FAA to boost Co-pilot training, avoid ATP rule

bronco21016 said:
If this shortage really happens I think what we'll see is the airlines offer scholarships to get people trained rather than increased pay. They'll offer to pay a good portion of your training at a four year university with a requirement to repay if you some how flunk out or leave early. Basically we'll send you to school but you're our slave until we've made money off you.

If you go to the page of the actual article there's an interesting graph from the ALPA about legacy retirements. A quick estimate of adding the bars up tells me around 10,000 pilots over the next 9 years. Lets hope those jobs stay at mainline.
Click to expand...

This. I see it becoming just like Europe and Asia- where the airline sponsors your training in exchange for bonding you to the job for 10 years (or more). So, effectively, they just made you an indentured servant.
 
Patrick said:
This. I see it becoming just like Europe and Asia- where the airline sponsors your training in exchange for bonding you to the job for 10 years (or more). So, effectively, they just made you an indentured servant.
Click to expand...

With 700 hours as the new minimum and then ways to reduce that there doesnt seem like there will be much change from what is in place now. There should be a pipeline still in place for the regionals to fill seats quickly, will anyone want to take the spots who knows? I don't think any regional would have the money to offer training to anyone, they seem to be barely hanging on. The ATP requirement had the potential to prevent regionals from even having pilots to fly there planes, which probably wouldn't have gone well with the public.

Airline sponsored training I think would have to come from the mainline level, probably with government help. That deep of a pilot shortage doesnt have many believers.
 
So, if this becomes like Europe/Asia, does that mean we will see starting Salaries of 60K (Cathay Cadet) 50K(British Airways Future Pilot Program) 70K(Lufthansa AbInito) 40K(SIA Cadet)? If so, ill take the free flight training, the good starting pay, and a 10 year bond (no furlough?) to pay them back for my 'troubles.'

But in all seriousness, this will never happen in the States...
 
Let there be a damned pilot shortage! As it sits currently, if there was a pilot shortage, I'd be getting calls back from the places I apply at. Money should never be greater than safety.

There are some serious problems in the industry right now, and who knows what it's going to take to fix it. But one thing I am sure of, THIS is not the solution.


Edit to add: What really bothers me about all of this, is they are still asigning an hour mark to the experince level. Someone who borrows their dads 172, and fly's around the middle of Texas for 700 hours taking his friends to lunch at nothing but uncontroled fields in CAVU will be no better than the dude who gets higherd with a wet commercial certificate. There needs to be a better metric to judge experince. I still say an ATP is needed to sit in the right seat. At least at that point, the metric being used is a little more standardized. It's not perfect, but at least it's realistic.
 
mshunter said:
Let there be a damned pilot shortage! As it sits currently, if there was a pilot shortage, I'd be getting calls back from the places I apply at. Money should never be greater than safety.

There are some serious problems in the industry right now, and who knows what it's going to take to fix it. But one thing I am sure of, THIS is not the solution.

Edit to add: What really bothers me about all of this, is they are still asigning an hour mark to the experince level. Someone who borrows their dads 172, and fly's around the middle of Texas for 700 hours taking his friends to lunch at nothing but uncontroled fields in CAVU will be no better than the dude who gets higherd with a wet commercial certificate. There needs to be a better metric to judge experince. I still say an ATP is needed to sit in the right seat. At least at that point, the metric being used is a little more standardized. It's not perfect, but at least it's realistic.
Click to expand...

This.
 
CFI A&P said:
I believe it was Ian Twombly in one of the flying magazines that pointed out, BOTH crew members of Colgan exceeded the ATP requirements.
Click to expand...
They were hired with less than ATP. So lack of experience combined with substandard training is the outcome they are trying to prevent. I've always thought 121 mins for the fo should be the same as 135 PIC(1200TT), but I dont work in congress so my opinion isn't valid.
 
WalterSobchak said:
They were hired with less than ATP. So lack of experience combined with substandard training is the outcome they are trying to prevent. I've always thought 121 mins for the fo should be the same as 135 PIC(1200TT), but I dont work in congress so my opinion isn't valid.
Click to expand...

You sure about that? The FO had quite a bit of experience prior to being hired.
 
I-Pilot said:
[video]http://online.wsj.com/video/faa-boosting-co-pilot-training-hours/0A36AE0E-596B-4EC5-9EBE-BC9F89B62956.html[/video]
Click to expand...

The guy they had on knew nothing more about the topic he was talking about then the article he read everything from.
 
slough said:
You sure about that? The FO had quite a bit of experience prior to being hired.
Click to expand...
According to the reports I have read she crashed with 2200 TT and had over 700 in the plane. I have also seen reports that some of her time couldn't be verified. Take it all for what it is, but she didn't have a clue what she was doing and unfortunatly the CA didn't either. She was along for the ride and the quick upgrade.
 
If 1500 hours total and ATP became a rule just to be FO in a regional jet, the companies might have to start shelling out a few more pennies per year to fill the seats and they don't want that. The FAA works for the airlines. Show business folks.
 
slough said:
With 700 hours as the new minimum and then ways to reduce that there doesnt seem like there will be much change from what is in place now. There should be a pipeline still in place for the regionals to fill seats quickly, will anyone want to take the spots who knows? I don't think any regional would have the money to offer training to anyone, they seem to be barely hanging on. The ATP requirement had the potential to prevent regionals from even having pilots to fly there planes, which probably wouldn't have gone well with the public.

