Observations from an outsider

meyers9163 said:
Will look for a copy... Mad props on the work... Just think the arguement should also be with the FAA to change the requirements for an ATP perhaps?

Ah, I re read and see what you typed.... Again the arguement perhaps should be at the faa rule of 1500? Or perhaps change the rule for Jet airplanes with certain amount of pax?
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. I would favor a change to the FARs of requiring all 121 copilots to have current ATP mins, and requiring all 121 Captains to have a minimum TT and minimum turbine time. Right now ALPA has its hands full trying to stop the MPL certification from coming to the states.
 
wheelsup said:
Here, I'll ask this again (you avoided it the first time, and the second time):

How would you measure this on a large scale basis? It would be almost impossible. That's why I don't like it.
Click to expand...

Well you can get aircraft operation by foqwa data (did I get that acronym correct?) and see where we're doing stupid things. Like I've heard that pilots are only responding to windsheer alerts up front about half of the time. That is something that can be hit on in training so that we operate safer. Or how about self disclosure with ASAP reports? The point being, there ARE things we and do, and I have a horrible feeling that your metric leads to apathy of, "Well can't measure it, so we can't change it."
 
A lot of the things I bet you have in mind John are basic airmanship things. We really don't need some form that is filled out after every flight to ID the mistakes we make, then fed into a computer so training can be adjusted accordingly. The criteria would change roughly about the same time the major seasons changed. We need people to do there jobs and take just a tiny bit of pride in doing there jobs correctly. You can't teach this stuff or train for it. The people that won't do it, need to either be "re educated" or weeded out. The problem is, and this site is a great example, the re education process has to be so PC and so touchy feely that no one takes it seriously or gets any thing from it.

The 2x4 method of teaching is all some people understand and those are the people causing the problems, bring out the 2x4's.
 
jtrain609 said:
Well you can get aircraft operation by foqwa data (did I get that acronym correct?) and see where we're doing stupid things. Like I've heard that pilots are only responding to windsheer alerts up front about half of the time. That is something that can be hit on in training so that we operate safer. Or how about self disclosure with ASAP reports? The point being, there ARE things we and do, and I have a horrible feeling that your metric leads to apathy of, "Well can't measure it, so we can't change it."
Click to expand...

Actually that windshear example is a great reason why relying on FOQA data won't work. The windshear system was designed to alert pilots of microburst encounters. I can see why an experienced flight crew would elect to land even under a windshear warning in certain situations. If they are anything like my plane they go off at the drop of a hat. Also dirty radar altimeters have effected the GPWS system and set it off incorrectly. Yet this would be considered "unsafe" under your system, which I would tend to disagree with.

I'm not saying we can't measure safety. We can. It's measured in accidents. That is the best way, over a period of time, to currently measure it. By your reasoning having lower time pilots up front in jets is unsafe, yet the statistics just don't reflect that train of thought. I would tend to agree with you, but there really isn't any factual data to back that up.
 
depot_jr said:
Resources? They'll pay 40 or 50 or 60K to go to a ridiculously overpriced school with inferior instructors but they won't pay 1/3 to 1/2 of that at their local FBO. Oh, and by the way, receive better instruction. It's the "I want it now" syndrome at work here. Improving your profession is not an overnight proposition. It's a battle for hearts and minds that will take years. Just trying to point out some of the flaws.
Click to expand...

Where can you pay 1/2 to 1/3 of the price at a local fbo. Training at a local fbo has become ridiculously expensive as well, especially for multi training. The only way an fbo will look cheaper is because you did all you training single engine and now you have figure out a way to purchase cheap multi time. I think the training cheaply at an FBO has become a thing of the past.
 
wheelsup said:
Actually that windshear example is a great reason why relying on FOQA data won't work. The windshear system was designed to alert pilots of microburst encounters. I can see why an experienced flight crew would elect to land even under a windshear warning in certain situations. If they are anything like my plane they go off at the drop of a hat. Also dirty radar altimeters have effected the GPWS system and set it off incorrectly. Yet this would be considered "unsafe" under your system, which I would tend to disagree with.

I'm not saying we can't measure safety. We can. It's measured in accidents. That is the best way, over a period of time, to currently measure it. By your reasoning having lower time pilots up front in jets is unsafe, yet the statistics just don't reflect that train of thought. I would tend to agree with you, but there really isn't any factual data to back that up.
Click to expand...

Dunno, I haven't had a windsheer alert go off yet! The company SOP says to go around when the system tells you to, so you're NEVER going to get in trouble for going around. But if you plant one on and the system was telling you to go around the company would be well within their rights to nail you to the wall.
 
Dugie8 said:
A lot of the things I bet you have in mind John are basic airmanship things. We really don't need some form that is filled out after every flight to ID the mistakes we make, then fed into a computer so training can be adjusted accordingly. The criteria would change roughly about the same time the major seasons changed. We need people to do there jobs and take just a tiny bit of pride in doing there jobs correctly. You can't teach this stuff or train for it. The people that won't do it, need to either be "re educated" or weeded out. The problem is, and this site is a great example, the re education process has to be so PC and so touchy feely that no one takes it seriously or gets any thing from it.

