CNN Video: Safety Rule Could Create Pilot Shortage

ClearedToThe said:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2012/04/23/tsr-oleary-pilot-hours-law-change.cnn

It looks like the SJS is alive and well at Purdue...

Best quote by one of the students: "If I were to go into a regional airline now, I've been flying the jet, I know exactly what I'm doing now...if I go fly for two years flying in a small single engine airplane I"m going to lose a lot of what I've learned". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Until you get in the airplane on IOE and go "uhmmm" you really don't, actually...
 
Captain Sullenberger's words here pretty much shuts them down. Besides exercising aeronautical decision making on your own for awhile, I support the 1500 rule because that makes the job less buy-able. God forbid mommy and daddy can't buy you the 1500 hours and you might....gasp!.....have to build experience before flying paying pax or heavy equipment in the flight levels.

Finally, when we become CFIs (apparently only some of us now days), we learn about building blocks. How much of building block is it to go cramming all this flying down someone's throat-then head straight to the airlines (with minimal real world, make your own decisions PIC flying) ?
 
MikeD said:
People on this very site have done it, and they're still alive. :eek:
Click to expand...

Uhh...I understand you have a lot of experience, and if I am not mistaken, military experience...so I just don't know how to take that response, other than tongue in cheek?? Many pilots are still very much alive and clean of record until they exceed their experience and have a fatal. (A flight student of mine riding along with another pilot (who was flying their plane) was killed recently...so this is poignant for me, particularly now).

First the new law, in my opinion restores a "building block" approach to developing professional pilots, something that the old 250 hour rule certainly lacked. I can only imagine that writers of the "old" law could not foresee the day where 250 hour commercial pilots would include right seat jet airliner and XXX paying pax in the back.

Secondly the new law does include provisions for those who have a more structured/approved/overseen training regimen and credit is granted for that experienced gained; 750 for ex military and 1000 for certain accredited civilian programs. So the building block concept is maintained. So if you are trying to compare a low hours military pilot to a low hours civilian-particularly mom and pop trained civilian---the difference is likely huge and the comparison does not hold up well. The military screening process, syllabus, training aircraft and facilities? Sheesh. Top notch! Civilian? Variable. So give the civilian more time to develop their experience and skills. Makes sense to me.

And finally, I think a certain ethos that military pilots have already proven they have, can to a certain extent be developed or weeded out in the civilian pilot population. This is done by making professional piloting more than something mom and dad can buy. (and trust me, I know of many whose family has paid a vast majority of their college expenses). It's the touchy feely stuff that there is no certificate for but is still crucial---work ethic, calm, judgement, humility, determination, etc....SOFT skills

"The last three US airline accidents have involved crew members that took the "express lane" in their training to land that airline job. (Gulfstream)" ---- Agreed!
 
block30 said:
Uhh...I understand you have a lot of experience, and if I am not mistaken, military experience...so I just don't know how to take that response, other than tongue in cheek??
Click to expand...

It's completely tongue in cheek (different smiley face likely would've been bettter). :)

Point being we have a number of express lane people here on this very site who will say the same thing as the above, yet its the route they themselves took, but I bet would likely never equate themselves to the same boat as the 3407 Captain, even though he had alot of experience by then.

Its an interesting dichotomy.
 
For my fellow ERAU Aeronautical Science alumni and undergraduates:

Screen Shot 2012-04-24 at 4.22.54 PM.png
 
MikeD said:
It's completely tongue in cheek (different smiley face likely would've been bettter). :)

Point being we have a number of express lane people here on this very site who will say the same thing as the above, yet its the route they themselves took, but I bet would likely never equate themselves to the same boat as the 3407 Captain, even though he had alot of experience by then.

Its an interesting dichotomy.
Click to expand...

I figured as much...preaching to the choir then. Though my words stand for the doubters or as the kids like to say now days; "haters." :)
 
Oh, and finally, is it really the 1500 hour rule that is creating a shortage??? Or is it that there are reasons young folks are less and less attracted to the airlines?? Hmmm....(rubs chin)


Oh, wait!! I know!! Let's ask Roger Cohen!! :D
(Wasn't it not that long ago when a person had to have something like 2000 TT MINIMUM to not get laughed at for a "commuter airlines" job?)
 
block30 said:
Captain Sullenberger's words here pretty much shuts them down. Besides exercising aeronautical decision making on your own for awhile, I support the 1500 rule because that makes the job less buy-able. God forbid mommy and daddy can't buy you the 1500 hours and you might....gasp!.....have to build experience before flying paying pax or heavy equipment in the flight levels.

