Article: Are pilots flying beyond their limits?

MPL is a completely separate issue. ALPA only supports MPL under very strict criteria which don't exist in today's industry. A complete revamping of training in this country would have to take place in order for ALPA to be on board with MPL.

Regarding mandating 1,500 hours and an ATP, you should visit ALPA's public page to read testimony from Captain Prater supporting the bill, and since you're a Teamster, you should also read public statements from CAPA which support the bill. With all of the profession's experts on one side of the debate, you should ask yourself why you're on the other.
 
Polar742 said:
How much TT do you need for an ATP?

I recognize other requirements for the license.
Click to expand...
don't mean to go back and forth on this but how does someone argue 1500TT but in the same sentence support having an ATP when they know that 1500TT is a prereq for an ATP? If you are leading to a Frozen ATP argument that is one thing but until the FAA starts considering that aspect it makes little sense because we have no Frozen ATP in the USA.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
MPL is a completely separate issue. ALPA only supports MPL under very strict criteria which don't exist in today's industry. A complete revamping of training in this country would have to take place in order for ALPA to be on board with MPL.

Regarding mandating 1,500 hours and an ATP, you should visit ALPA's public page to read testimony from Captain Prater supporting the bill, and since you're a Teamster, you should also read public statements from CAPA which support the bill. With all of the profession's experts on one side of the debate, you should ask yourself why you're on the other.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Let's put it this way:

I have no problem with an ATP, as I stated. I'd even say the hour requirements are not a factor, I was merely stating my position.

I'd like to see the MPL training requirements used as a base to revamp the civilian training ladder, as they would improve the areas I discussed in my lengthy post.

And, because I disagree with ALPA and CAPA on one point (the hour requirement for ATP) doesn't automatically put me at odds with them, as you'd like to insinuate. Actually, combining the MPL training ideas while getting rid of the MPL, and adding the ATP as a requirement to fly 121 is fine by me.

However, if my disagreement on one area of this constitutes me being against needed changes in the industry in your eyes, such is life.

When you re-read my post and take time to understand that my points directly relate to 3407 and what I think it could catalyze versus what I think needs changed in the industry, you'll see that what I think needs changed is contained, in part, in 3407.

Like I pointed out, there are many things that need changed. Only so much can come from this accident.
 
subpilot said:
don't mean to go back and forth on this but how does someone argue 1500TT but in the same sentence support having an ATP when they know that 1500TT is a prereq for an ATP? If you are leading to a Frozen ATP argument that is one thing but until the FAA starts considering that aspect it makes little sense because we have no Frozen ATP in the USA.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I brought up the idea of a frozen ATP in my post, which would not waive the hour requirements to exercise the certificate.

If you're going to change things, change them.

We need to revamp our thought processes and take a "clean sheet" look at things.

Some stuff works, some doesn't. There is space for debate there. A debate no one seems to want.
 
Trip7 said:
Exhibit #249,307 on what happens when you go to a lower tier regional for the quick upgrade, and you end up getting stuck as FO for years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 'cause no ASA guys are getting crap schedules. Oh, BTW. Upgrading didn't make me suddenly not get schedules that are fatiguing. Let's stop the "My regional sucks less than your regional" BS, huh?
 
I can't believe no one's said "Na..." oops, almost did it! :)
 
Trip7 said:
Exhibit #249,307 on what happens when you go to a lower tier regional for the quick upgrade, and you end up getting stuck as FO for years.
Click to expand...

Exhibit #249,308 for why the first post on a thread can hijack the whole damn thing.

This was about pilot fatigue at one time wasn't it?
 
kellwolf said:
Was it? I nodded off. Wait. Did we just fly over MSP?
Click to expand...

When I went on break while flying JFK to BOG, I *ALMOST* purchased a Gogo subscription so I could surf the net. But then I thought if I blew a tire, some investigator would figure out that I was surfing JC when I should have been resting so I decided not to.
 
Doug Taylor said:
When I went on break while flying JFK to BOG, I *ALMOST* purchased a Gogo subscription so I could surf the net. But then I thought if I blew a tire, some investigator would figure out that I was surfing JC when I should have been resting so I decided not to.
Click to expand...

Threads like this would put you to sleep though wouldn't it?

Sleep aid, work related, prolly a tax writeoff
 
subpilot said:
Please read the proposed bill. It only requires an ATP to fly pt 121. Nowhere does it mention 1500TT. How is it that so many people think the bill says "Thou shall have 1500 hours TT...?" Can we all (not just you Polar;)) discuss the facts and not the mistruths and rumors please.

edit: I know the reason 1500TT is the quoted stance because that is an ATP prereq but the FAA in the future could change the ATP requirements and would still be in compliance with the bill because the bill only mentions ATP...nothing else.
Click to expand...

