fender_jag
Well-Known Member
DTW clearance: ________ read back correct. SSSSEEEEEEE-YYUUHHHH!
Article: FAA won't back 1500 hour requirement
- Thread starter Clocks
- Start date
DTW clearance: ________ read back correct. SSSSEEEEEEE-YYUUHHHH!
3enginejock
Well-Known Member
Because no one with less than 1500 hours and an ATP is an asset in the team and everyone with an ATP is... Thats basically what your saying.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
No one with less than 1000 hours has enough experiance to be an asset in the cockpit of a jet airliner period.
Even the guys who got hired on below that threshold will tell you they were not really ready. Take note that one of the major advocates of this law was hired at an airline with less than 400TT and got into a jet with less than 1000.
Requiring an ATP for both pilots is a good way to make sure that the airlines are not allowed to repeat the idiocy that happened 2 years ago. Clearly they will not hold themselves to reasonable standards, so the government had to step in and apply a arbitray limit. If I believed for one second that the regional airlines would take the steps you are advocating I would agree with you. However nothing has really changed, and as soon as they need to, they will scrape the bottom of the barrel again.
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
:yeahthat:
If I wanted to still be teaching basic flying and decision making, I'd still be an instructor. I'm all for mentoring FOs, showing them better ways to operate the aircraft, tricks of the trade, gotchas to watch out for on the paperwork and things that will generally make them a better CA when the time comes. It helps a little if they don't already think they know everything, too. However, I should NOT be teaching how to land airplanes in a cross wind, play "What's this mean?" on an approach chart and be teaching basic radio phraseology. As an aside, you XJ guys that sign off on frequencies with "SEE YAAAAAAAAAA!" and sound like you're in pain? I laugh at you. Not because you're funny, but because you're sad. Joe, if you do this, I laugh double at you.
I don't know if you'd like ATL then. We all try to get our best "seeeee yuh!"s in on frequency.
In addition, evenings on Ramp 2, you seem to get better service if you add "go gators" on frequency....:rotfl:
3enginejock
Well-Known Member
So I guess all those guys in the Military flying C-5's or F-16s with less time than that are completly useless.
Training is the real problem not hours. There are plenty of low time pilots that are an asset and there are plenty of high time guys who arent.
The Military can put low time pilots in the right seat of a large jet aircraft because their training ensures that ALL pilots will be asset. The problem with civilian training is so many get through the cracks and raising the minimums at airlines to 1500 doesnt do a damn thing about that problem.
Also please remember that not all regional airlines fly CRJ900's or EMB-190s. Some actually fly regional aircraft. Mandating that 1500 hours and ATP be required by law to sit right seat in a B1900 is a bit rediculous. This bill doesnt differentiate between A380 or a small turboprop, it says ALL 121 passenger aircraft require both pilots to have an ATP.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
For the 500th time, "YOU CANNOT COMPARE MILITARY FLIGHT TRAINING TO CIVILIAN TRAINING"
It's like comparing the merchant marine academy to a boater safety course. Every time you make that argument you lose all your credibilty.
Civilian trained pilots need lots of experiance in order to make up for the lack of screening and low standards required for the FAA certificates.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Relentlessly asserting an opinion is not the same as having a discussion.
gtpilot
Well-Known Member
The argument that he (and others) are making does not compare current civilian training to to military training. We are saying that selection and training standards should be brought up to that level. So while folks point out that 'we don't get it' , 'lose all your credibilty(sic)' and 'must be a 250 hour wonder', they barely touching the basis of the argument. The two main points so far that are being ignored are - 1) can training and selection for 121 airlines be brought up to higher levels? and 2) what will be the consequences of the 1500 hour rule?
#1) Selection and training standards are already high in our military, a government entity and not the most well oiled machine. (Before anyone gets upset, I have deep military roots and a deep love for our military and its service members). Also, the JAA has a process already in place that is far more difficult and complex that what the FAA runs, so it can be done on the civilian side as well.
#2) How will everyone get 1500 hours? I foresee a big industry of PFT time builders ala Twin Time Builders .com, etc. I also think that the extra pilots forced to instruct is not a good thing - it is way too easy to become an instructor and not everyone who can 'earn' that certificate needs to be teaching. Finally, while I think this will fix the problem of regional scope and perhaps force mainline to do more of it's own flying and with larger aircraft, what happens to the traditional regional carriers? Should 1500 hours really be a requirement to fly right seat of a SAAB or Brasilia? (Honest question, no sarcasm included.)
Now, before I get bashed again, I have to point out I don't have a big stake in this debate. I am ok with the 1500 hour rule, but I don't think it is necessary nor do I think it will actually help. Just my humble, and sometimes errant opinion. I also have to point out that I did all my flying in the civilian world and did not even apply to a 121 airline until I had 1500 hours. How many of the passionate supporters of this rule can claim this?
subpilot
Squawking 7600
FWIW, every captain I flew with on the SAAB said that this aircraft was way more difficult than the barbie jet.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
That's it, I've heard it enough and I QUIT. I officially hate people and I'm voting republican in the next election!
