CNN Video: Safety Rule Could Create Pilot Shortage

Well and I should add that the single scariest icing encounter I've had (probably the scariest thing that's ever happened to me in an airplane) was in a jet. And I sort of suspect (although I can't say for sure and it might have been MY screwup, and certainly sitting in the left seat means that I share at least SOME of the blame) that it was largely due to some don't-understand-what-the-button-does button pushing by an F/O who, while actually a pretty good pilot in many ways...wait for it...had a pretty fair amount of time in jets and non-FIKI recips, but zero experience in turboprops and FIKI recips. Just a datapoint...
 
ATN_Pilot said:
It's realistic for some, but not for all. Everyone can't go into the military. Everyone can't be a part 135 pilot. Expecting everyone to have the same experience as you is unreasonable. There are many paths to an airline cockpit, and claiming that only yours is the "correct" way is elitist and unreasonable.

As I said, flight instructing is going to continue being the predominant way for new pilots to gain experience, even with the new 1,500 hour rule. In that environment, expecting people to get icing experience or a lot of actual time just isn't realistic, and it seems from your post that that's what you expect before someone can be an airline pilot. You're just not being reasonable in your expectations.
Click to expand...

I am a lowly grease monkey, wrenching turning, enlisted puke in the Natl Guard. Got sand in my boots, and about to get more. I deeply resent your elitist comment, and I expect an apology. Period.

Also, if you are able to hold a first class medical, you are probably almost OVER qualified mentally, physically, and legally to enlist in the military and collect GI Bill etc. There are medical waivers upon waivers if you want to serve your country. The usual repsonse when people "hate on" or are jealous of my military service and benefits have the absolute LAMEST excuses; my family would be disappointed, my family would be embarassed if I was only enlisted-not an officer (gee thanks!), I don't take orders, I can't commit my life for four / six years, my side hurts when I run, everyone in the military is a baby killer, wah, wah, waaaaaah!
 
Its funny how you make less to fly a Beech 1900 or a Metro at night down in the WX with all kinds of terrain and reduced performance than to fly a shiny jet at 350 in Day VFR on autopilot...

The truth is IMO the 1500hr rule while a great idea on paper still has more holes in it than swiss cheese. Not because more experience isn't good, but because getting another 1300 hrs flying a Piper Cub from grass strip to grass strip, banner towing, or doing steep turns in Day VFR doesn't help much flying in severe icing at night in a turboprop over upstate NY... Requiring whatever TT with 750 XCPIC (more than 50NM) and 250 of which should be at night, and maybe 250 high performance and 250 IFR and 100 logged approaches would go much further...

But do I feel bad about the freebie were getting from the FAA? No way, between age 65 rule change, mergers, gas prices, the fact that airlines can have $1B in aircraft orders and still declare BK to reset they're union contracts just because management can't do its job right... (but still get a bonus). Pilots have been bent over the table for doing there jobs for 30 yrs now. Its about right things move back in the other direction...
 
ATN_Pilot said:
It's realistic for some, but not for all. Everyone can't go into the military. Everyone can't be a part 135 pilot. Expecting everyone to have the same experience as you is unreasonable. There are many paths to an airline cockpit, and claiming that only yours is the "correct" way is elitist and unreasonable.

As I said, flight instructing is going to continue being the predominant way for new pilots to gain experience, even with the new 1,500 hour rule. In that environment, expecting people to get icing experience or a lot of actual time just isn't realistic, and it seems from your post that that's what you expect before someone can be an airline pilot. You're just not being reasonable in your expectations.
Click to expand...
Who said people must follow exactly my foot steps? I feel like I am talking to lawyers who want to trip me up rather than engage the subject matter. I believe more experience than 250/wet is a must for part 121 FOs. I knew flying is expensive, so coming from a lower middle class family I joined the service (plus I felt it was my duty to the country..). I also instructed and flew part 135. Both extremely rich experience builders. I am honored and thankful for the contacts I have made in this industry and this very forum. These are pilots whose skill and experience exceeds my own!. That makes me humble. That makes me realize there is more experience to gain. Coming in tonight, in the soup, between the heavy to intense cells, to an ILS with pax in the back counting on the CA and I to do it right. I know had I just finished my Commercial ME and instrument, I would have been a sack of potatoes in that seat. But my experience allowed me to keep up, make decisions, evaluate a plethora of information and threats. No way I want my wife riding in back of a plane where someone has only about 250/wet license. That is the gold standard...my loved ones riding in back.

