FAA to boost Co-pilot training, avoid ATP rule

[WalterSobchak]

Exactly. The right seat of an airliner should NOT be one's first gig fresh out of college.

W3RD!

It's not as bad any more, but in '07 I can't count how many FO's would say things like this is my first approach in actual or I have not ever shot an approach with less than a mile vis before. They were all fine to fly with and did a nice job considering the experience level, but I wonder given other situations what could happen. I just hope I don't have to listen to someone talk about 'building time' in the cockpit of a 121 airline anymore. This doesn't reflect on any one individual, but more of a general attitude amongst the majority of lower time pilots.

 

[derg]

I did some part-61 training, some "University Aviation" training and worked under both part-61 and part-141.

As a graduate of ERAU, the idea that my four years experience there is going to supplant not just getting out there and building experience is a flipping joke. So I learned about using canvas to keep frost off of the upper surface of a wing and can read a flow script to know when to put my "Headsets.......ON" in a Cessna 172 and when to use "Riddle 58" instead of "Cessna 258 Echo Romeo" doesn't mean that I'm an iota more qualified to fly fare-paying passengers at 700 hours.

700 hours is jack squat when it comes to experience.

Hell, even when I had 1500 hours it was almost a joke that I was qualified to be an "Airline Transport Pilot", woo hoo.

The "money" won. Basically we're going to end up working more hours in a day, codifying having more low-experienced pilots in the cockpit and just gave University Aviation impetus to jack up training costs again.

As a professional pilot, these new rules do nothing but benefit the Airline Tranport Association and Regional Airline Association and not a cotton-picking thing to improve safety.

I'm very concerned and pissed off.

 

[mshunter]

I'm very concerned and pissed off.

Have you noticed who isn't pissed off? I sure have. I am personally just as angry as you(I think). Unfortunately, the just don't want to hear what the pilot group has to say about this because we don't have the money to buy off our elected officals. If they would actually listen to those who were out there doing the work, things would change in a benefical way. But pilots be damned, passenger's be damned, the all mighty dollar prevails again.


There is going to have to be a tring of accidents for them to wake up and smell the tirds that are floating around in aviiation right now. I have been making a living at this for just a short time, but been around it for nearly my life time. In that time frame I have seen those who actually know what they are talking about in the industry slowly start to complain about the quality of people who are getting into the right seat, and how being aa CFI is more benifical now than ever because many FO's require "OJT."

 

[MikeD]

It's not as bad any more, but in '07 I can't count how many FO's would say things like this is my first approach in actual or I have not ever shot an approach with less than a mile vis before.

Anyone saying that should NOT have even one paying pax in the back, much less 50. Completely unacceptable.

 

[MikeD]

The "money" won. Basically we're going to end up working more hours in a day, codifying having more low-experienced pilots in the cockpit and just gave University Aviation impetus to jack up training costs again.

As a professional pilot, these new rules do nothing but benefit the Airline Tranport Association and Regional Airline Association and not a cotton-picking thing to improve safety.

I'm very concerned and pissed off.

Why are any of you at all surprised that money won out over safety? It happens all the time. If it costs less to save you, then the entities at play will pay to save you; if it costs less to kill you, then they'll kill you.

 

[Mark815]

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.

I can't say I'm a full 100% on board with that idea, or that it's a solve all solution, but it's a damn good start.

I've never flown for a regional, however I disagree 100% with anybody who says "well it's a stepping stone and a place to learn". Sorry, flying a 70,000lb airplane 500mph is not a "place to learn" your skills.

 

[DE727UPS]

I have to say plus one.

Sadly, it seems the big school players will find a way to skirt the intent of the rule. This is typical and somewhat historical. We can all only hope for the best. At least the FAA is trying.

 

[MikeD]

however I disagree 100% with anybody who says "well it's a stepping stone and a place to learn". Sorry, flying a 70,000lb airplane 500mph is not a "place to learn" your skills.

.....with pax in the back depending on your experience to get them safely to their destination. While we are always learning something when we fly, there are baseline levels of experience one should possess that they shouldn't be learning in an OJT setting with people's lives in their charge.

