Congress agrees to 1500hr min for airlines.

[ppragman]

I have yet to fly with a Aviation College guy who was any better than a straight 61 or small school 141 guy when it came to ADM or stick and rudder skills in the jet. Sure they could tell me all about high altitude weather and air crash investigation and how a VOR worked but mostly in their first couple of hundred hours they couldn't think their way out of a wet paper bag. Same as every other low time guy just getting into bigger/faster operations.

You're right, the 1500 hour requirement is a bandaid for the bigger problem that anybody can pay their way into an airline job and there is very little if any screening. That said, I'll take every little bit of band aid I can in preventing guys that have no business in the pointy end of a jet (or big prop) from being there.

Lol, systems and weather, and all that other jazz, though important, is typically not the straw that breaks the camels back. Its piss-poor ADM, lousy stick and rudder, and simple arrogance. The guys with decent ADM are going to be ok anyway, why? Because they aren't going to jump into something that will kill them without having a thorough understanding of the specifics of the machine. They're the guys who are going to study outside of the "Bob's Air Taxi and Hot Wing BBQ's" ground school to make sure they're proficient on systems, emergency procedures, etc. Others not so much. These guys may be able to diagram the electrical system to the individual wire, program the EFIS at lightning speed, and mathematically calculate the rate of ice accretion at different temperature dew point spreads, but if a pilot doesn't have the ADM (or as its more commonly known of - common sense) to try to get out of a bad situation, he's not going to last all that long. Either he'll get killed, get fired, or wind up someplace that doesn't care about that and has a system in place (read restrictive GOM) to prevent him from making decisions for himself.

 

[aloft]

Can somebody confirm whether or not this bill would decrease the required minimums for a few flying schools like Riddle?

The bill gives the FAA administrator the option of decreasing the minimums for collegiate aviation programs but does not require him to do so. We'll see what sort of political pressure the aviation colleges are able to mount against the FAA once the bill is enacted.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

I'm guessing you a) wenr to a puppymill and b) don't have 1500 hours if you think pupymills make better pilots. Snort.

While not a big fan of the aviation university (went to one) I wouldn't consider them a puppy mill school. To me a puppy mill school is more concerned with turning out as many pilots as possible in the shortest amount of time possible to make the most amount of money.

When I went to UND the rates for a rental were pretty reasonable (brand new warrior for less than $100/wet), and the degree portion is on par with most state schools, even a little cheaper. Also, jumping through all the hoops takes a good amount of time, which allows time for your education to sink in.

Again, while I think there is a lot of room for improvement in the aviation university arena, I don't think comparing them to ATP, flight safety, ariben, etc is a fair comparison.

I also think that the biggest factor is attitude. Someone with a good attitude who goes to the worst school, is still going to be better than someone who slacked off at the best school. You get out what you put in, just like with most things in life.

 

[BobDDuck]

When I went to UND the rates for a rental were pretty reasonable (brand new warrior for less than $100/wet), and the degree portion is on par with most state schools, even a little cheaper. Also, jumping through all the hoops takes a good amount of time, which allows time for your education to sink in.

Again, while I think there is a lot of room for improvement in the aviation university arena, I don't think comparing them to ATP, flight safety, ariben, etc is a fair comparison.

I don't think Boris was comparing aviation universities directly to pilot mills. His point stands though.

Do you honestly think you were a better pilot during your first several hundred hours in the RJ because of where you learned to fly or took academic classes? I don't mean to make that a personal attack, I'm just wondering. You have some experience in the industry now and I'm curious what you think looking back on your first block of time, knowing what you do now.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

I don't think Boris was comparing aviation universities directly to pilot mills. His point stands though.

Do you honestly think you were a better pilot during your first several hundred hours in the RJ because of where you learned to fly or took academic classes? I don't mean to make that a personal attack, I'm just wondering. You have some experience in the industry now and I'm curious what you think looking back on your first block of time, knowing what you do now.

I can't comment on whether I was a better pilot or not, but I did get through IOE rather quickly and received a lot of positive comments from the captains I flew with when I was new. So I'll say I performed adequately.

Whether this is because of where I went to school, I can't really say. Overall I was happy with my education, but would certainly change some things. I did do some part 61 training when I was working on my PPL and found I liked the structured 141 environment much better.

I'm certainly not saying that aviation universities are the only way to go, I'm just saying that there are a lot of people who look down their nose at them, when in my opinion, they really aren't that bad.

 

[BobDDuck]

I'm certainly not saying that aviation universities are the only way to go, I'm just saying that there are a lot of people who look down their nose at them, when in my opinion, they really aren't that bad.

Fair enough, and thanks for the response. I'll certainly agree that some people do look down their nose at Aviation Universities, and while some of the graduates (the stereotypical riddle rat) make it easy to do, I'd agree with you and say I don't think the reputation is always deserved.