Airline sponsored training I think would have to come from the mainline level, probably with government help. That deep of a pilot shortage doesnt have many believers.
Click to expand...

The way I understood it the minimum is reducable to 700 at the specially selected collegiate and advanced programs. 1,500 still stands for anybody going through a traditional FBO. That's just the way I read the article. We'll see when the final rule gets published I guess.

So basically shell out $150k or so to get there quick or go fly circles dropping jumpers for 1,500 hours. If a situation occurs where the airlines need pilots quick they're going to have to shell out the money to pump people through the collegiate programs. I could see mainline shelling out the cash to fill regional seats so they can keep the regionals alive rather than bring the flying back to mainline.

I'm not saying I'm a believer in the shortage. I've heard the song and dance since I got in the game 6 years ago and I have yet to actually see it. I'm just saying if it happens like some want you to believe then the paid training could happen. I doubt the pay will ever go up though.
 
The possibility exists here for flying to come back to mainline, as the financial feasibility of outsourcing flying to the regionals goes away. The biggest component of cost that the regionals can control is labor, so if they lose that advantage via a "pilot shortage," it may make financial sense for mainline to just put those airframes under their own certificate and be done with the whole game. Of course, airline sponsored flight training (by regionals, of course), would completely override this.
 
I-Pilot said:
With part 141 they get every dime out of students having them sold on the idea that failing a stage check or an end of course failure is not the same as a checkride failure. Lots of fun explaining that to airline recruiters.
Click to expand...

Unless there is an examiner on board, it's just a training flight. Including stage checks. No examiner = not a checkride.
 
Given the finite number of "seats" available in the collegiate programs, I don't see how this will impact them significantly. Schools which don't necessarily handle the flight training themselves (UVU, Everglades, etc.) might be able to ramp up, but given the budgetary realities, it's doubtful the traditional brick-and-mortars are in any position to increase enrollment. On the other hand, this'll be great for places that offer approved two-week-long, "Jet Transition" programs. So a bunch of pilots will enter the regionals with more debt and a slightly better chance of making it through initial, but not being any better (or worse) than they would have been once they get on the line.

At the same time, traditional training FBOs will get their teeth kicked in.

I thought the whole point of the 1500-hr rule was to bring in pilots with additional experience. It's not like airlines (theoretically, at least) just give the new hire a pat on the back and throw him or her into the right seat. Initial training exists. Is the FAA just saying they have no faith, whatsoever, in airline training programs? Bad news, then, because courses in aircraft recognition and airport management aren't going to better prepare a pilot to deal with a real-life emergency than an additional 800 hours of flight time. If they didn't learn the stick shaker in initial, they didn't learn the stick shaker in initial.
 
Love it.

Finally somebody is taking a hold of the "1500 hour" rule that has been looming over the training industry for the past few years. I'm very happy that it is somebody that knows the industry, not just some congressmen trying to be reelected.

the reduced hours but higher training standards seems very sensible to me. But since I am at a 141 university, I do not know the effect it would have on part 61 students.
 
flyingsaluki1 said:
Love it.

Finally somebody is taking a hold of the "1500 hour" rule that has been looming over the training industry for the past few years. I'm very happy that it is somebody that knows the industry, not just some congressmen trying to be reelected.

the reduced hours but higher training standards seems very sensible to me. But since I am at a 141 university, I do not know the effect it would have on part 61 students.
Click to expand...

Looming over the training industry? What negative impact has this rule had on training? You mean schools might not be able to tell their students, hand us 60k and well put you in the right seat of a shiny jet in less time than it takes to become a hair dresser? To be fair, they are dealing with peoples hair which is important. Getting to the destination is worthless if you dont look good!

PS this carve out was bought by lobbyist with campaign contributions to politicians to pressure the FAA to reduce the minimums. This isn't the work of "somebody that knows the industry".
 
Patrick said:
This. I see it becoming just like Europe and Asia- where the airline sponsors your training in exchange for bonding you to the job for 10 years (or more). So, effectively, they just made you an indentured servant.
Click to expand...

Are we not already? Pay sucks
 
I still disagree with the reduced minimums for those from a 141 university. It is obviously all about the money and keeping enrollment numbers up. I teach regularly for both a 141 university and a 61 university, and the number of people who just barely slip through each 141 'checkride' and end up flying a regional (or anything professionally really) scares me. In many cases, the part-61 students get MORE experience through their training because they don't have to follow as many rules (designed to try to take the fun out of flight training I think) and can see more situations. Their time building isn't necessarily doing lazy-8s on a CAVU day, it can be flying trips with their friends all over the place in all sorts of weather conditions, getting real experience. Yet they could be the ones that are 'held back' from their SJS job. Also, I think that the quality of the training has very little to do with what program or school you are at, and is mostly controlled by the instructor.

I'm not totally against the 1,500 hour rule as I think a pilot shortage would be good for the industry, and not everyone is ready to fly a jetttttt right out of school. Then again, it holds back the few that could handle an RJ with way less than 1,500 hours.

(This coming from someone who has taught and trained in several part-61 and 141 environments)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top