The best I can gather why not to obtain more experience is that
1. It's too hard/unfair. Answer...quit whining
2. It's too expensive to obtain those hours. Answer...have rich parents, join the service, work lots of hours, take on a lot of debt....YOU figure it out. Not my problem.
3. Experience doesn't matter. Answer....Several accidents now have a common factor (among other things)-how experience was gained by either CA or FO. (to include Air France, and wasn't there recently an incident in some country like India where the FO almost put it into the ground when the captain stepped out, then the captain came running back up front and saved the day?) Also, if experience doesn't matter, don't put your experience down ona resume, don't talk about experience at an interview, don't talk about your hours, and just throw your log book away. Just show 'em your license and medical. If you are current on the company computerized tracking, good 'nuff.

And finally, isn't saying acquiring 1500 or 1000 hours is like asking for lunar landings jumping the shark?! That is hyperbole beyond acceptability. Seriously.
 
HVYMETALDRVR said:
Its funny how you make less to fly a Beech 1900 or a Metro at night down in the WX with all kinds of terrain and reduced performance than to fly a shiny jet at 350 in Day VFR on autopilot...

The truth is IMO the 1500hr rule while a great idea on paper still has more holes in it than swiss cheese. Not because more experience isn't good, but because getting another 1300 hrs flying a Piper Cub from grass strip to grass strip, banner towing, or doing steep turns in Day VFR doesn't help much flying in severe icing at night in a turboprop over upstate NY... Requiring whatever TT with 750 XCPIC (more than 50NM) and 250 of which should be at night, and maybe 250 high performance and 250 IFR and 100 logged approaches would go much further...
Click to expand...

Now we're getting somewhere.

I suppose if I ruled the world it would look something like this
750 total at least 500 of which is PIC
100 multi
100 high performance
100 complex
150 instrument with at least 15 actual instrument and 100 approaches (20 hours sim may count)
300 cross country
100 night at least 25 of which is cross country

And in case anyone is wondering, I don't yet meet some of those requirements.

Lets not forget that, yes, an FO should be an asset to the operation, but there aren't two captains up front and it's generally because one person is less experienced by nature. I believe that those would be reasonable requirements that would provide a good foundation without needing to sell your body, have rich parents, or go into so much debt your grandchildren wouldn't be able to pay it off.

For the most part you wont get meaningful icing experience in a GA airplane if you value your life. A GA airplane, for the most part, isn't going to teach you to think ahead like a jet pilot, or even a large turboprop pilot for that matter. No GA airplane is going to teach you how to fly a large airplane, or a heavy one.

And Block30... I don't think anyone said that experience doesn't matter.
 
I'm not really sure where the perception that CFIs only sit there while the student does steep turns in CAVU conditions comes from. Certainly not the case where I worked, at least not all the time. More like night IMC into busy class B and C airports. Or, scarier, night VFR in marginal conditions to Podunk airports. I, uh, even heard some stories from guys who might have picked up ice now and then. Operations in SVFR conditions. All with someone who may or may not be on top of things doing the flying. Doesn't stretch you like doing 135 flying does but it's certainly above and beyond the stereotype that some (ignorant) people perpetuate.
 
Roger Roger said:
I'm not really sure where the perception that CFIs only sit there while the student does steep turns in CAVU conditions comes from. Certainly not the case where I worked, at least not all the time. More like night IMC into busy class B and C airports. Or, scarier, night VFR in marginal conditions to Podunk airports. I, uh, even heard some stories from guys who might have picked up ice now and then. Operations in SVFR conditions. All with someone who may or may not be on top of things doing the flying. Doesn't stretch you like doing 135 flying does but it's certainly above and beyond the stereotype that some (ignorant) people perpetuate.
Click to expand...
That is not your typical flight school. Special VFR? Ha! The flight school I went to all but canceled all the flights, including IFR, if the weather got anywhere near MVFR. Winds much above 20 and no one's going, TS within 200nm...... no one's allowed to go. And judging from what I hear from other CFI's at different places it's not uncommon.
 
