FAA to boost Co-pilot training, avoid ATP rule

[derg]

I've got some really, really, REALLY bad news for you.

If you think flight instructing is boring, then an airliner cockpit is going to send you to an early grave. You'd better go and start applying for crop dusting positions, because that'll keep you alert and awake.

Domestic: Sit in your dark closet at home and change frequencies every six minutes.

International: Sit in your dark closet at home, change frequencies every two hours, eat on your lap, wonder what the big deal about "Angry Birds" is.



In retrospect, some of the best years of my flying career was watching that student shoot his first ILS to minimums or watching him make his very first solo pattern.

 

[derg]

While you guys were basking in the sun on some Florida beach, we were locked up in Minot where the snow went up to the third floor, and the only channel on the TV has "Curling Championships from Southeast Central Wisconsin".

Gives fellows plenty of time to be retrospective.

Richman

True.

D periods in Coconut Grove during 727 school where the instructor would call at noon ask, "You nancy boys survive? Get your ass to the pool so we can brief!"

 

[bronco21016]

http://www.baseops.net/militarypilot/

I'm adding up 210 hours at the most before attending aircraft specific follow on training. I can't find any numbers for how many hours of flight training follow on training consists of. I didn't add up classroom hours but I know there's classroom nearly every single day.

Academics must mean something if the Air Force relies so heavily upon them.

http://www.afsc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080407-052.pdf

Considering the high risk mission of the Air Force I'd also say their safety record is pretty impressive.

I'm siding with Polar.

 

[Richman]

True.

D periods in Coconut Grove during 727 school where the instructor would call at noon ask, "You nancy boys survive? Get your ass to the pool so we can brief!"

Meh....lucky bum. I spent the 8 weeks in 727 school at some no-name former HoJo marinating in the vapors from the way over-chlorinated pool. The hallways looked like "Cops...filmed on location!"

The good news was that the 8 weeks was co-incident with the 8 weeks of above zero temperatures they get per year, so I had that going for me. Seriously...I finished OE, and the first snow was already on the ground.

Ahhh, but it's fun to reminisce about the days of paid health care, fully funded retirements, mercifully abscent RJs, and paychecks worth going to work for...

Richman

 

[BobDDuck]

http://www.baseops.net/militarypilot/

I'm adding up 210 hours at the most before attending aircraft specific follow on training. I can't find any numbers for how many hours of flight training follow on training consists of. I didn't add up classroom hours but I know there's classroom nearly every single day.

Academics must mean something if the Air Force relies so heavily upon them.

http://www.afsc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080407-052.pdf

Considering the high risk mission of the Air Force I'd also say their safety record is pretty impressive.

I'm siding with Polar.

The part in the equation you are missing is that the selection rate a whole lot lower than Riddle or UND or whomever. And the washout rate once selected is WAY, WAY higher than the Aviation College route.

 

[kellwolf]

I've got some really, really, REALLY bad news for you.

If you think flight instructing is boring, then an airliner cockpit is going to send you to an early grave. You'd better go and start applying for crop dusting positions, because that'll keep you alert and awake.

Flying jets is BBBBOOOORRRRIIINNNNGGGG!!!

What it boils down to is this: like every other job, there are those stretches of time that it's just a job. I had more variety in my schedule as a CFI than I do as a 121 captain, but I DO like this job better. I agree with Train, though. If CFIing is getting boring, 121 flying will get boring at some point, too. The challenge is not getting complacent during the boredom. Find things to do that challenge yourself. Don't just give your students challenges, give them to yourself. Getting bored in the 121 flying? There are ALWAYS places where you can improve. Normally right in the middle of a complacent lull when you're flying from DTW-MBS for the 90th time this year is when the fecal matter hits the fan. If you're in "bored mode," it's gonna take you time to get up to speed with the situation. I've seen EXACTLY what a lot of guys are talking about with some of our FOs. Went the academy or aviation university route, have about 10-20 hours of solo time, spent 2 years in the right seat waiting for their number to come up for upgrade but not really paying attention, got through upgrade and now they're line captains on reserve flying with guys that have been flying a CRJ for about 6 weeks. THAT is what scares me to death. I've flown with FOs that will talk the whole trip about how they can't wait to upgrade because they need the extra money or they need to get out of this place. Normally, THOSE are the guys that need to slow down and pay attention because they can't even get the FO stuff done right, much less function as a competent captain.