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
Gee, that lawyer stuff sure works fast!
I figured we had at least another year before you 'turned'.
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
:yeahthat:
I know for a fact that this is the case at my company. During the last hiring wave, any FO that could get a job an a 'major' like CAL, DAL, NWA, or an LCC like SWA, Spirit, Allegiant or JetBlue did so. A pack more went places like NetJets. Many more went to other 'regionals' in order to upgrade faster.. for more what? Pay! More pay at a 'bigger and better' company, or as a regional captain, then more pay when they moved up to another company.
Why? Pay.. and to a lesser degree, career expectations. My airline already HAD several hundred highly qualified FOs flying their airplanes. The hiring wave generated here was because pilot attrition exceeded the ability of the training department to staff the airline.
I believe Senator Dorgan was the one who asked how regional airlines expect to keep their pilots on for a 'career' when job expectations are so low.
It's because regional airlines WANT IT THAT WAY.
I was told, by management (hell, at my interview at Colgan) at both airlines I have worked for that they want me to fly for them a few years, get some experience, and LEAVE.
To say that a pilot shortage exists because there simply aren't enough pilots is an absolute falsehood. Regional airlines are intentionally spurring pilot turnover in order to lower labor costs. Period.
Patrick
Well-Known Member
Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner!
pavelump
Well-Known Member
They had no choice not because there weren't qualified applicants available, but rather that the more qualified applicants had no interest in working for $19/hr at a regional airline.
Someone with 250 hours and a desire to be Chuck Yeager or Earnest Gann however...
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Truth. I feel bad for the CAs I flew with for the first several months, and I was just shy of 1000 when I got hired here.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Doing the whole FO thing all over again, it's hilarious how much easier it is the second time around and how much the captains appreciate it. The FO job is easier but it is a REAL job, the government should make some sort of push to get higher experience guys in there. Though the debates are compelling both ways for the 1500 hour argument.
Now if I was only smarter and faster with the FMS/ACARS. Seriously someone outa make a keyboard that doesn't stick/double up letters. It's like they are trying to make more work for me.
Now if I was only smarter and faster with the FMS/ACARS. Seriously someone outa make a keyboard that doesn't stick/double up letters. It's like they are trying to make more work for me.
Clocks
Well-Known Member
I feel the same way, but I don't know how much more extra CFI'ing would have prevented that.
I felt bad for the CA when I screwed up a 40 step taxi read back in ORD, or for screwing up my decent and leveling off 10+ miles before the crossing restriction (drives some CA's nuts). In a year I only had to hold 3 times (which CFII'ing made me very comfortable with), the first time the CA was awesome and walked me through his entire thought process of calculating when we would need to divert. Using the weather radar, the best way to do the arrivals into DCA, the PHLBO (I think) into EWR, are more things our great CAs helped me with in my first few months.
I don't know if any of this would have been better had I done another few hundred hours of multi-engine instrument training (which is what the majority of my CFI time was).
Maybe it speaks to "quality" time building vs steep turns in a 152. Or there's always the chance that I was scaring the crap out of every CA I flew with, and they were there silently picking up the pieces while I flew along fat, dumb, and happy.
I don't know. But I still believe if the problem is insufficient non-121 time (as so much of this thread is dedicated to proving), then the only way to fix the dangerous situation is to lay off every pilot who was hired with less than 1500 hours so they can go be CFIs longer and get the experience needed to avoid the next 3407.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
If nothing else CFI'ing makes you multitask constantly and constantly be reading up on your regs answering questions. Get used to watching yourself and the other guy and being a part of the team rather than being dragged along. (CFI's and CFI'ing doesn't get enough credit in my opinion)
Besides, how long has his been since you've been a 250 hour pilot? Honestly, I'm asking. Theres no way to remember how you reacted or what you knew 6 (i'm guessing) years ago.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
I remember thinking when I got hired at PCL that less than a year before then, I didn't even have a Commercial certificate. In fact, I was slinging bags at XJT. It was a pretty sobering thought.
Clocks
Well-Known Member
I always read these threads about 1500 hours, and forget that given similar training there is a difference between a 1400 hour pilot, a 600 hour pilot, and a 250 hour pilot.
If there's one thing I can agree one with just about anyone, me getting hired to a 121 job at 250 hours for me would have been nuts. There is absolutely no way I was ready until after I had CFI'd. I would have failed out of initial training.
If there's one thing I can agree one with just about anyone, me getting hired to a 121 job at 250 hours for me would have been nuts. There is absolutely no way I was ready until after I had CFI'd. I would have failed out of initial training.