Roger Roger said:
I'm not really sure where the perception that CFIs only sit there while the student does steep turns in CAVU conditions comes from. Certainly not the case where I worked, at least not all the time. More like night IMC into busy class B and C airports. Or, scarier, night VFR in marginal conditions to Podunk airports. I, uh, even heard some stories from guys who might have picked up ice now and then. Operations in SVFR conditions. All with someone who may or may not be on top of things doing the flying. Doesn't stretch you like doing 135 flying does but it's certainly above and beyond the stereotype that some (ignorant) people perpetuate.
Click to expand...
same here. I took students into the weather busy airports, VMC to IMC etc. I did all start to go down hill when the city kids became more prominent at UND and the mere thought of incompleting a lesson or having to spread a lesson over two launches was met with the utmost resistance.

I put more dents in the noses of Seminoles slinging ice off the props than I care to admit.
 
z987k said:
That is not your typical flight school. Special VFR? Ha! The flight school I went to all but canceled all the flights, including IFR, if the weather got anywhere near MVFR. Winds much above 20 and no one's going, TS within 200nm...... no one's allowed to go. And judging from what I hear from other CFI's at different places it's not uncommon.
Click to expand...

I think that's why a lot of us uh slightly older (never use the word "elderly" around me, you whippernsappers) dudes view it differently. Forget about CFI, when I was a private pilot they tossed me the keys to the plane, wished me the best of British luck, and adjured me that if I wasn't back in a week or two, I'd be paying them a lot of money. When that was how things worked, yeah, flying GA was at least a grounding in how to become a competent pilot. Now that flight schools have "dispatch" offices? Maybe not so much. Eventually, you're going to have to go our there and scare the poop out of yourself. It can be by your lonesome, or with some checks in the back, or it can be with 50 trusting sheeples in the back, too. But eventually you're going to be Afraid in an airplane. IMHO, the sooner the better. Because I don't want the guy next to me to experience his First Time Being Afraid In An Airplane when I'm experiencing my hundred and first. Because then he/she is just baggage.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I think that's why a lot of us uh slightly older (never use the word "elderly" around me, you whippernsappers) dudes view it differently. Forget about CFI, when I was a private pilot they tossed me the keys to the plane, wished me the best of British luck, and adjured me that if I wasn't back in a week or two, I'd be paying them a lot of money. When that was how things worked, yeah, flying GA was at least a grounding in how to become a competent pilot. Now that flight schools have "dispatch" offices? Maybe not so much. Eventually, you're going to have to go our there and scare the poop out of yourself. It can be by your lonesome, or with some checks in the back, or it can be with 50 trusting sheeples in the back, too. But eventually you're going to be Afraid in an airplane. IMHO, the sooner the better. Because I don't want the guy next to me to experience his First Time Being Afraid In An Airplane when I'm experiencing my hundred and first. Because then he/she is just baggage.
Click to expand...
Ya, I was lucky enough that all my jobs except my current one were... here's the keys and a credit card... you break it, you'll be in a world of trouble.... have fun.
Our companies policies included no unimproved (for a very valid and expensive reason) and no formation... unless you let them know you were going to do it and then it was fine. Oh, and don't be a dumbass. I've landed cessnas and 6's safely in winds I'm not even allowed to launch taxi in now. :rolleyes:
 
z987k said:
Oh, and don't be a dumbass.
Click to expand...

Years and years ago I saw a picture of a homebuilt's cockpit. In it was very minimal instrumentation, but also a highly visible placard that read "Don't Do Anyhing Stupid". I'd buy that airplane because you just know it was made well by someone who wasn't a dumbass.
 
block30 said:
I deeply resent your elitist comment, and I expect an apology. Period.
Click to expand...

I would strongly suggest that you don't hold your breath waiting on that. I stand by my comment. Just because you went into the military and flew part 135 doesn't mean that everyone needs to follow that path. I flew with plenty of qualified and capable first officers who had none of that kind of experience. In fact, many of them were (gasp) Jet University graduates. The horror! My experience has shown that good pilots come from a variety of backgrounds. Insisting that everyone follow the same (or similar) path is unreasonable.
 
block30 said:
I am a lowly grease monkey, wrenching turning, enlisted puke in the Natl Guard. Got sand in my boots, and about to get more. I deeply resent your elitist comment, and I expect an apology. Period.
Click to expand...

What was resentful, elitist and worthy of apology in his post? He didn't say anything remotely offensive.

