While I can say that some of the newer airline pilots are real up-and-comers and have their act together, there are people that do not.
I talk to the crusty old captain types that have been-there-done-that as often as I can about it. Things captains have told me about junior first officers (at any given airline...) Some of them just aren't quite getting it.
When Sully says that the airline are not always attracting the best and brightest, he's right. Pilots getting hired with as little as 200 hours with a wet part 141 commercial ticket are still green. Some will thrive and rise to the challenge, many will be too immature in their growth as aviators.
Perhaps some of the people even here on this forum are not the 'best and brightest'. For the most part, it seems like we've got a high-end sample of the population, though. All the same, we've got to deal with the fact that some just can't quite cut it.
Sully's right, and we should back him. His hero status is a chance for us to get our collective voice heard. The timing in Washington and the spirit of change makes it possible that his words won't fall on deaf ears.
I'll back him, all the way.
Sully, FTW! :rawk:
Firebird,
First of all, I back Sullenberger 110%. He's done something remarkable and is getting to use his unintended public access to air some issues most of us have known about for a long time; this can't hurt. He should be listened to because he has the "street cred". I just hate to see politicians and media exploit someone of his stature, that's all.
I'm
not sure I agree with all of his remarks and never thought he was calling anyone a "moron". But, his remarks are important because they start a discussion about aviation that the young people in particular need to hear. There are few decisions as important as the choice of a career and given the passage of enough time, it's gets hard (but not impossible) to undo.
I'm not much inclined to enter anything but a gentlemanly discussion (too lazy for anything below that level
![Big Grin :D :D](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png)
) but I kinda think this is an important one.
There are no universal right or wrong answers.
About the "...crusty old..." factor, maybe I can add some unsolicited comments to what you've gotten from my fellow C & O's. Everyone has 200 hours at some point and a few will "get it" then but most won't. I don't know that one can say they are "...too immature in their growth as aviators." How would you know ? They've hardly begun to grow.
Should a 200 hour pilot be in an airliner ( and how many actually do that ?) ?
I don't know. But, at least they have access to the experience, knowledge and training of a more experience person in the captain. We all learn to fly by flying so having input from an experienced captain is a significant part of one's education.
I can tell you there are the occasional FOs with a lot more than 200 hours who don't "get it." Fortunately, they are a small number. When I was an FO, the C & Os I flew with were the WW2 and Korean War types and they too were complaining about the occasional FO who didn't "get it". Heck, they were probably talking about me at one time or another.
![Eek! :o :o](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png)
There is very little that's new about human behavior.
Got a bit off messsage. I back Sullenberger all the way and respect his stature, experience and point of view. I think some good things will come from all of this because it'll start the discussion about flying as a career.
If this scares some people away from it, that too serves a good purpose.