1500 hr rule going away??

z987k said:
I think making people do the full type rather than just an SIC type or PC helps weed people out a lot as well. You should be able to pass a PIC type on a new airplane after 6-8 sims by the time you get to the level of 121 flying.
Click to expand...
There may be an argument there. My personal opinion is no, all things being equal... *staring down the NMFC of Memphis's Pinnacle Airline training department right now*
Anyone still remember ACA's fail rates from years ago on the RJ? If everyone had an AQP program, a well regulated training department, yeah that might be a help. All I see is a wild wild difference from one airline to the next on training departments. It's not like it's flight safety's customer mentality.
 
z987k said:
I think making people do the full type rather than just an SIC type or PC helps weed people out a lot as well. You should be able to pass a PIC type on a new airplane after 6-8 sims by the time you get to the level of 121 flying.
Click to expand...
Empirical evidence shows otherwise. I know my company was really pushing it at 10 sims and quite a few people needed more when they went to the PIC type requirement.
 
wheelsup said:
Empirical evidence shows otherwise. I know my company was really pushing it at 10 sims and quite a few people needed more when they went to the PIC type requirement.
Click to expand...
Well I'd make the argument that they were either not training well or had substandard applicants. At least with the latter case, why I think it is helping to weed people out.
 
z987k said:
Well I'd make the argument that they were either not training well or had substandard applicants. At least with the latter case, why I think it is helping to weed people out.
Click to expand...
Basically all I hear is someone talking out their butt.
 
z987k said:
Ok, why did people need more sims? Was the instruction that bad? Because it's not hard.
Click to expand...
When I started I was nervous about the PIC/ATP type having never pinked a ride and not wanting to bust this one. It was also my first jet and my first 121 job, I was concerned that maybe I couldn't do it or that I wasn't quite ready for the slamdunk checkride. Part of that fear was that going through school up to this point so many instructors made it a point to iron out how difficult airline training was. When I made it through the ground school I didn't think it was too hard so I expected the difficult stuff to show up soon, amd every step of the way I started expecting it to get really tough and that the easy stuff was over.

I was told around sim 3 that we should expect more because "everyone" was getting them. The company wasn't willing to risk a pink slip when we could just do another sim, and to my mind I was perfectly OK with that.

When we came up for our rides my sim partner and I both got the graces to move forward without any extra sims, the day of the checkride I know of at least 2 more that made it and passed without any extra sims.

Having just finished, I know some people got extras and some were sent home, but I can't say if it was the majority just yet. But, I don't think it was too tough.
 
Johnny Beau Bekkestad said:
Not that i know the answer to this question, but how many crashes has there been with lowtimers?
Both pilots in Buffalo met ATP mins.
Click to expand...

The sample size (low number of accidents) is not large enough to draw conclusions.

There is good anacedotal evidence though, that the decision making skills that one gets in their first 1,000 hours as PIC in an aircraft does translate into safe habits and better airmanship far later on. I feel very comfortable arguing that based on the performance of my students and the nature of their low-time experiences (spoiler: the ones with good pre-airline experience do a lot better when things go sideways)

Safety numbers are highly skewed anyway - they normally look at incidents per 100,000 hours, while incidents per cycle is far more meaningful (few accidents happen during a 10 hour cruise...). Given the high number of cycles regional pilots do, they are probably safer statistically
 
drunkenbeagle said:
The sample size (low number of accidents) is not large enough to draw conclusions.

There is good anacedotal evidence though, that the decision making skills that one gets in their first 1,000 hours as PIC in an aircraft does translate into safe habits and better airmanship far later on. I feel very comfortable arguing that based on the performance of my students and the nature of their low-time experiences (spoiler: the ones with good pre-airline experience do a lot better when things go sideways)

Safety numbers are highly skewed anyway - they normally look at incidents per 100,000 hours, while incidents per cycle is far more meaningful (few accidents happen during a 10 hour cruise...). Given the high number of cycles regional pilots do, they are probably safer statistically
Click to expand...

Not sure if i agree that someone who timebuilds a c152 for 1250 hours and then goes into an RJ is in a much more favorable position than someone who got into the RJ at 250h has constant training that includes stall recognition and recovery etc..
 