See:

ATN_Pilot said:
It's realistic for some, but not for all. Everyone can't go into the military. Everyone can't be a part 135 pilot. Expecting everyone to have the same experience as you is unreasonable. There are many paths to an airline cockpit, and claiming that only yours is the "correct" way is elitist and unreasonable.

As I said, flight instructing is going to continue being the predominant way for new pilots to gain experience, even with the new 1,500 hour rule. In that environment, expecting people to get icing experience or a lot of actual time just isn't realistic, and it seems from your post that that's what you expect before someone can be an airline pilot. You're just not being reasonable in your expectations.
Click to expand...
 
Ian J said:
What was resentful, elitist and worthy of apology in his post? He didn't say anything remotely offensive.

See:
Click to expand...
He called me elitist?? Maybe that? I don't see how working one's way up is elitist. I would think the opposite is true...
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I would strongly suggest that you don't hold your breath waiting on that. I stand by my comment. Just because you went into the military and flew part 135 doesn't mean that everyone needs to follow that path. I flew with plenty of qualified and capable first officers who had none of that kind of experience. In fact, many of them were (gasp) Jet University graduates. The horror! My experience has shown that good pilots come from a variety of backgrounds. Insisting that everyone follow the same (or similar) path is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
We're going round and round in circles as you speak to something I am not, apparently I am are speaking to something you are not. I never said cookie cutter/exact same path, which you continue to pontificate about. I argue increased fundamental airmanship skills built through time and opportunity (FOIs anyone?). The new law takes into consideration different backgrounds, no?
 
block30 said:
Who said people must follow exactly my foot steps? I feel like I am talking to lawyers who want to trip me up rather than engage the subject matter. I believe more experience than 250/wet is a must for part 121 FOs. I knew flying is expensive, so coming from a lower middle class family I joined the service (plus I felt it was my duty to the country..). I also instructed and flew part 135. Both extremely rich experience builders. I am honored and thankful for the contacts I have made in this industry and this very forum. These are pilots whose skill and experience exceeds my own!. That makes me humble. That makes me realize there is more experience to gain. Coming in tonight, in the soup, between the heavy to intense cells, to an ILS with pax in the back counting on the CA and I to do it right. I know had I just finished my Commercial ME and instrument, I would have been a sack of potatoes in that seat. But my experience allowed me to keep up, make decisions, evaluate a plethora of information and threats. No way I want my wife riding in back of a plane where someone has only about 250/wet license. That is the gold standard...my loved ones riding in back.

The best I can gather why not to obtain more experience is that
1. It's too hard/unfair. Answer...quit whining
2. It's too expensive to obtain those hours. Answer...have rich parents, join the service, work lots of hours, take on a lot of debt....YOU figure it out. Not my problem.
3. Experience doesn't matter. Answer....Several accidents now have a common factor (among other things)-how experience was gained by either CA or FO. (to include Air France, and wasn't there recently an incident in some country like India where the FO almost put it into the ground when the captain stepped out, then the captain came running back up front and saved the day?) Also, if experience doesn't matter, don't put your experience down ona resume, don't talk about experience at an interview, don't talk about your hours, and just throw your log book away. Just show 'em your license and medical. If you are current on the company computerized tracking, good 'nuff.

And finally, isn't saying acquiring 1500 or 1000 hours is like asking for lunar landings jumping the shark?! That is hyperbole beyond acceptability. Seriously.
Click to expand...

If a kid is sharp, focused, has a great attitude and solid training foundation I'd have no problem flying with that person in right seat as a captain or passenger.

This quantifying of pilot ability solely on flight time is beyond rediculous. What a dead horse that has been beaten to death.

The only real positive on the 1500 hr rule is the leverage for higher regional pilot compensation.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
 
block30 said:
We're going round and round in circles as you speak to something I am not, apparently I am are speaking to something you are not. I never said cookie cutter/exact same path, which you continue to pontificate about. I argue increased fundamental airmanship skills built through time and opportunity (FOIs anyone?). The new law takes into consideration different backgrounds, no?
Click to expand...

What I'm trying to figure out from you is where you expect pilots to get the kind of experience that you previously complained that the FO in the Colgan crash didn't have. Specifically, in-flight icing and significant amounts of actual instrument. You have strongly implied that you think someone in the right seat of a regional airliner should already have this experience when they start flying at the airline. I'm trying to figure out where you expect this experience to come from, since the average airline newhire is going to continue to come from a CFI background.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top