The 2x4 method of teaching is all some people understand and those are the people causing the problems, bring out the 2x4's.
Click to expand...

No doubt holmes, I can't disagree with you that these folks either need to be re-educated or weeded out. I don't know if we need to it with a 2x4, but it needs to happen.
 
For many beginning pilots these days, a shortcut is available. It's called an overpriced flight school. Who will pay the price? Maybe just the pilot. Maybe the pilot's mommy and daddy. Maybe the pilot's spouse and children. Or the worst case scenario. Maybe the pilot, his flight crew, and 50 or 70 or 90 passengers on his flight. There is no doubt in my mind that the day(s) for the last scenario is/are coming. That's why I fly myself as much as possible these days. When my family and I fly commercially, we fly on a major. Not a regional. I want to know that the people in the cockpit are competent and professional and experienced.
Click to expand...

Someone a bit bitter, eh? What does it matter how much the school costs, or who paid for it? Vastly overpaying for flying lessons is punishment enough for not doing one's research. The cost has little to do with quality and safety. I've had fairly expensive training, as well as dirt cheap training, and they all had thier advantages and disadvantages not really related to the cost. This subject has been beaten to DEATH. Its hard, but people need to stop generalizing everything and realize many things are up to the individual person / company / school. i.e., I've flown with some great lower time captains (as a low timer myself), but have heard horror stories about others with much more experience. Sometimes you just need to trust the folks up front, since you can't generalize competence based solely on flight time (although its probably the easiest, which is why we see so many posts beating it to DEATH)
 
Depot I'd ask you to remember that age and experience are different things. I've personally trained/tested plenty of folks in a professional capacity, and the percentage of those who 'made it' vs those who did not was fairly consistent across age ranges. Surprisingly flight times did not have as great an effect on the outcome of the training as you'd probably suspect, either. I do not know why this was true, and this is based on my own personal experience.

And one more thing, you can't honestly believe that flying yourself around in your own DA-40 is safer than sitting in the back of a regional airliner??? You seem pretty concerned with aviation safety which is good. So I'm sure you're well aware of the fact that virtually any airline operation, albeit 135 or 121, is statistically much safer than an owner-flown pt 91 operation.
 
E_Dawg said:
Depot I'd ask you to remember that age and experience are different things. I've personally trained/tested plenty of folks in a professional capacity, and the percentage of those who 'made it' vs those who did not was fairly consistent across age ranges. Surprisingly flight times did not have as great an effect on the outcome of the training as you'd probably suspect, either. I do not know why this was true, and this is based on my own personal experience.

And one more thing, you can't honestly believe that flying yourself around in your own DA-40 is safer than sitting in the back of a regional airliner??? You seem pretty concerned with aviation safety which is good. So I'm sure you're well aware of the fact that virtually any airline operation, albeit 135 or 121, is statistically much safer than an owner-flown pt 91 operation.
Click to expand...

You're right. GA aviation is statistically more dangerous than flying commercial. But, who wouldn't rather fly their own plane? It's fricken' awesome. But, I do get a little worried about how young some of the people flying up front are. Many of them with low times. That concerns me. But, maybe it's easier than I think to fly a jet. Maybe RJ pilots do deserve to be paid less than a plumber. Obviously, it takes much longer to become a good plumber than a pilot.
 
depot_jr said:
Maybe RJ pilots do deserve to be paid less than a plumber. Obviously, it takes much longer to become a good plumber than a pilot.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what's involved in being a plumber, nor am I even remotely aware of what they make or what relevance it has to this topic. So I can't comment on pilots' salaries in relation to plumbers'. Obviously however, you're well informed on the job requirements, responsibilities, and compensation of both.


And as for flying safety, that's great that it's more fun. Everyone has their reasons and I'm glad you recognize the increased risk of flying GA over airlines.
 
E_Dawg said:
I have no idea what's involved in being a plumber, nor am I even remotely aware of what they make or what relevance it has to this topic. So I can't comment on pilots' salaries in relation to plumbers'. Obviously however, you're well informed on the job requirements, responsibilities, and compensation of both.

Sorry Dawg. I was being sarcastic. I own a mechanical contracting business and I am familiar with plumbing practices as well as earnings. I also believe it's much more difficult to learn to fly a plane well than to plumb a new commercial property. Or any property for that matter. I wish RJ pilots did make more money than they do. That would make any decision about a career change in the futuer a little easier.
Click to expand...
 
Feel free to use the sarcasm tag the next time you want to make it obvious you're being sarcastic.

And I totally agree that not only RJ pilots, but all pilots should be compensated more than what they currently are.
 
depot_jr said:
I also believe it's much more difficult to learn to fly a plane well than to plumb a new commercial property. Or any property for that matter.
Click to expand...

I dunno man. I've never flown a jet, nor have I "plumbed" a property.

If a master plumber died and left me in charge, I sure as heck wouldn't want to live in the structure I plumbed.

If FlyChicaga and JTrain ate the bad fish up front on the RJ, I'd at least have a fighting chance of getting that thing on the ground.

Then again, if I f up a plumbing job, no one is going to die.

:D - Just having fun with the thread!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top