Johnny Beau Bekkestad said:
Not sure if i agree that someone who timebuilds a c152 for 1250 hours and then goes into an RJ is in a much more favorable position than someone who got into the RJ at 250h has constant training that includes stall recognition and recovery etc..
Click to expand...

I would guess that in those 1250 hours the guy probably had to make more decisions that kept him alive than a guy flying those same number of hours in the right seat of an RJ did.
 
Bottom line is: if you are low time, you always will be. You will never, at 5k, 10k, or 30k hours ever have the right base of experience required. You will always be a liability when the crap hits the fan.

There is nothing you can do, short of "getting that first 1500" outside of your airline comfort zone, if you want to be a true aviator and an asset to your crew and company.

Go get another rating, get that CFI, fly at home and put yourself in situations where you learn.
 
I know at least 2 current CFI's with well over 1500hrs working for a major flight school that are just walking near miss accidents/incidents waiting to happen. Sever lack of focus and attention to detail. So easily distracted. I often wonder how they received their CFI cert. Was his 3rd flight school. Thankfully both have come to realize the airline world is not a place for their skill level. One went to airlines & it didn't work out, he went to instructing.

Flight Schools especially the academies are dying for Instructors so I think if you have a pulse w/ your CFI cert, you got the job. I remember back in the days. Focus today is not on quality IMHO.

FAKE IT TILL YOU MAKE IT.
 
BobDDuck said:
I would guess that in those 1250 hours the guy probably had to make more decisions that kept him alive than a guy flying those same number of hours in the right seat of an RJ did.
Click to expand...

This is where i disagree.
You might fly those 1250 hours in that 152 up and down the florida coast and have absolutely nothing serious happen. Most people that own a plane don't have serious mishaps.
But once you are in a 121 environment, there are rules and regulations that specify scenarios you need to be subjected to in a simulator. And you will need to pass them. And those scenarios will be specific to the type of A/C you would be flying.
 
Johnny Beau Bekkestad said:
And those scenarios will be specific to the type of A/C you would be flying.
Click to expand...

Sure... and you will be able to fly the hell out of a coupled ILS to mins or a V1 cut. But when stuff goes wrong that forces you to think outside the box, or make good decisions, you'll be completely lost. I watched it happen to many low time hire FOs all the time.

And I disagree that nothing ever happens flying up and down the coast of Florida in a 152 for 1250 hours. In my 100 hours of flying the east coast of Florida I made many, many weather and fuel decisions, dealt with two engine failure type problems (one in a Cessna on a checkride and one in a Seminole while flying an XC).
 
I've had way more things go wrong while flight instructing than I have had in an RJ. This is like a retirement job in comparison.

But when things go wrong now, they go wrong FAST, and without the prior experience of having things hit the fan in smaller, slower aircraft, you're dealing with a very serious experience gap.

You fill in that experience gap with, you guessed it, more experience before you get to the RJ.
 
jtrain609 said:
I've had way more things go wrong while flight instructing than I have had in an RJ. This is like a retirement job in comparison.

But when things go wrong now, they go wrong FAST, and without the prior experience of having things hit the fan in smaller, slower aircraft, you're dealing with a very serious experience gap.

You fill in that experience gap with, you guessed it, more experience before you get to the RJ.
Click to expand...

Hows the new gig at California Pacific going? Heard they opened a DTW base. ;)
 
I started my career at 250tt in a 135 job. Now it was no jet aircraft for sure, just a slow turboprop. But I could not imagine being thrown into a jet with that experience level. Fortunately for me I had a great set of Captains that have been preparing to move into a PIC role. Just recently I moved into a PIC role, and honestly the transition was so easy. Prior to the upgrade I was making a lot of the decision making. In my time I had a number of issues, including an engine shutdown in flight. The whole experience has taught me a lot about CRM and DM. I think everybody should have an opportunity to have this experience, just not in a jet.
 
SeanD said:
Hows the new gig at California Pacific going? Heard they opened a DTW base. ;)
Click to expand...

In fact they did! It's part of the latest east coast expansion. I think our next east coast hub will likely be in Altoona, PA, so the company can corner the O&D traffic that is going from there to Palm Springs currently. I'm excited about the opportunities at California Pacific, even though I'm going to be based in LAX for the first month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top