 

[Cedarbend1]

Some well said advice here. I am one of those that have managed to keep myself alive flying a Beech Baron all accross Southwest Alaska
with 1700+ hrs TT. Prior to this I was a CFI and honestly enjoyed it. I was flying right seat in King Air with very experienced Captian during
the same time. Both taught me airmanship and decision making skills that are mandatory to fly in and deal with the conditions (runways, aircraft, maintenance and the bosses schemes). I have 10yrs working as mechanic on those nice shiny Cessna Citations and I'm anxious as heck to fly one.
But I have memories for a lifetime building my skills here in Alaska.

 

[Hacker15e]

Considering the high risk mission of the Air Force I'd also say their safety record is pretty impressive.

I'm siding with Polar.

Unfortunately, I think using the military paradigm as an example in this discussion is disingenuous. The military's training program is completely different than any civilian training system in all aspects, from entry requirements, to standards during training, to regulations under which they're flying, to the operational world they fly in after training. It's unfortunately an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Although I agree that extensive classroom academics should definitely be part of a pilot's training program, if you wish to model the successes of the military training system there are a hell of a lot of other things you'd need to change, too. The only way you could get close to that model would be a controlled ab-initio program either run by the Gov't (the 'national aviation academy' that was being proposed recently, perhaps?) or by one of the airlines.

Of course, we know that if the program were being run by one of the airlines, they'd have a completely different goal in mind than producing a highly skilled pilot. One of the benefits of the military system is that it completely disregards economics and instead is only interested in the quality of the graduate....which would NOT be the case in a program run by a for-profit business.

 

[ASpilot2be]

Some well said advice here. I am one of those that have managed to keep myself alive flying a Beech Baron all accross Southwest Alaska
with 1700+ hrs TT. Prior to this I was a CFI and honestly enjoyed it. I was flying right seat in King Air with very experienced Captian during
the same time. Both taught me airmanship and decision making skills that are mandatory to fly in and deal with the conditions (runways, aircraft, maintenance and the bosses schemes). I have 10yrs working as mechanic on those nice shiny Cessna Citations and I'm anxious as heck to fly one.
But I have memories for a lifetime building my skills here in Alaska.

Welcome to the forums! I see you fly out of PAIL. If you work for who I think you do, I have probably met you when I worked at Signature Anchorage.

 

[kellwolf]

The part in the equation you are missing is that the selection rate a whole lot lower than Riddle or UND or whomever. And the washout rate once selected is WAY, WAY higher than the Aviation College route.

True. If you can get a loan, you're accepted using the civilian route. You can pretty much keep trying to pass a checkride as long as the money for the DE holds out, too. I've seen people take the same checkride 3+ times. Not sure how many shots you get in the military, but they're not too big on wasting the tax payer money from what I've heard.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

THIS!


Amateurs soil their pants when things go bad. Pros get the job done and soil their pants on the ground.

Like the end of The High and the Mighty...John Wayne looks up at the twisted wreckage of the #1 nacelle, says something to the effect of "phew!" and strolls to the terminal.

 

[Patrick]

Unfortunately, I think using the military paradigm as an example in this discussion is disingenuous. The military's training program is completely different than any civilian training system in all aspects, from entry requirements, to standards during training, to regulations under which they're flying, to the operational world they fly in after training. It's unfortunately an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Although I agree that extensive classroom academics should definitely be part of a pilot's training program, if you wish to model the successes of the military training system there are a hell of a lot of other things you'd need to change, too. The only way you could get close to that model would be a controlled ab-initio program either run by the Gov't (the 'national aviation academy' that was being proposed recently, perhaps?) or by one of the airlines.

Of course, we know that if the program were being run by one of the airlines, they'd have a completely different goal in mind than producing a highly skilled pilot. One of the benefits of the military system is that it completely disregards economics and instead is only interested in the quality of the graduate....which would NOT be the case in a program run by a for-profit business.

I think this is the most critical difference, and one that could NEVER be applied to the civilian side of the coin.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

I think this is the most critical difference, and one that could NEVER be applied to the civilian side of the coin.

Big :yeahthat:

It might vicariously produce a highly skilled pilot, but the point is A to B and make some money...or at least try to.

 

[BEEF SUPREME]

Unfortunately, I think using the military paradigm as an example in this discussion is disingenuous. The military's training program is completely different than any civilian training system in all aspects, from entry requirements, to standards during training, to regulations under which they're flying, to the operational world they fly in after training. It's unfortunately an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Although I agree that extensive classroom academics should definitely be part of a pilot's training program, if you wish to model the successes of the military training system there are a hell of a lot of other things you'd need to change, too. The only way you could get close to that model would be a controlled ab-initio program either run by the Gov't (the 'national aviation academy' that was being proposed recently, perhaps?) or by one of the airlines.