That said, I still think that it doesn't matter where you come from, Ma and Pa 141, 61 or a University program, at low times, pretty much everybody sucks equally. Saying a structured University environment is some sort of magic bullet against lack of flying experience is down right scary.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

Fair enough, and thanks for the response. I'll certainly agree that some people do look down their nose at Aviation Universities, and while some of the graduates (the stereotypical riddle rat) make it easy to do, I'd agree with you and say I don't think the reputation is always deserved.

That said, I still think that it doesn't matter where you come from, Ma and Pa 141, 61 or a University program, at low times, pretty much everybody sucks equally. Saying a structured University environment is some sort of magic bullet against lack of flying experience is down right scary.

Agree 100%

Not to toot UND's horn or anything, but when I was hired on, when asked my background before the first flight, the response was usually something along the lines of "We've had a lot of UND guys here, lately and I really like them better than the Riddle guys. They have a better attitude and don't think they're gods gift to aviation"

I know a lot of riddle guys who are good people, so I'm sure its a case of the vocal minority giving a bad name to the whole group. But it does go to enforce my opinion of attitude and motivation has a lot more to do with success than your background. Case in point, when I was a CFI I taught PPL ground school (canned Jeppesen course) to 10 naval academy grads. 8 of them did absolutely brilliantly, two of them (both with horrible attitudes) could not pass a test to save their lives. I'm not talking about missing it by a few percentage points, I'm talking 40-50%.

 

[juxtapilot]

I'm guessing you a) wenr to a puppymill and b) don't have 1500 hours if you think pupymills make better pilots. Snort.

Um, no to both...? (If you're saying a puppymill is a college..)

I don't think that colleges make better pilots. Colleges do go much more in depth than most pt.61 courses. Having spent a year at a 4 year avit school, I have seen this first hand. They teach CRM, ADM, Flight Safety, Human Factors, Weather, Aerodynamics, etc., MUCH more in depth than a part 61 course. Like Emu, I am definitely not saying that you must go to an aviation college. In fact, I am generally not a person who will defend a avit degree. However, I do see the value in that degree, and it's not something you can gain from CFIing for a thousand hours. Snort.

@ BobDDuck

I am know there are some great pilots out there who have gone pt. 61 (me being one of them<"great pilot," will check ego..>), but there are also lots of great pilots coming from colleges. Having gone to an aviation college, and taken aviation courses, I have seen first hand how much farther in depth they go into the coursework. I don't think that all of what they teach could be learned through time spent as a CFI. Would all your FO's be able to tell you how air moves across a swept wing? Or why it moves that way? Do they understand the stall characteristics of a swept wing aircraft? I'm sure not all avit college grads do, but I'm sure a higher percentage of college grads understand that stuff, than pt. 61 grads.

I don't think going to an avit school will give you better stick and rudder skills. I'm just considering the ADM and safety aspects of going to a university.. I've said it already, but there is no amount of flight time that can make up for a lack in CRM, ADM, Safety etc..

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

It's stick and rudder skills that I am concerned about, not weather or aerodynamics. You said it yourself, colleges don't make better pilots so there is no reason to give them and you a gimmie just because you were shortsighted enough to get an aviation degree. Personally, I bet an Engineering or Math degree would make a better pilot than an aviation degree, but that's just me.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

I'm sure not all avit college grads do, but I'm sure a higher percentage of college grads understand that stuff, than pt. 61 grads.

I think this is an important point. Yes, this info was covered, but if someone just sat in class and tried to get by, vs actually learning the information, they're not going to be any better off than someone who got their education elsewhere.

I also think that a weakness of aviation universities, is that while they did cover a lot of airline centric information, it is hard to truly grasp a lot of this info while flying a piper arrow. There was a lot of stuff that I learned rotely that didn't really sink in until I actually started flying at my current company.

 

[BobDDuck]

Would all your FO's be able to tell you how air moves across a swept wing? Or why it moves that way? Do they understand the stall characteristics of a swept wing aircraft?

Probably not... But frankly, I really don't care how air moves over a super critical wing. I do care about stall characteristics of swept wing aircraft, but only enough to know how to avoid stalling the wing. I'd much rather have information about planning descents and operating in high density areas and knowing how to do quick and dirty math when the FMS decides to die and I don't have a pretty banana bar telling me where I will level off.

I'd much rather have an FO who isn't afraid to speak up and TELL me I am doing something wrong with the airflow over the wing as it's happening then one that can lecture me on what happened after the fact (assuming we don't fireball).

I don't think going to an avit school will give you better stick and rudder skills. I'm just considering the ADM and safety aspects of going to a university.. I've said it already, but there is no amount of flight time that can make up for a lack in CRM, ADM, Safety etc..

