Congress agrees to 1500hr min for airlines.
- Thread starter darthpanda
- Start date
DCTNstudentpilot1987
New Member
Just in 2007, there was quite an outcry from the media and passengers when Northwest had to cancel lots of flights due to crew issues. This happened in the year 2000 as well with United. The risk of 1500 hour legislation for SIC is that if too many pilots cannot afford to fly or if not enough have close to 1500 hours when heavy hiring is needed at the regional and major level to replace the flood of retirements in the next 8-12 years then there could be legislation to replace this requirement. Airlines can raise their pay to attract new pilots however this means nothing if there are not enough people with close to 1500 hours. Zero to hero worked for regionals in 2007-2008 because it took only three months for pilots to be trained and hired at airlines. 1500 hours will take well over a year. Everyone assumes that if pay is raised then magically there will be a plethora of qualified candidates. However, this is only true if there is no shortage created by the new legislation. If there is no shortage then pay will not go up.
Just remember, people are already complaining about the bad side effects of the 3 hour tarmac rule. And this is a rule that they all still like even with the bad side effects. Imagine what they will do when they have flights cancelled because of lack of qualified pilots due to a govt regulation. Methinks that the rule will be changed quickly if substantial cancelations such as NW 2007 occur. The airlines will surely tell the public that govt regulations are hampering the supply of pilots and the public will demand their cheap flights and frequent air service.
One thing I find interesting is how the rest of the world can manage to find a way to safely put low time pilots into the right seat of B737/A320 types but we in America cannot find a way to do the same with smaller CRJ/ERJ types. Are American pilots not trained as well in the first 250 hours? Are Americans not as smart or as talented flying wise as Europeans that take JAA theory exams and practical check ride standards? Or even Central American and Asian pilots that take FAA exams in this country and then go fly those types at home for low time? People have proposed these standards on these boards but pilots who fear failing because of higher standards are against them. Where is the can do spirit of American aviation? This 1500 hour rule really confuses me. If it is about safety, then why is this rule not being adopted by more countries? If it is about pay then it is basically a legal gamble. It relies on many variables for the best case scenario to occur.
Just remember, people are already complaining about the bad side effects of the 3 hour tarmac rule. And this is a rule that they all still like even with the bad side effects. Imagine what they will do when they have flights cancelled because of lack of qualified pilots due to a govt regulation. Methinks that the rule will be changed quickly if substantial cancelations such as NW 2007 occur. The airlines will surely tell the public that govt regulations are hampering the supply of pilots and the public will demand their cheap flights and frequent air service.
One thing I find interesting is how the rest of the world can manage to find a way to safely put low time pilots into the right seat of B737/A320 types but we in America cannot find a way to do the same with smaller CRJ/ERJ types. Are American pilots not trained as well in the first 250 hours? Are Americans not as smart or as talented flying wise as Europeans that take JAA theory exams and practical check ride standards? Or even Central American and Asian pilots that take FAA exams in this country and then go fly those types at home for low time? People have proposed these standards on these boards but pilots who fear failing because of higher standards are against them. Where is the can do spirit of American aviation? This 1500 hour rule really confuses me. If it is about safety, then why is this rule not being adopted by more countries? If it is about pay then it is basically a legal gamble. It relies on many variables for the best case scenario to occur.
There was no shortage; There is no shortage; There will be no shortage.
They do not safely put low time pilots into the right seat They un-safely put...
z987k
Well-Known Member
:yeahthat:
aloft
New Member
Um, you're making an apples-to-oranges comparison. You're comparing Pt 121 SIC to Pt 135 IFR PIC. Pt 135 SIC requires only a wet commercial and a 135 SIC check. 121 PIC already requires 1500 hrs (and an ATP). The new rule will require 1500 hrs of Pt 121 SICs, same as PICs are required now.
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
Glad to hear it!:clap:
I was really hoping they'd just make it an ATP to be in the right seat of a 121 opperator, but this is better than the 800 hour thing, and I'm happy congress took it seriously. For one, this will likely help to weed out those with SJS who will fly 100 seats for peanuts who will never see the light and try to bring proper honor and dignity to the profession. Two, guys coming into the airlines with a minimum of 1500 hours will likely be much more professional and hopefully pilot groups will have much more leverage towards proper compensation.
I'm guessing guys who want to fly shiny jets for the wrong reasons won't want to spend 1500 hours of their lives to get there.
I was really hoping they'd just make it an ATP to be in the right seat of a 121 opperator, but this is better than the 800 hour thing, and I'm happy congress took it seriously. For one, this will likely help to weed out those with SJS who will fly 100 seats for peanuts who will never see the light and try to bring proper honor and dignity to the profession. Two, guys coming into the airlines with a minimum of 1500 hours will likely be much more professional and hopefully pilot groups will have much more leverage towards proper compensation.
I'm guessing guys who want to fly shiny jets for the wrong reasons won't want to spend 1500 hours of their lives to get there.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
The reason there is that it actually takes skills and a personality type to make it through the training to get into the 737/320 in Europe. The selection process is rigorous and the training is hard. Lots of people wash out. For a time period in the States, all you needed was a pulse and a wet in commercial and the training department would figure out how to get you through. The "norm" used to be 25 hours of IOE. During 2008 we had a lot of guys taking 90 to 125 hours to get signed off. Something is VERY wrong with that.
Because many foreign carriers use ab-initio programs to train their pilots, programs with one particular characteristic that makes them better at what they do than comparable US programs: rigorous admission standards.
All you need to train at ATP is enough money to pay ATP. Universities like ERAU or UND have some general admissions standards, but they're not very high, and SAT scores and your high school GPA are hardly a good measure of aptitude for being a pilot anyway. JAA ab-initio programs, by contrast, tend to be very selective of who they take, and you've got to perform at a very high level to make it through. The closest thing we've got in the US to that sort of rigorous training is the military (who, not surprisingly, is able to put out excellent pilots with relatively low time).
Why there are no similar civilian schools in the US I don't know. There doesn't seem to be a push for them. Basically, it can be done, but nobody seems to want to do it (probably because the airlines have gotten away with low-timers from ATP, who aren't held to the same standards). I'd like to see the FAA approach the issue from that angle as well, but I'm not holding my breath.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
There is no shortage of 1500 hour pilots. That's ludicrous. There is a shortage of 1500 hour pilots willing to work for peanuts and say thank you when kicked. Creating a relative shortage of qualified employees is the only way to improve conditions in the long term. May the trend continue.
Also, for those who think that "hours aren't a measure of quality", what would you propose? Are the underwriters of aircraft insurance policies that require a certain number of hours to be insured stupid and deceived, too? How did you come by your Special Knowledge of what makes a good pilot?
Also, for those who think that "hours aren't a measure of quality", what would you propose? Are the underwriters of aircraft insurance policies that require a certain number of hours to be insured stupid and deceived, too? How did you come by your Special Knowledge of what makes a good pilot?
intern_mike
E-175 f/o
Another point that hasn't been mentioned, banks still aren't lending to flight schools. The only people getting their ratings are students of a university aviation program (federal loans), or kids with well to do parents. It has definitely become a profession for the financially fortunate. Doesn't that right there drastically reduce the applicant pool?
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Particularly because the well-heeled generally want their kids to be at least as well-heeled as they were.
z987k
Well-Known Member
We all know very well that there is this perception the pilots make a ton of money. I'd bet the well off parents don't know any better.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
My metric for evaluating people would be approaches flown, a tally of all of the landings the pilot does, cross country hours, and types of equipment.
Timbo
Well-Known Member
That will reduce the numbers but won't increase the QUALITY of the applicants. As pointed out above, here in the good 'ol USA, it's always been "pay to play", if you kept throwing money at the flight school, they -eventually- got you to pass your checkride.
Sure, you might flunk it 7 times first, but if you keep coming back with mo'money, you get to keep trying. And then you fly a deep stall into the ground...
The FAA isn't about to point the finger back at themselves, but they wrote the rules in the first place, certified both the flight school (Gulfstream) and the airplane, so they'll call it Pilot Error and just change the rules.
The big question is, how are all the newbs with 250 TT supposed to get up to 1,500? Are there that many cancelled check runs in the entire country? Not since the banks started using computers!
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Fair enough, but these things require more depth of analysis than the government is realistically able to provide, unless you provide absolute minimums, at which point there will be another enterprising young businessman out there hawking the opportunity to shoot the necessary 300 approaches in a turbojet for the low, low price of a hundred grand. Straight to the 747! Buy here, pay here!
The point is that any analysis of pilot "quality" will be subject to the whims and interests of the controlling Authority. And any government Authority can be bought, it shouldn't take too many history books to reach that conclusion. OTOH, the number of hours one spends in command of an aviation appliance is more or less unfudgable. At least until ERAU successfully lobbies for the CRJ Sim exemption, which...you heard it here first...they will.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Science would disagree with you. The ARC's (and ALPA's) proposed flight/duty time limits are based on scientific evidence, and the science clearly demonstrates that there needs to be a more thorough method of determining flight/duty time than a simple one-size-fits-all max duty time.
I'm glad the 1,500 hour rule looks like it will make it through. Hopefully the new flight/duty time rules are soon to follow.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Same thing with a vast majority of traffic watch runs. Much cheaper to just put a ton of cameras around town. That way, you can see everywhere at the same time, rain or shine.
Dugie8
Well-Known Member
That's fine and all. However, with matrices and complex "rules" scheduling will always be able to skirt them by playing by the rules. Can only be on duty for 9 hours with a 0500 local show time. No problem, your show time is now 0505.
For domestic ops, including Canada and Mexico, Bahamas, etc. 12 on, 12 off works just fine. We need much MUCH stronger language defining duty and rest and less effort on feel good science.
If we went strictly by sleep and rest science, none of us would be allowed on duty for any longer than 10 hours at a time. We can't pick and chose what we want to believe. Make the rules beneficial to both pilot and company and make them iron clad and clear.
Giggity
Well-Known Member
I used to think many hours of experience created great pilots.....Now that I have been flying professionaly for a couple of years --hours dont mean crap! Some of the scariest pilots I fly with are the ones with 4k+ hours...Their resume looks great, but the hours should be labled- flight hours that they have skated by before causing a accident....Airline interviews are a complete joke = especially the regionals.
*Flying a ILS and doing holds in a simulator is not going to weed out the weaker pilots
* Hell you could just stick them in a cessna and see if they have basic stick and rudder skills
The biggest problem in saftey is bellow
* Stop holding crappy pilots hands because they already spent too much $$ on them....every compay I have worked with has kept the weakest links because of how much they have invested in them.
Dugie8
Well-Known Member
It is not just the 121/airline side that does that Giggity. The stories I hear from the instructors at SimCom, Flightsafety, etc would make your eyes water. Yet those same instructors pass these people and send them out the door to share the sky with the rest of us.
Classic example. Fella was in for BeechJet initial. On the BeechJet you have two transfer pumps that pump fuel from the fuselage tank to the wings. They must be on and operative if you have fuel in the fuselage. They have 3 settings, OFF, AUTO, ON. For this guys sim ride they only had fuel in the wings, so the transfer pump lights were out (off, not illuminated, etc). He kept putting them to ON just so the lights would come on and would argue that they had to be ON for takeoff.
This was the "easy" thing the instructors had to deal with. He passed his sim ride and now occupies the NAS with us.
Classic example. Fella was in for BeechJet initial. On the BeechJet you have two transfer pumps that pump fuel from the fuselage tank to the wings. They must be on and operative if you have fuel in the fuselage. They have 3 settings, OFF, AUTO, ON. For this guys sim ride they only had fuel in the wings, so the transfer pump lights were out (off, not illuminated, etc). He kept putting them to ON just so the lights would come on and would argue that they had to be ON for takeoff.
This was the "easy" thing the instructors had to deal with. He passed his sim ride and now occupies the NAS with us.