FAA Set To Issue Mentoring Rules For Airline Pilots

Curious if they plan on cutting down requirements from 1500 for civilians too. That would stir things up for a year or two.
 
I'm sorry but this is dumb..... I have seen great leadership from relatively new captains and crap leadership from senior captains. The only thing that matters is pilots who actually give a crap. Way for them to take a misguided government approach to a problem that doesn't have a single answer fix.
 
Box hauler said:
I'm sorry but this is dumb..... I have seen great leadership from relatively new captains and crap leadership from senior captains. The only thing that matters is pilots who actually give a crap. Way for them to take a misguided government approach to a problem that doesn't have a single answer fix.
Click to expand...
The way I read the article, it's a congressional mandate, with which the FAA has reluctantly complied.

-Fox
 
hook_dupin said:
I think the writing's on the wall there. I see 1500 as gone in a couple of years.
Click to expand...
I sure hope not. While it was a knee jerk reaction, and puts to much emphasis on quantity of hours over quality, the FAA has been able make it workable and reasonable with the reductions for military or 141 schools. Speaking as 121 ground, simulator, and aircraft instructor, there is an indirect relation between hours and the skill level of the student. To clarify, while not all high time applicants excel in a 121 program, a larger percentage do. Additionally, most of the students I've seen come through with a background in military aviation, or as a 141 flight instructor, are significantly better.

Finally, the impact that the 1500 hour rule has had on the industry economically has been hugely positive.

Edit: To address the topic of the thread... Can't read the article due to lack of subscription, but my carrier, has had a mostly successful ALPA sponsored mentoring program. Successful enough that the company training department considered participation in the mentor program as a significant positive when it came to hiring people into the training departmenr.
 
Oh man, I feel sorry for my trainee. "The man does this, and do let the man do that to you, the man blah blah blah. And if you have to go home and fix your girlfriends car..."
"Uh sir descending through 10."
 
Hammertime said:
Finally, the impact that the 1500 hour rule has had on the industry economically has been hugely positive.
Click to expand...

This depends on which side of the industry is doing the talking. The regional CEOs will say that increased salary demands has crushed them and forced them to roll back on schedules. The smaller cities are losing air service, which makes them economically less viable.

Who's Congress going to listen to? Pilot groups or the Chambers of Commerce from every small to mid-sized town with a regional airport in America? From a macro view, the safety benefits of the 1500 hour rule do not outweigh the economic impacts. For that reason, I believe 1500 will go away.
 
Even if 1500 goes away it's only going to create a temporary fix. I don't think 1500 deterrd people from entering the industry. People just have to instruct for a year and a half. So once they repeal it, they'll have a bunch of guys that were going to instruct but now don't have to. It will level out a year or two later and the benefit of repealing it won't be there anymore.
 
Lots of good comments in this threa, IMO of course. I think in very simple terms, like how about not sucking or suck less. With my military flying background, I really don't get many of the FAA mandated procedures enforced on civilian flying gigs, like in the 135 flying I'm doing now. It often looks more like lawyer speak with little input, thought or application by career aviators. If you have to • pilots no they are quite ascending or descending through 10k, it means you have two quite • pilots.

When I went through some training BFM (Basic Fighter Manuevers) in the 45, at times were fighting while slow, in shakers with the IP talking, cracking jokes, keeping his SA about him, flying the jet in a critical flight regime without issue. Granted, these pilots weren't • and obviously understood when to talk and when not to. Just a small example, I get trying to concentrate on the appropriate stuff but like others said, good CRM and standardization goes a long way for safety. But just implementing rules and regs without really looking at the root of the problem to say you've done something to increase safety doesn't really increase safety. I don't know, above my pay grade, time for a bourbon, double on the rocks will do.
 
The 1,500 rule was never a deterrent for the decades it was the de facto minimum.

1,200 hours never deterred anyone flying part 135 (IFR) in the decades it's been in place.

The rule is being used as an excuse for far more serious industrial problems that were already extant before Colgan.

Richman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top