FAA to boost Co-pilot training, avoid ATP rule

Shouldn't there be some kind of hour requirement for upgrade to captain? If there is one, I will be the first to admit that I do not know one way or the other. Just seems kind of funny to me to have a requirement to get into the plane, but not one to be in command of it. If there is one, maybe that number may not be high enough. Maybe quick upgrades are a bad deal too. I am just looking at the big picture. There are two people up on the flight deck. Seems silly to just be scrutinizing one of them.
 
Shouldn't there be some kind of hour requirement for upgrade to captain? If there is one, I will be the first to admit that I do not know one way or the other. Just seems kind of funny to me to have a requirement to get into the plane, but not one to be in command of it. If there is one, maybe that number may not be high enough. Maybe quick upgrades are a bad deal too. I am just looking at the big picture. There are two people up on the flight deck. Seems silly to just be scrutinizing one of them.

Yes, one must be qualified to hold an ATP.
 
His opinion of the all mighty "aviation" degree.

I think there should be a formalized route of education for professional pilots.

Military flight training or civilian via a specialized degree like I have.

If you want to merely fly your GA plane for yourself, there is no reason for that.
 
I think there should be a formalized route of education for professional pilots.

And UND, Riddle, do a good job at this? Ok... Aviation is a trade. Go out and learn the trait. The way most american's look at the trade field, this opinion doesn't surprise me one bit.
 
And UND, Riddle, do a good job at this? Ok... Aviation is a trait. Go out and learn the trait. The way most american's look at the trait field, this opinion doesn't surprise me one bit.

I'd say the pilots I either hired, did their OE or just flew with online and that had degrees in flight from ERAU, UND, MTSU, OhioU overall did very good job and had a very good grasp on Transport category systems, CRM, high altitude wx, high speed aero, and meteorology than those that did not.

Given my choice of a 2 people with 1500 hours, I'd take the one with the degree to hire. All else equal.
 
And UND, Riddle, do a good job at this? Ok... Aviation is a trait. Go out and learn the trait. The way most american's look at the trait field, this opinion doesn't surprise me one bit.

Alright.

If you are not second or generation, GET OUTTAH MAH BUSINESS! ;) :sarcasm:
 
And UND, Riddle, do a good job at this? Ok... Aviation is a trait. Go out and learn the trait. The way most american's look at the trait field, this opinion doesn't surprise me one bit.

Aviation is a trait?
 
I'd say the pilots I either hired, did their OE or just flew with online and that had degrees in flight from ERAU, UND, MTSU, OhioU overall did very good job and had a very good grasp on Transport category systems, CRM, high altitude wx, high speed aero, and meteorology than those that did not.

Given my choice of a 2 people with 1500 hours, I'd take the one with the degree to hire. All else equal.

So what your saying is that your company did a poor job teaching these non-university pilots those topic areas? Why put the cart before the horse? Why teach a student who can barely fly a skyhawk about swept wing aerodynamics?
 
And UND, Riddle, do a good job at this? Ok... Aviation is a trait. Go out and learn the trait. The way most american's look at the trait field, this opinion doesn't surprise me one bit.

I am assuming you meant trade, but that might be an over assumption. But by this over generalization of the term any Job can be a trade. And thus you have universities that excel at teaching people to do such trade, no matter what the industry is.
 
I am assuming you meant trade, but that might be an over assumption. But by this over generalization of the term any Job can be a trade. And thus you have universities that excel at teaching people to do such trade, no matter what the industry is.

Yea, meant trade.
 
Yes, one must be qualified to hold an ATP.

Right, but maybe that's not enough to command. Shouldn't the pilot in charge be well over that if 1500 hours becomes an entry level stat? There are too many people out there right now that were hired with under 1500. They will develop and grow and one day be called captain. These unsafe "low timers" will be in the system for decades to come. Sure, they will have many new hours to hide the fact that they were hired with in with under the new "safe" minimums. To only raise the minimums for new pilots hired today will do nothing for those in the system already. I don't want you to read this as I am against the 1500 rule. It is plenty fair to me. I am just saying that measures will need to be taken to make sure those in the system are developed properly. All the attention on the new hire leaves the future captain already at the airline to progress through the system with no special attention. If we are going to put an hour benchmark on things, maybe nobody should be PIC of a jet full of passengers with less than 5000 hours. How many did the Colgan captain have? How many did the Pinnacle captain have?
 
I wonder why the military spends hours and hours on formal classroom academics?
 
So what your saying is that your company did a poor job teaching these non-university pilots those topic areas? Why put the cart before the horse? Why teach a student who can barely fly a skyhawk about swept wing aerodynamics?

Why shouldn't a professional pilot show up in possession of the fundamental knowledge to do the job?

For example, you should have had turbine theory before you transitioned to the metro, in the same way you knew about piston engine theory before you flew the 402.

I didn't say teach a student who can barely fly a skyhawk swept wing aero. But a commercial pilot candidate, who could very well walk into a job flying a jet after the checkride should have a good understanding of the environment in which they are going to operate.
 
I think the biggest part of any rule regarding flight time is, flight time and experience are not equal to one another. Someone with 500hrs might have better experience then someone with 1000hrs. I fully support the 1500hr rule, but I think its a overly simplistic way to look at experience. But alas there is not a good way to equate one persons flight experience vs. another person flight experience.
 
Right, but maybe that's not enough to command. Shouldn't the pilot in charge be well over that if 1500 hours becomes an entry level stat? There are too many people out there right now that were hired with under 1500. They will develop and grow and one day be called captain. These unsafe "low timers" will be in the system for decades to come. Sure, they will have many new hours to hide the fact that they were hired with in with under the new "safe" minimums. To only raise the minimums for new pilots hired today will do nothing for those in the system already. I don't want you to read this as I am against the 1500 rule. It is plenty fair to me. I am just saying that measures will need to be taken to make sure those in the system are developed properly. All the attention on the new hire leaves the future captain already at the airline to progress through the system with no special attention. If we are going to put an hour benchmark on things, maybe nobody should be PIC of a jet full of passengers with less than 5000 hours. How many did the Colgan captain have? How many did the Pinnacle captain have?

I was hired at 550TT.

I flew with experienced CAs into low wx, snowstorms, contaminated runways and stuff like that with someone experienced sitting with me. I learned by their mentorship, even while doing my job and gaining experience.

They even let me do OE at my last job after I upgraded.

If you want to play the accident game, let's talk about ALL 121 accidents, not just 2. How many hours did the FedEx pilots in NRT have? How about in EWR? AA in LIT? AA in JFK? SWA in MDW? You listed 2 accidents, I'll toss in CMR in LEX to give you 3. I had 5 more off my head.
 
Back
Top