ALPA call to action flight time limits, open to everyone

But again, irrelevant metric.

That's like saying women make up just 5% of the overall airline pilot group, but they represent (have been in) over 50% of recent fatal airline crashes since 9/11. Capital Cargo Carriers CRW, UPS at BHM, Colgan 3407, Ocean Chalks 101, Air Midwest 5481. The legacy airlines haven't had a fatal hull loss since 11/2001, but there were incidents like SWA at MDW (male crew) and a female CA for flt 341 at LGA nose collapse. Either way, you can't deny that this certain group that is 5% of the total pilot group are showing up in 50% (or more) fatal accidents in pax airlines since 9/11.

So that does that mean much? Can you really draw a conclusion?
 
Last edited:
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
But again, irrelevant metric.

That's like saying women make up just 5% of the overall airline pilot group, but they represent (have been in) over 50% of recent fatal airline crashes since 9/11. Capital Cargo Carriers CRW, UPS at BHM, Colgan 3407, Ocean Chalks 101, Air Midwest 5481. The legacy airlines haven't had a fatal hull loss since 9/11, but there were incidents like SWA at MDW (male crew) and a female CA for flt 341 at LGA nose collapse. Either way, you can't deny that this certain group that is 5% of the total pilot group are showing up in 50% (or more) fatal accidents in pax airlines since 9/11.

So that does that mean much? Can you really draw a conclusion?
Click to expand...

Not touching this. Nope.
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
Not touching this. Nope.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There's no co-relation, no definite proof they are crashing because of one conclusive factor. You can't say these planes are crashing because of women. That's my issue with ALPA saying the new FO requirement rules since 2010 has had 0 fatalities since then, whereas the 20 years before had fatal crashes and 1,000+ fatalities. Yeah, there were crashes and fatalities but that has nothing to do with our safety record from 2010-2017 or the FO hour requirements. And certainly, these FO hour requirement and stall training rules would not have changed the outcome of those fatal crashes.


ALPA is trying to swing a self-righteous sword about the 2010 safety law by touting safety since 2010-2017, which by itself would be fine, but no reason to throw the previous fatal crashes into their argument for it. Those crashes did not happen because of low time FOs.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Exactly. There's no co-relation, no definite proof they are crashing because of one conclusive factor. You can't say these planes are crashing because of women. That's my issue with ALPA saying the new FO requirement rules since 2010 has had 0 fatalities since then, whereas the 20 years before had fatal crashes and 1,000+ fatalities. Yeah, there were crashes and fatalities but that has nothing to do with our safety record from 2010-2017 or the FO hour requirements. And certainly, these FO hour requirement and stall training rules would not have changed the outcome of those fatal crashes.


ALPA is trying to swing a self-righteous sword about the 2010 safety law by touting safety since 2010-2017, which by itself would be fine, but no reason to throw the previous fatal crashes into their argument for it. Those crashes did not happen because of low time FOs.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. It's frustrating to see an organization as large and influential as ALPA making propaganda claims. The "there is no pilot shortage" claim comes to mind.
 
I'd be really interested in the ASAP reports before and after the 2010 rule change.

That sounds like a great dissertation/thesis for you Embry -riddle types out there.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Exactly. There's no co-relation, no definite proof they are crashing because of one conclusive factor. You can't say these planes are crashing because of women. That's my issue with ALPA saying the new FO requirement rules since 2010 has had 0 fatalities since then, whereas the 20 years before had fatal crashes and 1,000+ fatalities. Yeah, there were crashes and fatalities but that has nothing to do with our safety record from 2010-2017 or the FO hour requirements. And certainly, these FO hour requirement and stall training rules would not have changed the outcome of those fatal crashes.


ALPA is trying to swing a self-righteous sword about the 2010 safety law by touting safety since 2010-2017, which by itself would be fine, but no reason to throw the previous fatal crashes into their argument for it. Those crashes did not happen because of low time FOs.
Click to expand...
Many of the people who initially advocated for the rule flat out admitted it had nothing to do with safety and everything to do with limiting supply.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
He wasn't wrong, and well... It worked.

I kinda feel bad for the families who were essentially used.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
Hey, just ask Representative Chris Colllins (clueless stooge from NY...also a massive Orange Clown supporter (but that's outside the scope of this discussion)), he supports the continuation of the FO Qualification. But he also believes the only reason 3407 happened was due to pilot error. This is no advocate of ALPA positions or policy. Just some dumbass flunky congressman that thinks he's a savior to aviation. Hey Chris (#RepChrisCollins)....go F yourself!

Obviously the crew made mistakes; however to blame the accident solely on pilot error is totally outside anything worthy of discussion.
 
Last edited:
The following excerpt is from and APA email to the membership, dated yesterday, Sept.27.

DOT Releases Advisory Group Report on First Officer Qualifications
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) asked the Department of Transportation this week to release an advisory group’s 2016 recommendations on alternative ways for prospective airline pilots to get credit toward required flight hours.

The Senate Commerce Committee chairman’s request came as his panel’s long-term FAA bill, S. 1405 (115), remains stalled over the issue of whether lawmakers should sanction other ways, besides military and college experience, for pilots to gain credit for the 1,500-hour mandate for first officers.

“Given the importance of the matter of pilot pathways, I believe that ongoing policy discussions would be greatly informed if the public had access to the recommendations of this expert working group,” Thune wrote to Secretary Elaine Chao on Oct. 25.

FAA spokesman Gregory Martin said the recommendations “are just that,” and the agency hasn’t endorsed them.

“As with most ARC reports and recommendations, they are routinely posted in the interest of transparency and related to ongoing public interest in an issue,” he said.

FAA Administrator Michael Huerta told the Southwest Airlines’ Pilots Association last month that regulators have no “plans to change anything” about current credit allowances toward the 1,500 hours. “We believe pretty strongly that if Congress desires a change in it, they have to give us specific direction to do that,” he said.

APA opposes any change in the existing requirements, which were enacted after several accidents involving regional carriers, including the Colgan Air crash in 2009 that killed 50 people.
 
chart-airline-safety-act-2010.png

I have a question about this. Seeing that the last accident, 3407, happened in 09, what are the odds that the accident free trend would have continued if 3407 never crashed. What I mean is if colgan never crashed and the accident free period started in 2207 what would the likelihood have been of being fatal accident free for the past 11 years?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top