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this. I personally don't think CRM or ADM can be taught fully in a classroom. You need flight time to get experience to build up your CRM and ADM (which are really just buzzwords for common sense anyway). I don't care where the flight time comes from, whether it be instructing (at a 141 or 61 or university) flying boxes in a 206, pipeline patrol, banner tow, what ever... it just shouldn't be in multi crew jet with paying passengers in the back.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

It's stick and rudder skills that I am concerned about, not weather or aerodynamics. You said it yourself, colleges don't make better pilots so there is no reason to give them and you a gimmie just because you were shortsighted enough to get an aviation degree. Personally, I bet an Engineering or Math degree would make a better pilot than an aviation degree, but that's just me.

I'm not worried about stick and rudder skills. I'd rather fly with a horrible stick who knows it and makes good decisions, than a person who is god's gift to aviation and knows it.

I know there are times when superior stick skills can save your bacon, but you're much more likely to get yourself into trouble with poor decisions and lack of knowledge.

 

[2BEER]

The bottom line is that experience matters. This may be a hard pill for some low-timers to swallow, but after a lot of reading and pondering, I support this bill 100% for not only the 1500hr minimum but also the changes in duty/rest times that they are proposing.

I think we all understand some of the frustrations of building time when we have a goal in mind that seems impossibly far away, but motivated pilots will hopefully see this as an opportunity for further development as an aviator in other segments (freight, banner towing, instructing, etc.) before sitting in the right seat of an RJ. There's a whole lot more to aviation than going from zero to RJ hero. Take the time to enjoy the ride!

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

I'm not worried about stick and rudder skills. I'd rather fly with a horrible stick who knows it and makes good decisions, than a person who is god's gift to aviation and knows it.

I know there are times when superior stick skills can save your bacon, but you're much more likely to get yourself into trouble with poor decisions and lack of knowledge.

So someone who went to a mom and pop flight school who was trained by some old guy who has more flight hours than the combined total of your newhire class and 40+ years experience flying airplanes makes worse decisions than someone who sat through class on it and was trained by someone who is 1 or 2 years ahead of them on the program?

 

[Screaming_Emu]

So someone who went to a mom and pop flight school who was trained by some old guy who has more flight hours than the combined total of your newhire class and 40+ years experience flying airplanes makes worse decisions than someone who sat through class on it and was trained by someone who is 1 or 2 years ahead of them on the program?

No...you were just saying that you didn't care about stick and rudder skills, I was saying the opposite is true for me.

Completely separate from the flight school debate.

 

[popaviator]

The bottom line is that experience matters. This may be a hard pill for some low-timers to swallow, but after a lot of reading and pondering, I support this bill 100% for not only the 1500hr minimum but also the changes in duty/rest times that they are proposing.

I think we all understand some of the frustrations of building time when we have a goal in mind that seems impossibly far away, but motivated pilots will hopefully see this as an opportunity for further development as an aviator in other segments (freight, banner towing, instructing, etc.) before sitting in the right seat of an RJ. There's a whole lot more to aviation than going from zero to RJ hero. Take the time to enjoy the ride!

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

No...you were just saying that you didn't care about stick and rudder skills, I was saying the opposite is true for me.

Completely separate from the flight school debate.

The fact is without stick and rudder skills you can't make good decisions. If you're so far behind the airplane you are using so much of your brain to keep up that you don't have a whole lot left to spare to make any good decisions.

 

[2BEER]

Don't know if this has been posted already (if so, my apologies), but here ya go...

http://transportation.house.gov/Med...t/Airline Safety and Pilot Training Intro.pdf


H.R. 3371,

THE "AIRLINE SAFETY AND PILOT TRAINING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2009" ​

Pilot Training, Qualifications, Screening and Professional Development
Air Carrier Safety and Pilot Training Task Force ​

​

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]
   [*]Establishes a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Task Force that will identify aviation industry best practices regarding: pilot training, pilot professional standards, and inter-carrier information sharing, mentoring and other safety-related practices.
   [*]The Task Force shall report to Congress every 180 days on air carrier progress implementing best practices, and make recommendations for legislative and regulatory action.[/FONT][/FONT]

Implementation of National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Recommendations​

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]
   [*]Requires FAA to ensure that pilots are trained on stall recovery, upset recovery, and that airlines provide remedial training.
   [*]Mandates the FAA to convene a multidisciplinary panel on pilot training for stick pusher operations, and then take action to implement the recommendations of the panel.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Wingdings,Wingdings][FONT=Wingdings,Wingdings]

​

[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]Requires the Secretary of Transportation to provide an annual report to Congress on what the [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]