 

[Boris Badenov]

At least the FAA is trying.

Try? TRY? Do or do not. There is no "try".

 

[jhugz]

.....with pax in the back depending on your experience to get them safely to their destination. While we are always learning something when we fly, there are baseline levels of experience one should possess that they shouldn't be learning in an OJT setting with people's lives in their charge.

Thank baby jesus for automation. A 200 hour PIC captain with a 400 hour FO, yea, I'll put my family on that one.

 

[flyinggreasemnky]

Thank baby jesus for automation. A 200 hour PIC captain with a 400 hour FO, yea, I'll put my family on that one.

Its scary that is possible but what's even scarier is that a captain with 100 (real) PIC could be paired with a 250 hour FO.

 

[PGT]

Thank baby jesus for automation. A 200 hour PIC captain with a 400 hour FO, yea, I'll put my family on that one.

Since flying an RJ requires so many advanced skills

 

[Bumblebee]

Its scary that is possible but what's even scarier is that a captain with 100 (real) PIC could be paired with a 250 hour FO.

I was paired with very new FO's once I passed the 100 hour mark...remember I was at the bottom of Captain seniority and the Fo was near the the bottom of the FO seniority...it will happen more often than not due to the seniority based scheduling system.

 

[Hacker15e]

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.'

....and, with all that, you can also live in Hong Kong, the UK, or continental Europe, where those "starting salaries" will basically pay for the same thing a regional FO's salary will pay for here.

 

[Hacker15e]

Since flying an RJ requires so many advanced skills

It's not the iron, or even the normal day to day flying, that is the issue.

Let's face it -- most of the airplanes flying scheduled 121 service these days don't really take much aviation skill to operate when everything goes normally, from RJs up to 747s. Pilots aren't paid because they know how to retract the gear, talk on the radio, and program stuff into the FMS.

The real issue is "what does the pilot do when stuff goes wrong?" The primary reason we have pilots sitting in that little room at the front of the airplane these days is to handle emergencies and make decisions when things do NOT go correctly. The keys to making those decisions -- airmanship and judgment -- are built through experience (there is NO academic substitute for it).

Airmanship and judgment is what allowed Al Haynes and Chesley Sullenberger to save as many paying passengers' lives as they did when stuff went wrong and they were at the controls. It SHOULD be the #1 thing the airline industry is concerned with when it hires pilots....and is the one thing that this whole ruling completely disregards.

 

[mshunter]

Airmanship and judgment is what allowed Al Haynes and Chesley Sullenberger to save as many paying passengers' lives as they did when stuff went wrong and they were at the controls. It SHOULD be the #1 thing the airline industry is concerned with when it hires pilots....and is the one thing that this whole ruling completely disregards.

Well said. I'd like to see what a 250 hours guy would do it that situation.

 

[A150K]

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)

This. I once met a guy who was a CFI at ATP that only had 15-20 hours of solo time compared to my 200 solo (out of 320ish total), and I don't even have my CSEL quite yet. I'm just not so sure that I agree that "supervised PIC" is the same as real solo/pic flight time. Sometimes you have to scare yourself a bit to learn what's smart and what's not.

 

[jhugz]

Sometimes you have to scare yourself a bit to learn what's smart and what's not.

...and without paying customers in the back.

 

[dasleben]

...and without paying customers in the back.

Well...to be honest, I've learned hard lessons with paying passengers in the back. I think we all have. That said, the difference between "learning a hard lesson" and "balling up the airplane" was due to my previous experience level.

Between the delayed rest rules and the watered-down FO requirements for 121, I feel like we're back to square one...

 

[jhugz]

Well...to be honest, I've learned hard lessons with paying passengers in the back. I think we all have. That said, the difference between "learning a hard lesson" and "balling up the airplane" was due to my previous experience level.

Between the delayed rest rules and the watered-down FO requirements for 121, I feel like we're back to square one...

Agreed, you're always going to be learning, otherwise you're doing it wrong. However there should be some baseline. Your first "actual" shouldn't be an ILS down to 1800 RVR with 50 people in back.