If you read Sec. 11(c)(1) of HR3371, you'll see that 1500 hours is stated as a minimum for total time. The FAA might be able to change the 500 cross-country to 250 cross-country or something like that (not that I'm saying they should, just as an example), but the 1500 total would be legally required to remain, or increase.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3371

I do find it somewhat ironic that despite all the fuss made about quality of training vs. quantity, the other time requirements of an ATP are being overlooked in favor of the blanket "1500 hours".
 
The thing about the flight/duty time regulations is that all the focus is on the number of flying hours in a given period. I've never understood that approach. Flight hours by themselves do not wear a person out. It is the length of duty period, the lack of adequate rest periods, and the number of cycles a pilot flies that contributes to fatigue.

If I could rewrite the regualtions, it would focus on the duty and the rest periods, not how many hours were flown in such-and-such period.
 
That's exactly what ALPA's proposal includes. The length of the duty period is determined by what time of day the duty period begins. Duty periods could range from 9.5 hours to 13 hours, depending on the time of day, which takes into account fatigue science and circadian rhythm.
 
ppragman said:
Lol, are we really debating this? The regionals suck. The pay sucks. The work rules suck. Either work with your union, or if you can't or won't do that, then quit or don't work for a regional in the first place. Those are the only ways to change the game. Control the company's ability to find cheap labor, and they'll have to pay more for it and treat it better. The problem is that the regionals advertise a way to "get ahead quick" to young, type A, career oriented pilots, who think that suffering to succeed is enobling. Grow up. This is a job. I'll fly a 152 if they'll pay me the wage I want. Basing your life around the myth of the aviator ethos will leave you sad and empty inside, and to a large extent that's what I think the problem is with the regionals. Being an airline pilot is still considered "glamorous." People will continue to suffer and stab each other in the back to reach that arete. You want aviation to have good work rules? Change the culture amongst the pilots.
Click to expand...

Now there I have to disagree. When you "control the company's ability to find cheap labor," what you are really doing is controlling the company's ability to control costs. The company doesn't have control over their revenue; the only thing they can control is costs. When unions control, or or attempt to control costs as well, the result is a company that is only marginally profitable, or worse, losing money. "The union" doesn't pay you. The company pays you. If the company isn't profitable, then it won't be paying you for very long.

To tie this into duty regulations, I think the focus should be on maximum duty times and minimum rest times, not how many hours are flown in such and such a period. Pilots should be allowed to fly as much as they want outside of their required rest periods. This puts the pilot in control of his productivity, therefore putting him in control of how much he earns.
 
Xiph said:
If you read Sec. 11(c)(1) of HR3371, you'll see that 1500 hours is stated as a minimum for total time. The FAA might be able to change the 500 cross-country to 250 cross-country or something like that (not that I'm saying they should, just as an example), but the 1500 total would be legally required to remain, or increase.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-3371

I do find it somewhat ironic that despite all the fuss made about quality of training vs. quantity, the other time requirements of an ATP are being overlooked in favor of the blanket "1500 hours".
Click to expand...
Ok, I stand corrected. This is why I love JC.
 
skydog2 said:
Now there I have to disagree. When you "control the company's ability to find cheap labor," what you are really doing is controlling the company's ability to control costs. The company doesn't have control over their revenue; the only thing they can control is costs. When unions control, or or attempt to control costs as well, the result is a company that is only marginally profitable, or worse, losing money. "The union" doesn't pay you. The company pays you. If the company isn't profitable, then it won't be paying you for very long.
Click to expand...

Labor should not be a variable cost anymore than the price of fuel is. The idea that a company "has no control over their revenue" is absolutely asinine, and is the exact mentality that has caused so many managements to fail. Proper revenue management is exactly why profitable airlines like AirTran and Allegiant are making so much money right now. AirTran has managed to increase ancillary revenue ten fold in the past couple of years. Were it not for this revenue stream, the company would not be profitable today. On the other hand, if the company gave every employee industry-leading pay, benefits, and work rules, we would still be profitable. The key is revenue management, not squeezing your employees for money.
 
aloft said:
And it never occurred to you to resist the temptation to respond in kind, letting it roll off your back instead?
Click to expand...

He made an incorrect, false statement questioning my character.

To let it go unanswered would lend it validity. Why the hell would anybody do that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oxman
Delta Airlines pilot sentenced to 10 months after showing up impaired to fly plane
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
5K
Beep
Beep
A300Capt
A little rant….
9 10 11
Replies
212
Views
11K
Richman
Richman
Oxman
Stinky situation: Farting passenger on plane allegedly causes flight to turn around
Replies
15
Views
1K
scooter2525
scooter2525
NewsBot
  • Locked
Air Traffic Control Station
Replies
0
Views
193
NewsBot
NewsBot
NewsBot
  • Locked
Surveillance and Ops Support Specialist/Flight Control for Air Medical Transports
Replies
0
Views
287
NewsBot
NewsBot
Back
Top