FAA Revising ATP Regs

[hook_dupin]

2) The MBA, if he/she is good, will buy a large share of the foreign training provider

I see this happening... with the exception that the MBA is from China and the "foreign training provider" is a US flight school. For the foreseeable future, America will have a comparative advantage in flight training.

3) Just hiring foreign cadets? Surprised it hasn't happened yet. My guess, regionals will lobby for an H1-B like program, where they get a foreign pilot for 5 years. They legally have to pay them what they would pay an American (next to nothing), so everyone is happy there.

I don't see it. As long as the number of H1-Bs are capped, the IT industry will likely dominate in convincing INS that they need more folks. Why would we bring in immigrants at the $30K pay level and turn away IT professionals at the $100K+ level? The regional airlines' lobby power is spit compared to that of Oracle, IBM, or Cisco.

Eh...but I'm just a MBA student.....

 

[RA390]

CFIing is far more than pattern work. If that's what you're making it, you're doing a disservice to yourself and your students.

You took my response too literally. My time instructing was spent doing freelance where you provide quality service and make it fun for the student or get pushed out. Even giving the best flight instruction will only further your skills so much that are transferable to other types of flying.

 

[ryan4sail]

You took my response too literally. My time instructing was spent doing freelance where you provide quality service and make it fun for the student or get pushed out. Even giving the best flight instruction will only further your skills so much that are transferable to other types of flying.

I agree that there really isn't a whole lot of a difference between a 1000, or 1500 hr CFI. Some people don't really understand an analogy, or example.

 

[Cloud Surfer]

It ought to stand at 1500 hours for everyone--period--NO EXCEPTIONS, other than for military aviators. There is no reason why a Riddle kid is entitled to a restricted ATP at 1000 hours while others who are just as qualified, and did not graduate from Riddle must gain 500 hours more than that. The FAA has sold itself off in regards to this whole ATP affair to whoever will stroke its back with the most favors...and it looks like it is about to cave in again to the highest bidder.

 

[chrisreedrules]

There has been a ton of wild rumors flying around about this... None of which seem to be based on any concrete evidence. It's all a bunch of "my friend talked to xxx at the FSDO" or "my AME told me...". I've heard things from age 70 to no age limit for SIC/age 65 for PIC. Remember that there is only so much the FAA can do legally so let's just wait and see. I for one think they have taken a huge step forward with the new requirements and I would hate to see them do anything to compromise those gains for the industry... But time will tell.

 

[Max1594]

It ought to stand at 1500 hours for everyone--period--NO EXCEPTIONS, other than for military aviators. There is no reason why a Riddle kid is entitled to a restricted ATP at 1000 hours while others who are just as qualified, and did not graduate from Riddle must gain 500 hours more than that. The FAA has sold itself off in regards to this whole ATP affair to whoever will stroke its back with the most favors...and it looks like it is about to cave in again to the highest bidder.

I'm curious to hear how public universities pay favors to the FAA

 

[Cloud Surfer]

I'm curious to hear how public universities pay favors to the FAA

Lobbyists. Plain and simple. It's no surprise that political decisions can be swayed by money, agreements and whatever other gimicks big, powerful organizations which possess the means to lobby big govenment agencies, can use to guide a decision along a certain direction.

Having done flight training under both pt. 61 and 141 programs, I agree with the 500 hour difference ( the reasoning behind it, not the numerical difference).

So have I, and I don't think part 141 gave me any more of an advantage than someone who did all his training under part 61. I have met many pilots who did all their training at mom&pop FBOs, and I am still in awe that they can fly an airplane just as well as I can, and whatever deficit in knowledge I may have held initially at 250 hours had been bridged eventually through experience and reading at 1000. My aviation degree really was a joke in a lot of ways. I strongly feel that all that I learned in college, I could have learned in time by myself if I had wanted. No one needs to go to an aviation university to become a master pilot. Heck, there were guys and gals who were hired at regionals and who are still flying part 121 nowadays who never set foot in a part 141 university, and they had no problems whatsoever.