Finally, when we become CFIs (apparently only some of us now days), we learn about building blocks. How much of building block is it to go cramming all this flying down someone's throat-then head straight to the airlines (with minimal real world, make your own decisions PIC flying) ?
Click to expand...

As someone that flight instructed for 3.5 years and then moved to other things, I echo this completely. IMHO, a flight instructor is not ready to sit in that seat. If you're "learning things"(other how the airplane flies), you're not a good supplement to the captain in making decisions. With innocent paying passengers on board, this is borderline unethical. I know this is a broad generalization that isn't true for every CFI under the sun, but flight instructing at UND was just hours in the log book relatively speaking, nothing more, nothing less. Flight instructing had it's own learning curve sure, but ADM development is never ending and comes best from experience, not from a book.

Many will disagree I'm sure. I do realize that flying a regional jet is not rocket science from a day to day standpoint, but when the poop hits the fan, REAL experience wins.
 
ClearedToThe said:
Best quote by one of the students: "If I were to go into a regional airline now, I've been flying the jet, I know exactly what I'm doing now...if I go fly for two years flying in a small single engine airplane I"m going to lose a lot of what I've learned". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know it's CNN's fault, but this "student pilot" had over 400TT. Hmmm....

I hope he realizes that the jetz don't have the chute like that cool Cirrus.
 
The almighty Aviation University Kool-Aid is nice and strong in West Lafayette. These people are marketing geniuses or thiefs depending on how you look at it. "Hey uninformed high school senior, that has dreams of becoming a professional pilot, come to our University! We have jets, simulators, and the almighty Cirrus with...wait for it... GLASS PANELS! Come blow $80,000+ in flight fees alone, for that oft sought after Aviation Flight Science degree, its basically a guaranteed slot with the airlines..... flying....JETS! Instrument scan? Naahhh, you don't need that. You'll never fly an airplane with a six pack, I don't even think they exist anymore." I was guilty of this about a year ago, but Thanks to numerous opinions shared on this site, I got out before it was too late. That student has a few hours of Phenom time in his log book and he is ready to roll with 70 people in the back...what a joke.
 
UAL747400 said:
As someone that flight instructed for 3.5 years and then moved to other things, I echo this completely. IMHO, a flight instructor is not ready to sit in that seat. If you're "learning things"(other how the airplane flies), you're not a good supplement to the captain in making decisions. With innocent paying passengers on board, this is borderline unethical. I know this is a broad generalization that isn't true for every CFI under the sun, but flight instructing at UND was just hours in the log book relatively speaking, nothing more, nothing less. Flight instructing had it's own learning curve sure, but ADM development is never ending and comes best from experience, not from a book.

Many will disagree I'm sure. I do realize that flying a regional jet is not rocket science from a day to day standpoint, but when the poop hits the fan, REAL experience wins.
Click to expand...

As you already pointed out, there is huge variation amongst instructors. CFI's who get stuck in the "bubble" of teaching at big cookie cutter programs like Riddle or UND probably do miss out on a lot of the decision making skills they'll need later in their career.

Personally, after doing various flying jobs to this point in my career, I'd say "airline pilot" is on the easier side of the spectrum. From a judgement perspective, I was very ready to make the jump from teaching to airline flying. The standardization, support from other sources (maintenance, dispatch, FOs, etc.), capability of the equipment (speed, range, power, avionics, redundancy), etc. are the best I've ever had. I don't have to think about things nearly as much as I used to. I feel like my PIC judgement is less needed on a day to day basis now than it was when I was teaching every day.

Or maybe that's because I'm so awesome now and forget what it feels like to be challenged. I don't know.
 
The picture of the smoking wreckage of Colgan airlines fits nicely with the "we don't need more experience" message that the 300 wunder-kinds try to push...
 
Douglas said:
Goodness, give that kid a right seat in a jet ASAP, heaven knows he knows he'd wet himself on a freight run in one of those "little planes".
Click to expand...
I think it'd be great experience if they did a ride along on one of those special nights. The one's where you're trying to find where the approach plate just flew off to, and are doing everything you can to wrestle the thing to keep a heading and stay on the inbound course, and you're like whytf am I so slow? Ah yes! the boots.... or not, guess they decided to go home early.

I agree though, the kid in the article needs to get into the right seat of a massively automated jet asap, he'd piss himself if he had to actually fly an airplane.
Anyone know if the cirrus has a go-around feature on it's autopilot? I imagine it's all that's missing. With all that glass, why should you have to fly it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top