1500TT minimums ?

Pilot27usa

Pilot27usa

Well-Known Member
Hi JC !

Does anybody can tell me, where I could find details about the new reg that will go into effect in few months from now!? I searched the FAA website and wasn't able to find anything on it.
Thank you !
 
Should be able to just search the forum for the law. The actual FAA reg for the new law hasn't been written yet.
 
Lack of sleep caused an accident in 2009. Took/is taking 4+ years to basically say pilots aren't well rested and should get more sleep.

To appease the masses, Congress passed a bill that said all part 121 pilots must have an ATP.

Make sense?
 
Rotor2Wing said:
Like I said. The final reg has not been written yet that is the "proposed rule" the final reg has not been published in the FAR yet. It is expected to be finalized sometime this spring.
Click to expand...
The industry sure is conducting itself as if (this part, anyway) of HR5900 is fait accompli.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
This is incorrect; an NPRM has been promulgated, and should be available from the Federal Register.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/media/2120-AJ67NPRM.pdf
Click to expand...
Thank you for the info!

I believe the current regs are just fine the way it's, don't see a need for change!
Pic for 121 ATP and sic commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and an instrument rating !

Am I missing something that I don't see it ?

Thanks.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
The industry sure is conducting itself as if (this part, anyway) of HR5900 is fait accompli.
Click to expand...

I too agree. The industry has no choice at this point. More than likely the proposed rule will become the reg but this is the FAA we are talking about. Lots of deep pockets poking at the FAA about this new law.

I want to be clear though about what I'm trying to say. The ATP rule is "law" but the reg that defines the requirements for an ATP is what is under review and waiting for final publication.
 
Rotor2Wing said:
I too agree. The industry has no choice at this point. More than likely the proposed rule will become the reg but this is the FAA we are talking about. Lots of deep pockets poking at the FAA about this new law.

I want to be clear though about what I'm trying to say. The ATP rule is "law" but the reg that defines the requirements for an ATP is what is under review and waiting for final publication.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

It'll be interesting on August 2, 2013, to see if the final rule isn't done, what transpires. Which, given the DOT's record of not having their homework completed on time, is not an outside possibility.
 
Fabio30BR said:
Thank you for the info!

I believe the current regs are just fine the way it's, don't see a need for change!
Pic for 121 ATP and sic commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and an instrument rating !

Am I missing something that I don't see it ?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

As a fomer 121 PIC I absolutley think the SIC should have an ATP. I was hoping I was done giving basic instruction when I left my CFI job. With the batch of low time guys my airline hired, I was still having to teach things like cross wind correction, fuel management and cockpit organization. There are a lot of things you just can't substitute for experience. I'd wager MOST guys and gals that are CAs in the 121 world would agree that the person sitting next to them should have at least an ATP. The job of the first officer is to assist the CA and (if needed) assume command of the aircraft in the event the CA cannot do so. Their job is not to fill the seat so the airline that employs them can dispatch the flight. If the CA croaks on the flight, who would you rather have assuming the controls: someone with experience and an ATP rating or a 300 hour guy that's spent the past year or less tooling around in a Seminole with an instructor who's first real command decision is going to be declaring the emergency he or she just found themselves in?
 
Not knowing crosswind correction is a little scary but I wouldn't expect a kid fresh out of a Seminole with an ATP to have a good grasp of jet fuel management or much else that is new to the 121 world.
 
BrewMaster said:
Lack of sleep caused an accident in 2009. Took/is taking 4+ years to basically say pilots aren't well rested and should get more sleep.

To appease the masses, Congress passed a bill that said all part 121 pilots must have an ATP.

Make sense?
Click to expand...

Let me clear this up for you. The new rest rule regulations that are forthcoming are in response to pilots flying with inadequate rest. The 1500 rule went with it- along with several others, such as the truth in advertising about who you're really flying, and fatigue management programs.

The 1500 rule, in its simplest intent, exists to kill Pay For Job (PFJ). That's PFJ either as an actual check being written to apply for a job, or to pass off "experience gained" as a suitable substitute for livable wages, thereby structuring airline hiring to only the most minimally qualified, least experienced (therefore, cheapest) pilots applicants possible.

The best thing you can do to advance safety is to put two well trained, well rested pilots in the flight deck. This will make strides to help promote that.

Questions?
 
Jet said:
Not knowing crosswind correction is a little scary but I wouldn't expect a kid fresh out of a Seminole with an ATP to have a good grasp of jet fuel management or much else that is new to the 121 world.
Click to expand...

I agree with you Jet. Like you said not knowing the basics would be scary for a new commercial pilot, but however expecting a new hire to know the intricacies of turbine engine is probably something a majority of piston pilots will not know.

We all have to learn at some point... I do not think a 1500 C-172 pilot is going to do any better in a new-hire class than a 500 hour C-172 pilot.
 
purpel said:
I agree with you Jet. Like you said not knowing the basics would be scary for a new commercial pilot, but however expecting a new hire to know the intricacies of turbine engine is probably something a majority of piston pilots will not know.

We all have to learn at some point... I do not think a 1500 C-172 pilot is going to do any better in a new-hire class than a 500 hour C-172 pilot.
Click to expand...

We're not talking new hire class. We're talking actually being a help to the PIC instead of the CA having to wonder if he's going to be single pilot for the next four days. As Autothrust pointed out, it's not the math that's the problem. The only difference in fuel management between a Seminole and a jet are the numbers. The "word problem" is the same. The major difference is you can't just top off the tanks every time in a jet. However, and maybe I'm the odd one out, I had to do fuel burn computations on every checkride from private pilot on. Had to do them when I did flight planning for cross countries as well. It's not a new concept being introduced at the airlines. As a general rule, the only people I have come across against the new rules are the ones that don't meet the new requirements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top