But there seems to be an outspoken group on JC that sees college grads as entitled, spoiled, etc. So I won't get into it

Don't be silly. Most of the users here on JC have graduated from college, and recognize the benefit of education. I think what is being criticized so often is the FAA's lame notion of who is qualified and who is not, and its random attribution of who is worthy based off what school they went to. Exempli gratia, I went to Purdue and graduated from the flight program there while it still operated under part 61. I do not qualify for a restricted ATP while part 141 Riddle kids and UND graduates do since Purdue's program was part 61 at the time, despite that I went to a "prestigious" aviation university that offered relatively decent training. Does this make any sense to you?

 

[Max1594]

Lobbyists. Plain and simple. It's no surprise that political decisions can be swayed by money, agreements and whatever other gimicks big, powerful organizations which possess the means to lobby big govenment agencies, can use to guide a decision along a certain direction.



So have I, and I don't think part 141 gave me any more of an advantage than someone who did all his training under part 61. I have met many pilots who did all their training at a mom&pop FBOs, and I am still in awe that they can fly an airplane just as well as I can, and whatever deficit in knowledge I may have held initially at 250 hours had been bridged eventually through experience and reading at 1000. My aviation degree really was a joke in a lot of ways. I strongly feel that all that I learned college, I could have learned in time by myself if I had wanted. No one needs to go to an aviation university to become a master pilot. Heck, there were guys and gals who were hired at regionals and who are still flying part 121 nowadays who never set foot in a part 141 university, and they had no problems whatsoever.



Don't be silly. Most of the users here on JC have graduated from college, and recognize the benefit of education. I think what is being criticized so often is the FAA's lame notion of who is qualified and who is not, and its random attribution of who is worthy based off what school they went to. Exempli gratia, I went to Purdue and graduated from the flight program there while it still operated under part 61. I do not qualify for a restricted ATP since their program was part 61 at the time, despite that I went to a "prestigious" aviation university that offered relatively decent training. Does this make any sense to you?

Trust me I agree with what you're saying, but there are definitely multiple arguments to make for both sides, and I can agree with both. As far as everything else, like you said about graduating college but flying pt. 61, there are so many situations and exceptions to the rule, which is part of why I deleted most of my post. Heck, there's plenty of situations where people completed training pt. 141 and graduated with a degree but for a variety of reasons are not eligible for the 1000hr r-atp. Obviously I wouldn't think that pilots that trained under pt. 141 are better that those through pt.61, I was afraid that my comment might come across that way, so again deleted most of what I had said.

 

[Deleted member 21509]

I'm curious to hear how public universities pay favors to the FAA

I think what you get is more important than where you got it. If you think that you can't get the same quality through PT 61, you haven't been to the right Pt. 61. At 300 hours, I had time in 10 different aircraft, had flown across the country twice and in multiple countries throughout central and south america. I also got a tailwheel endorsement, flew some acro and in my opinion got a lot of experience that my friends at pt 141's didn't get. Im not saying you can do this at all pt 61's, but I am saying that I managed to find a great flight instructor that had a ton of experience and cared about my goals. At the Pt 61 I was at, we had everything from captains at majors, to corporate pilots that wanted to make some extra cash on weekends. All were great instructors that turned out good pilots. So to say that going through a more rigid 141 program makes one more qualified at a lower TT is in my opinion kind of silly. There is a lot more experience outside of flying the same few airplanes that the 141 of your choice owns for 1000 hours. Not trying to say that those coming from a 141 aren't quality pilots, just saying we shouldn't discount the training that can be received from a pt 61.

 

[Max1594]

I think what you get is more important than where you got it. If you think that you can't get the same quality through PT 61, you haven't been to the right Pt. 61. At 300 hours, I had time in 10 different aircraft, had flown across the country twice and in multiple countries throughout central and south america. I also got a tailwheel endorsement, flew some acro and in my opinion got a lot of experience that my friends at pt 141's didn't get. Im not saying you can do this at all pt 61's, but I am saying that I managed to find a great flight instructor that had a ton of experience and cared about my goals. At the Pt 61 I was at, we had everything from captains at majors, to corporate pilots that wanted to make some extra cash on weekends. All were great instructors that turned out good pilots. So to say that going through a more rigid 141 program makes one more qualified at a lower TT is in my opinion kind of silly. There is a lot more experience outside of flying the same few airplanes that the 141 of your choice owns for 1000 hours. Not trying to say that those coming from a 141 aren't quality pilots, just saying we shouldn't discount the training that can be received from a pt 61.

