATP certificate is another. Meaning... 1500tt is one thing, but dont forget.. also 500hrs cross country, and per the FARs, 500hrs XC is straight line of 50nm, not point to point as in part 135 requirements. So... if the legislation is passed, to have 1500TT is one thing... to have an ATP certificate before you can be 121 hired is another story. Lets hope the detials are sorted out a little bit more and we can read the WHOLE legislation proposal before its voted on. Im curious to see what ALPA and other orgnaizations think of this... AOPA anyone?

Let's say they raise the minimums to meet all ATP requirements. Why not modify the training so that the FO gets a PIC type and the ATP? They can't jump ship (CAL-737) and go elsewhere (SWA) with a wet CRJ/ERJ type. They'd get laughed at with no PIC time in type.

This would level the training standards (FOM, systems, and piloting skills) for both seats. Then when it's time to go to the left seat, the cost is lower and the training time is shorter.

 

[Clocks]

You can legislate anything. If you think a CFI is hungry at 600TT, just think what they'll jump at when they have 2k+ and need that next step in the job.

The history is there to study.

That's a great point. Instructing to 1500 hours (not to mention the other ATP reqs) is 1-2 years (100 or 50 hours/m, respectively). That's 1-2 years of some silly-low pay, with pay further being pushed down by the dozens of people who just got their CFI who also need 1200 more hours right in line behind you.

People dive into crappy pay regional jobs when the reqs a few hundred hours, imagine how enthusiastic all these people in their mid 20's will feel after trying to pay back college loans on their $1k/m CFI job for 2 years.

Right, wrong, or indifferent, people with 121 as a goal are going to JUMP on ANY job with the potential of a raise over their crappy over-saturated-market CFI pay.

 

[JKJCKSN]

Also people.. dont forget.. ATP minimums is one thing... requiring an ATP certificate is another. Meaning... 1500tt is one thing, but dont forget.. also 500hrs cross country, and per the FARs, 500hrs XC is straight line of 50nm, not point to point as in part 135 requirements. So... if the legislation is passed, to have 1500TT is one thing... to have an ATP certificate before you can be 121 hired is another story. Lets hope the detials are sorted out a little bit more and we can read the WHOLE legislation proposal before its voted on. Im curious to see what ALPA and other orgnaizations think of this... AOPA anyone?

I'm hoping the whole thing gets dropped altogether.

 

[granlistillo]

That's a great point. Instructing to 1500 hours (not to mention the other ATP reqs) is 1-2 years (100 or 50 hours/m, respectively). That's 1-2 years of some silly-low pay, with pay further being pushed down by the dozens of people who just got their CFI who also need 1200 more hours right in line behind you.

People dive into crappy pay regional jobs when the reqs a few hundred hours, imagine how enthusiastic all these people in their mid 20's will feel after trying to pay back college loans on their $1k/m CFI job for 2 years.

Right, wrong, or indifferent, people with 121 as a goal are going to JUMP on ANY job with the potential of a raise over their crappy over-saturated-market CFI pay.

Rising tide may in this case float all boats. CFI pay in 2007 went up substantially as the regionals sucked up all the experienced ones. CFIs in Europe can make over 50K Euros flying 4 hrs a day 5-6 6 days a weeks with all the labor benefits in europe. Fact of the matter, if FO starting pay is high, then what is the incentive to stay a FI? Higher pay with good working conditions. Here it is crap cfi pay, slightly less crappier fo pay, to survivable FO pay to hopefully decent pay as a senior FO or Captain.

 

[JKJCKSN]

A lot of states are imposing regulations on teenage drivers. Some examples are no driving at night, no passengers, etc. Some states are even making them wait until 18 now to get a license. Why, because statistically this age/experience group is much more likely to be involved in a motor vehicle accident.

Now, back to aviation... This proposal is only one of many on the docket. The big items are reduced duty days, increased rest periods that are based on scientific data, and training that is more tailored toward the pilots skill level. It is a new dawn for the regional airline business model that is upon us and it is going to make this industry safer (that is after all the main objective). Will it prevent all future accidents... of course not, but it will improve the statistics.

My guess is that once this is finalized and becomes law, it won't entirely reflect what you've written. This is not an attack towards you or to debate what you've stated, just that if I know Uncle Sam, he'll find a way to ruin such a simple task of doing what you've mentioned is in said docket.

Hate to be a pessimist, but I believe that when it's all said and done, the airlines aren't going to like what you've simply written above as what needs to be changed and will seek out some kind of retribution in return. For them, this ain't 'Burger King' and they will not let us have it our way. Since these issues will cost the airlines in one way or another, it will be interesting to see the end result.

 

[Polar742]

I do know a guy that had about 6k dual given in the 70s. He was hired as a metro FO at Britt airways and had a 6 month upgrade.

I just want to make the point, again, that the cycle has occurred without legislation.

And even now, with the state of the industry, there will be "De facto" mins as no one is hiring, so the average time of the applicant pool will be increased when the windows open again at the entry level. I think the last 10 years in the regional industry were a complete anomaly. Could it happen again? Maybe, but I doubt it, especially anytime in the foreseeable future.

Look at the Colgan thread, most applicants have over 2000 TT. There are some interviews with people around 1000, but most applicants even have prior 121. The pay there hasn't changed.

 

[JKJCKSN]

Let's say they raise the minimums to meet all ATP requirements. Why not modify the training so that the FO gets a PIC type and the ATP? They can't jump ship (CAL-737) and go elsewhere (SWA) with a wet CRJ/ERJ type. They'd get laughed at with no PIC time in type.

This would level the training standards (FOM, systems, and piloting skills) for both seats. Then when it's time to go to the left seat, the cost is lower and the training time is shorter.

I agree. Never fully understood why this doesn't occur already

 

[Polar742]

I'm an FO with a PIC type for my equipment.

 

[popaviator]

I think it's a great idea....I couldn't imagine going to an airline at my current time. I think working at an airline should be the midpoint of someones career, not the beginning.

 

[JKJCKSN]

I think it's a great idea....I couldn't imagine going to an airline at my current time. I think working at an airline should be the midpoint of someones career, not the beginning.

Working at an airline typically IS the mid-point (and sometimes the goal) of one's career. Many first "career pilot" jobs were flight instructing. It's rare to find a pilot that works at an airline right out of flight school--they exist, of course, but few and far in numbers, relatively speaking.

Also, keep in mind that life here on planet Earth is finite, for most of us. As a saying goes, seniority is EVERYTHING at an airline--the sooner you get there, the better off you are (in theory)! If your goal is to be an airline pilot, you wouldn't want to spend too much time doing much else.