Another Harebrained Idea by AAG

Roger Roger said:
Have you heard of savings?
Click to expand...

Pilots beating up on pilots. "Have you heard of savings" should not be used by any pilot when it comes to a job at a LEGACY carrier. And don't justify it, no matter how high second year pay is. Places like UPS and Hawaiian, the unions continue to screw newhire FOs.

Hey, "it's only for one year."

Yeah, it is. But it's far too painful. See post above about spreading the first two year total cost out. Why can't the union and management agree to that? It's a zero-cost item because the net cost for the first two years is the same. There's just no good reason to have a slope like that, when you know that at a legacy there's a very, very little chance someone will fail out during year 1 or be fired during probation year.
 
Last edited:
surreal1221 said:
Oh, granted, maybe they never achieved anything academically either though.

I was always able to tell those who finished some level of higher education from those who didnt...critical thinking skills were straight up non-existent. Too obvious.
Click to expand...

Do you consider me obviously uneducated?

-Fox
 
z987k said:
Fixed and are you serious?
135 IFR mins to CPL? So just when people get their license you throw them in ancient equipment with some of the highest demands?
Also, the turboprops are significantly harder to fly than the jets. If anything you should stick the 250 hour guy in the right seat of a modern jet and let him work his way to the left seat of a Q. Despite the absurd notion that flying jets is harder from retarded HR people, any pilot that came up flying 402s/pa31s, saabs and 1900s will tell you it's exactly the opposite. Flying jets just means there's more responsibility regarding costs and total numbers of lives.
Click to expand...
So make VFR mins comm mins and IFR 500. However I don't think that'll ever even come into play even if the mins were comm only for IFR operations.

Despite your assertation that they are 'harder' to fly, we went decades without issue putting guys with low time into turboprops (Great Lakes, Mesa, Colgan, etc).

We need a pathway if the FAA is serious about wanting experience up front in larger aircraft and we're not going to get that with the current system.
 
wheelsup said:
So make VFR mins comm mins and IFR 500. However I don't think that'll ever even come into play even if the mins were comm only for IFR operations.

Despite your assertation that they are 'harder' to fly, we went decades without issue putting guys with low time into turboprops (Great Lakes, Mesa, Colgan, etc).

We need a pathway if the FAA is serious about wanting experience up front in larger aircraft and we're not going to get that with the current system.
Click to expand...
Indeed, turboprop flying makes an excellent "finishing school," from my point of view.

(this is the real problem with the 1500-hour rule. 1500 hours in Airplane, SEL is not necessarily indicative of your success in a 121 cockpit.)
 
wheelsup said:
So make VFR mins comm mins and IFR 500. However I don't think that'll ever even come into play even if the mins were comm only for IFR operations.

Despite your assertation that they are 'harder' to fly, we went decades without issue putting guys with low time into turboprops (Great Lakes, Mesa, Colgan, etc).

We need a pathway if the FAA is serious about wanting experience up front in larger aircraft and we're not going to get that with the current system.
Click to expand...
Ya as SIC. That's a significant distinction. If you made 135 ifr mins a cpl then you'd have fresh cpls driving as PIC generally without an sic at all.
135 sic mins currently is a cpl.
 
z987k said:
Ya as SIC. That's a significant distinction. If you made 135 ifr mins a cpl then you'd have fresh cpls driving as PIC generally without an sic at all.
135 sic mins currently is a cpl.
Click to expand...
I really don't see an issue, if guys can pass the rigorous training that places like Airnet, Flight Express, etc had, to fly a Baron or 210 around with a fresh CPL. You're perfectly legal to do that on your own. You have plenty of PIC when you get your CPL.

I wouldn't allow larger turboprops under that program but smaller freight and pax charter? Why not? 1200 hours to fly a Cirrus right now? That has to be a joke. It's killing that part of the industry as well.

There is just no rhyme or reason to the standards in place right now with zero thought given to getting guys from low time to legit experience save for CFI'ing as the majority.
 
wheelsup said:
I really don't see an issue, if guys can pass the rigorous training that places like Airnet, Flight Express, etc had, to fly a Baron or 210 around with a fresh CPL. You're perfectly legal to do that on your own. You have plenty of PIC when you get your CPL.

I wouldn't allow larger turboprops under that program but smaller freight and pax charter? Why not? 1200 hours to fly a Cirrus right now? That has to be a joke. It's killing that part of the industry as well.
Click to expand...
But they weren't. They were SICs to be there with a fresh CPL. A 135 SIC checkride is pretty close to ya they're still breathing, pass.
 
z987k said:
But they weren't. They were SICs to be there with a fresh CPL. A 135 SIC checkride is pretty close to ya they're still breathing, pass.
Click to expand...
Airnet and FLX and those places mostly flew as PIC only. If you can pass that type of training program who cares how many hours you have.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Indeed, turboprop flying makes an excellent "finishing school," from my point of view.

(this is the real problem with the 1500-hour rule. 1500 hours in Airplane, SEL is not necessarily indicative of your success in a 121 cockpit.)
Click to expand...
Washout rates are really high. The current system isn't getting enough guys to the finish line with relevant attitude, intellect, life experience or a combo of all of the above.

We didn't have these washout rates with guys hired with 500 hours. Why? I'm genuinely curious.

The only guys to leave my new hire class back in 2005 was a 1900CA, a 340CA, and a high time older CFI. The Saab guy was asked to leave for attitude issues, the others has issues with aircraft control.

Yet the 350 hour guy sailed right through. Super smart dude.
 
wheelsup said:
Standards were just as good if not higher back then from what I was seeing. The better places haven't lowered theirs.

Mesa? Ok yeah we know. That being said they still haven't put one on the dirt so it's still working.
Click to expand...
The lack of an accident is not indicative of safety or the system working. I thought we all understood that at this point.

If the feds want to mandate something considerably more difficult than the current 135 ride and let anyone with any amount of hours take a shot at it then i might be supportive but thats not how it would work. A lot of places will slow pitch to get a guy through if they need. Especially with in house examiners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top