Again, not what I was trying to say at all, I realized what I originally posted was purely limited to my own experiences so it was deleted.

In fact I learned many things flying pt. 61 that I would not have otherwise and I'm very grateful for that!

 

[floridabeachbum]

Okay so now that the FAA has formed a committee to address this 1500 hour rule how long does the process take and for it to be implemented? I know some schools and employers are wanting people to sign lengthy contracts for employment- (it would make sense if you're low time and you need to build your hours) but when this rule changes -yes I said when- it wouldn't make any sense To sign a lengthy employment contract. Anybody have any thoughts on this?

 

[surreal1221]

I still don't really understand how an extra 500hrs of teaching students pattern work is suppose to better prepare someone to fly an rj? You can only learn so much sitting there saying 'more right rudder, more right rudder.'

Then you're doing it wrong.

 

[chrisreedrules]

Then you're doing it wrong.

Exactly... 500 is enough time to learn a wealth of knowledge. I think I learned more about having a safety mindset in the 500 hours leading up to my ATP mins than in all the rest of my flying combined.

 

[ScorpionStinger]

I still don't really understand how an extra 500hrs of teaching students pattern work is suppose to better prepare someone to fly an rj? You can only learn so much sitting there saying 'more right rudder, more right rudder.'

I understand the point your trying to make. Its a valid point & possible for a CFI to do this, learn nothing, teach nothing complex, and easily gain 500 extra hours without envoking principle FOI skills or basic aeronautical knowledge/skills to make one a better or safer Airline Transport Pilot.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

I still don't really understand how an extra 500hrs of teaching students pattern work is suppose to better prepare someone to fly an rj? You can only learn so much sitting there saying 'more right rudder, more right rudder.'

Then you're doing it wrong.

@surreal1221 , this was totally covered yesterday by @PeanuckleCRJ, and replied to later on:

You took my response too literally. My time instructing was spent doing freelance where you provide quality service and make it fun for the student or get pushed out. Even giving the best flight instruction will only further your skills so much that are transferable to other types of flying.

It's hard to read the whole thing

 

[surreal1221]

Great. Then perhaps next time he will think just a touch longer before hitting post reply. lol

 

[desertdog71]

121 training has a funny way of weeding folks out. Especially the weak and the over confident.

 

[RS1]

Doesn't matter what their plans are.. If they stick with the BS 1500 hour rule, then I'll keep my software job making 70k, while flying XC's in C150 with a safety pilot for 50 bux an hour until I get close to the minimums.. 25 hours a month.. 15k a year... My NET pay will STILL be higher than a CFI and/or regional FO.. I'd do the CFI thing once I got closer to 1000 hours, and do it for a few months until I get my ATP. Solid plan, no debt, money in the bank. The problem with the first year pay is the naive SJS kids who take out 100k in loans for a job that starts you at 20k. By accepting these terms, you perpetuate the pay problem. Build a side career and fly on the weekends. When you are ready, take a job for a good salary, not some crappy regional. Call it what you will, but I'll have less financial stress than anyone doing it the other way.

 

[desertdog71]

Ah FFS!! I'm so sick of hearing why it's always somebody's fault that you're not getting yours. Grow a pair and deal with it or do something else. Starting FO pay has never been a priority to people already on property. If it was then they'd give up some of their cash to bring the bottom up. Hasn't happened and it's always someone else to blame.

It's a tough business to get into with barriers to entry and no guarantees that you'll succeed once you do. That's nothing new and not secret knowledge.

 

[ComplexHiAv8r]

121 training has a funny way of weeding folks out. Especially the weak and the over confident.

HEY!