[FONT=Garamond,Garamond]agency is doing to address each open NTSB recommendation pertaining to part 121 air carriers. [/FONT]​

[/FONT]

Pilot Qualifications, Screening, Mentoring & Professional Development​

[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: [/FONT][/FONT]​

[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]

1. Requires airline pilots to hold an FAA Airline Transport Pilot license (1,500 minimum flight hours required).
2. Establishes comprehensive pre-employment screening of prospective pilots including an assessment of a pilot’s skills, aptitudes, airmanship and suitability for functioning in the airline’s operational environment.
3. Requires airlines to: establish pilot mentoring programs whereby highly experienced pilots will mentor junior pilots; create Pilot Professional Development Committees; modify training programs to accommodate new-hire pilots with different levels and types of flight experience; and provide leadership and command training to pilots in command (including complying with the "sterile cockpit rule").

[/FONT][/FONT]

Airline Training Hour Requirements​

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]
   [*]Studies the best methods and optimal time needed in airline training programs for pilots to master necessary aircraft systems, maneuvers, and procedures; the length of time between training events including recurrent training; and the best methods to reliably evaluate mastery of systems, maneuvers and procedures.[/FONT][/FONT]

Pilot Records Database​

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]
   [*]Creates a Pilot Records Database, within 90 days, to provide airlines with fast, electronic access to a pilot’s comprehensive record.
   [*]Information included in the database will include pilot’s licenses, aircraft ratings, check rides, Notices of Disapproval and other flight proficiency tests.
   [*]FAA will maintain the database and airlines will be able to access the database for hiring purposes only.[/FONT][/FONT]

1 [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]2 [/FONT]

[/FONT]

Fatigue​

1. Flight and Duty Time Rule

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Directs the FAA to update and implement new pilot flight and duty time rules and fatigue risk management plans within one year to more adequately track scientific research in the field of fatigue.[/FONT][/FONT]
   [*]Fatigue Risk Management Systems[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Requires air carriers, within 90 days, to create fatigue risk management systems approved by FAA to proactively mitigate pilot fatigue.[/FONT][/FONT]
   [*]Commuting Study[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Studies the impact of pilot commuting on fatigue and provides preliminary results after four months to the FAA to be considered as part of the flight and duty time rulemaking.[/FONT][/FONT]

Voluntary Safety Programs​

1. ASAP and FOQA

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Directs the FAA to develop and implement a plan to facilitate the establishment of an Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) and a Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) program by all commercial airlines and their unions.[/FONT][/FONT]
   [*]Report[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Requires FAA to report on ASAP, FOQA, Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA), and Advanced Qualification Program (AQP), which will include: an analysis of which airlines are using the programs or if they are using something comparable that achieves similar safety goals; how FAA will expand the use of the programs; and how FAA is using data from the programs as safety analysis and oversight tools for aviation safety inspectors.[/FONT][/FONT]

Flight Schools, Flight Education and Pilot Academic Training Study​

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]
   [*]Directs the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study of: current pilot academic training requirements compared to flight education provided by accredited two- and four-year universities and foreign academic requirements; FAA’s oversight of flight schools, and student loan options available to student pilots.[/FONT][/FONT]

Other​

1. FAA Safety Oversight by Inspectors:

1. [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]Requires the Department of Transportation Inspector General to study and report to Congress on if the number and experience level of safety inspectors assigned to regional airlines is commensurate with that of mainline airlines; and whether the various data sources that inspectors need to access to perform oversight of airlines can be streamlined into one data source.[/FONT][/FONT]
   [*]Truth in Advertising: [FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]Mandates that at the first page of an Internet website that sells airline tickets to disclose to the purchaser of each ticket the air carrier that operates each segment of the flight.[/FONT][/FONT]
   [*]Weather Event Training Panel[FONT=Garamond,Garamond][FONT=Garamond,Garamond]: Requires the FAA to convene a multidisciplinary panel on pilot training for weather events including microburst, windshear and icing conditions.[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

So it's not just 1500 hours but an ATP. Will they let you take one that has an ICAO limitation or will you need 1200hrs PIC? That would be even better.

 

[Firebird2XC]

The bottom line is that experience matters. This may be a hard pill for some low-timers to swallow, but after a lot of reading and pondering, I support this bill 100% for not only the 1500hr minimum but also the changes in duty/rest times that they are proposing.

I think we all understand some of the frustrations of building time when we have a goal in mind that seems impossibly far away, but motivated pilots will hopefully see this as an opportunity for further development as an aviator in other segments (freight, banner towing, instructing, etc.) before sitting in the right seat of an RJ. There's a whole lot more to aviation than going from zero to RJ hero. Take the time to enjoy the ride!

I heart you. You need to come to the next DFW meet & greet. First round's on me. :beer: