1500 ATP Minimums for 121

Clocks said:
I'm sure both female students at riddle have heard it too.
Click to expand...
oh_snap.jpg
 
Clocks said:
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.
Click to expand...
what if it is a pay cut of 50-60% over my current CFI pay?
 
BuickCFI said:
what if it is a pay cut of 50-60% over my current CFI pay?
Click to expand...
If my scenario plays out, you wont be making 2x regional starting pay.

And if you're happy being a career CFI (or doing something else non-121) then how this plays out wouldn't really affect you anyways.
 
Clocks said:
If my scenario plays out, you wont be making 2x regional starting pay.

And if you're happy being a career CFI (or doing something else non-121) then how this plays out wouldn't really affect you anyways.
Click to expand...
i would like to try 121 to see if i like it, but not for a pay cut. even money would be ok, but not a huge paycut. and i am over the mins proposed in this thread.

but i do feel to fly for an airline ATP mins (or cert) should be required, as specified in the title of the cert; Airline Transport Pilot. less time work for Asia (in most cases) but their training is much more intense from what i understand, and there requirements to get hired are much stricter. that could work here too, it is all about weeding out the bad ones.
 
JKJCKSN said:
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.
Click to expand...

Which is the argument many use for getting there even with low time.......a not-unreasonable argument, but an interesting counter to the concept of building time. Many guys that stress "climbing the ladder" are the first to zoom to the top if the opportunity presents itself.
 
JKJCKSN said:
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.
Click to expand...

I wanted to be at an airline very quick. Gulfstream was an option for me, however I felt it was degrading and selling myself short. I busted my butt and got hired by 9E with 1750 hours and 350 multi-engine. You do what you have to do to get there- and I was very very well prepared for an airline going that route with many more decisions made and experiences had than the low timers.
 
In my view, this is a step in the right direction, and that's coming from someone who probably never would've been hired had these regulations been in effect 5 years ago (well, might've still been hired, it just would've taken another year of instructing).

The problem is, I don't know how much another year of instructing in a 172 would've helped me transition to an RJ. What probably would've happened, is that I would've bailed for a 135 job at 1200 hours and gained some good experience that way before hitting the airlines. I think that would've been good for me. I could definitely still benefit from some other kind of flying experience today. A modern jet with advanced avionics insulates a developing pilot from so many issues that it's not a stretch to say it impedes the maturation of their airmanship. In this context, the aircraft/incident responsible for this initiative (DHC-8-400) is really no different than an RJ.
 
mtsu_av8er said:
*Sigh*

I've said it before, and those that have been on the board, and have known me since BEFORE my CFI days . . . there are a handful of us that DID take the high road, on principle!

Sometimes the high road is the tough road. But, the payoff is much greater in the end.

For years, people have been saying, 'GET YOUR CFI!". When the hiring was fast a year or two ago, a whole lot of people skipped that part, and decided that being a CFI wasn't "for them". Now, many of them are out of jobs, and not qualified to do much of anything else.

At least those that stayed the course, got their CFI certificates, and maybe got ATP minimums and/or 135 minimums, have a couple more options.
Click to expand...

This. Nothing wrong with getting good experience as a CFI, II, MEI while simultaneously preparing for a rainy day. I'm patiently waiting for the day I can get on with a 135 outfit. Diversify.
 
Polar742 said:
I'm an FO with a PIC type for my equipment.
Click to expand...

Is that an ICAO requirement, though? I'm pretty sure Pinnacle wouldn't even SIC type their FOs if ICAO didn't mandate some form of type rating. It was a new practice when I got here, and you could tell. I wandered into the office after my FO checkride with my 8710 to get my SIC type endorsement, and it took them a while to find out how to get that done.

As for CFIs, I could have EASILY just let mine go this month rather than paying the $125, doing the recurrent training and going to the FSDO to get them renewed. However, I LIKE having options in case my company goes TU. I'm glad I have them.
 
N261ND said:
what about the delta pilots who flew into a downdraft in dallas...
or the value jet pilots in florida...
or the northwest pilots in detroit who forgot to put the flaps in takeoff position?

news flash: regional pilots are human too.
Click to expand...

Ill throw some more out there:

Air France off the coast of Brazil
The recent Fed Ex MD-10 (11) Crash in Japan
The Fed Ex 727 crash in Tallahassee at night (I JUST learned of this one)
The Comair crash in KY (I believe the Captain had over 10,000 and the FO was around 5,000)

Anybody is capable of making a mistake. I think this bill could be a good thing. However its the quality of hours IMO is where the issue is. Which is better 1500 in the pattern doing touch and go's or 1000 IFR cross country?
 
kellwolf said:
Is that an ICAO requirement, though?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it's an IRO requirement.

There are a few places (DAL on your first dream plane, Airways on your first assignment and maybe AA) that type you (not SIC) right away, but I don't think any of the regionals do it.
 
kellwolf said:
Is that an ICAO requirement, though? I'm pretty sure Pinnacle wouldn't even SIC type their FOs if ICAO didn't mandate some form of type rating. It was a new practice when I got here, and you could tell. I wandered into the office after my FO checkride with my 8710 to get my SIC type endorsement, and it took them a while to find out how to get that done.

As for CFIs, I could have EASILY just let mine go this month rather than paying the $125, doing the recurrent training and going to the FSDO to get them renewed. However, I LIKE having options in case my company goes TU. I'm glad I have them.
Click to expand...

It's a requirement for me to be a cruise captain (I use the lower case "c" since I'm a pretender).

Just remember, most majors didn't type either until it was an ICAO requirement.

I know you're down on PCL and all, but alot of what they tend to do is/was industry standard and most operators do the same.

Most operators do what it is required and little more. Customer service comes second. The pay is what the market will bear, whether we like it or not. These are all constants. There can be minor variations, but they are the constants none the less. There is a reason there are natural bell curves.
 
SmoothLanderJ said:
Ill throw some more out there:

Air France off the coast of Brazil
The recent Fed Ex MD-10 (11) Crash in Japan
The Fed Ex 727 crash in Tallahassee at night (I JUST learned of this one)
The Comair crash in KY (I believe the Captain had over 10,000 and the FO was around 5,000)

Anybody is capable of making a mistake. I think this bill could be a good thing. However its the quality of hours IMO is where the issue is. Which is better 1500 in the pattern doing touch and go's or 1000 IFR cross country?
Click to expand...

You disagree with the arbitrary number and I see what you're saying. However, it stands to reason that the more time you have, the more likely you are to have "quality time." There's always exceptions. There are great 700hr pilots and terrible 2500hr pilots. I know plenty of rational 19 year olds...doesn't mean I support lowering the drinking age to 18.

I would hope someone with 1500 dual given would do themselves a favor and get more quality time (CFII, MEI,). I wouldn't expect someone with 1500 hours of VFR C-152 time to be super competitive at a 121 interveiw.
 
Arnie7781 said:
You disagree with the arbitrary number and I see what you're saying. However, it stands to reason that the more time you have, the more likely you are to have "quality time." There's always exceptions. There are great 700hr pilots and terrible 2500hr pilots. I know plenty of rational 19 year olds...doesn't mean I support lowering the drinking age to 18.

I would hope someone with 1500 dual given would do themselves a favor and get more quality time (CFII, MEI,). I wouldn't expect someone with 1500 hours of VFR C-152 time to be super competitive at a 121 interveiw.
Click to expand...

Good points there, cant argue with any of that.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Please God if you expect me to fly with you and not strangle you, do things other than "being an airline pilot". It's a job, you're a person. Presumably. Did you by any chance go to Riddle... :)
Click to expand...

The context is clearer if you quote the entire paragraph.

JKJCKSN said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
Personally I would love to see them throw this 1500 ATP requirement out there. I just want to see the shear chaos that will begin in a couple years when the Age 65ers start retiring. It was already going to be a pretty bad pilot shortage. This is gunna make it UGLY....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top