Of course, we know that if the program were being run by one of the airlines, they'd have a completely different goal in mind than producing a highly skilled pilot. One of the benefits of the military system is that it completely disregards economics and instead is only interested in the quality of the graduate....which would NOT be the case in a program run by a for-profit business.

Never thought of it that way. Learn something new everyday.

Also the weather minimums for a newb fighter pilot are pretty high, no? it's not my world but it takes a lot of experience to be a lead pilot or a low weather. That's the explanation I have heard.

The missions are not for profit either. Those guys actually do go around / missed. They miss management pressure for completing the flight.

There is only big pressure during war. So the flying is "safer" than for profit during peacetime? Maybe so but still totally different.

Military is a bad comparison... Yup.

 

[Hacker15e]

Yes, overall a good grasp on the core differences in motivation and performance pressures.

Also the weather minimums for a newb fighter pilot are pretty high, no?

It depends on where the guy is stationed (CONUS vs overseas), but in general they break pilots out into experience categories. Instrument mins start high when a pilot is new, and then eventually build toward published mins as experience grows toward 300 hours in type (first 700/2, then 500/1.5, then 300/1, then published).

it takes a lot of experience to be a lead pilot or a low weather.

Upgrades to flight lead require 300 hours in type (or 200 if the pilot has previous experience in a different type of jet). The process of selection to become a flight lead is entirely subjective, though, and is picked by commanders based on performance demonstrated in the aircraft and not based on seniority. The upgrade itself is not a "gentleman's program", and is quite a ball busting. This is a fighter pilot's actual first exposure to the crucible of combat ORM and decisionmaking, both in terms of admin and tactics.

The missions are not for profit either. Those guys actually do go around / missed. They miss management pressure for completing the flight. There is only big pressure during war. So the flying is "safer" than for profit during peacetime? Maybe so but still totally different.

Good overall assessment. During peacetime or stateside training yes, there generally isn't pressure to do anything but the safest/most conservative answer. During combat operations, there is immense pressure to complete the mission, sometimes requiring immense risk to do so.

 

[O&M]

You have all convinced yourselves that, if only the barriers to entry for this career field were raised, that this would somehow translate into a better paying job. Supply is only one side of the equation. Demand is the other. If airlines raise ticket prices in order to pay higher salaries, the paying customer is going to find another alternative, or perhaps just not travel. The job may pay better, but there won't be very many of them. Pick your poison.

 

[kellwolf]

You have all convinced yourselves that, if only the barriers to entry for this career field were raised, that this would somehow translate into a better paying job. Supply is only one side of the equation. Demand is the other. If airlines raise ticket prices in order to pay higher salaries, the paying customer is going to find another alternative, or perhaps just not travel. The job may pay better, but there won't be very many of them. Pick your poison.

Depends on WHERE the job is, too. Before the regional explosion, you're right. There were fewer jobs that were higher paying. After the regional explosion, there were a lot more jobs, most of them lower paying. The "good" jobs didn't really change in number. In fact, they went DOWN. Look what happened to United. 737s parked in favor of CRJs. This went along with a ticket price DECREASE rather than an increase. It's a lot more complicated than just "supply and demand." The ATPs and pilot mills started up as a result of the regionals. Honestly, I'd rather have fewer high quality jobs than a pack of crappy, low paying ones.

 

[Der_Meister]

You have all convinced yourselves that, if only the barriers to entry for this career field were raised, that this would somehow translate into a better paying job. Supply is only one side of the equation. Demand is the other. If airlines raise ticket prices in order to pay higher salaries, the paying customer is going to find another alternative, or perhaps just not travel. The job may pay better, but there won't be very many of them. Pick your poison.

They should last time I checked it was the least expensive form of travel for a given time. Sure it might be cheaper to take a bus from LAX to DC but it also take 4 days, trains are even more expensive.

 

[aviatoralex]

The goal is to improve the knowledge and caliber of newly hired co-pilots, partly by giving extra flight-time credits to civilian job-seekers who graduate from four-year academic institutions or other advanced-training programs in which they study such things as aeronautics and airmanship.

Sorry to bump a thread, but do you guys think ATP would qualify as one of the "other advanced-training programs" that would receive extra flight time credits?

 

[Boris Badenov]

I would expect so. If not, the repercussions could be...dire.