Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications  
User currently offlineindiansbucs From Costa Rica, joined May 2007, 151 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5951 times:

Airline co-pilots would have to meet the same experience threshold required of captains under a new proposal by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, The Associated Pressreported.

The proposed regulation would increase the minimum number of flight hours required to fly for a commercial air carrier to 1,500 for all pilots, the story said. Captains already have to meet that threshold, but co-pilots need only 250 hours to fly for an airline.

This is the first proposal to increase the threshold for co-pilots since 1973, when the FAA raised the minimum number of hours from 200 to 250.

Co-pilots would also need to be type rated on a specific airplane they plan to fly, another requirement that currently applies only to captains. This would mean additional training and testing.

link: http://www.newsday.com/news/faa-want...ine-pilot-qualifications-1.3561771

I thought there was a shortage or it was going to be a shortage of pilots due to the large amount of pilots retiring because of age. This is not going to help in someway... any thoughts?

[Edited 2012-02-28 07:33:45]

68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5914 times:

Quoting indiansbucs (Thread starter):
Co-pilots would also need to be type rated on a specific airplane they plan to fly, another requirement that currently applies only to captains. This would mean additional training and testing.

I'm not sure where they get that. As far as I know, a type rating is already required to be SIC on any jet powered aircraft or any aircraft heavier than 12,500 lbs, which is pretty much every airliner, even the smallest regional turboprops.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlinejfritz From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5874 times:

So I'm sorry where are they supposed to build those hours? I know you need 500 TT hours for some airlines but now you will need an extra 1000hours up to 1500 hours? Good luck with that...

User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5864 times:

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 1):
As far as I know, a type rating is already required to be SIC on any jet powered aircraft or any aircraft heavier than 12,500 lbs

The airline I was working for for the past few years, the Capt. had a type cert, but the F/O's did not, unless they had it prior to hiring on with the company. They were a supplemental 121 carrier, if that makes a difference.

Quoting indiansbucs (Thread starter):
Airline co-pilots would have to meet the same experience threshold required of captains under a new proposal by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, The Associated Pressreported.

I'm not understanding why. US airline safety has been outstanding for many years. I know the FAA is trying to make things safer, but isnt their a better way to do this? I understand the importance of a type rating, so I'm not trying to down play it, but couldn't they start with increasing the hours needed to become an airline pilot.

But I can also see this helping some airlines, this could reduce the number of people who hirie on with a company, a lower paying one, to get their type cert, and then jump ship back to another airline.



I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5839 times:

Quoting indiansbucs (Thread starter):
Airline co-pilots would have to meet the same experience threshold required of captains under a new proposal by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration

That's a little misleading. I don't think a captain is going to be legal to fly under the restricted ATP the FAA will start issuing.

Quoting indiansbucs (Thread starter):
Co-pilots would also need to be type rated on a specific airplane they plan to fly, another requirement that currently applies only to captains. This would mean additional training and testing.

FO's already have to be typed to fly outside the US. To keep costs down the FAA invented the SIC only restriction on type ratings. The training required to receive it was already required. My first type rating required nothing more than filling out the paperwork as I was already SIC qualified in the airplane. It's uncertain whether they'll get rid of the SIC only restriction and require both pilots to have unrestricted types.

All in all I think the NPRM is a good thing. I'm a little dismayed at the break for collegiate program grads, but appreciate the bigger break for ex-military pilots.


User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5814 times:

Quoting B727LVR (Reply 3):

I'm not understanding why. US airline safety has been outstanding for many years. I know the FAA is trying to make things safer, but isnt their a better way to do this?

One of my flight instructors years ago told me that the FARs were written in blood. That continues to be the case. This whole thing is in response almost solely to the 9L crash in New York in 2009. It was at least partially attributed to inexperienced pilots not understanding the situation they were in.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlinen6238p From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 501 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5794 times:

Here's a link to the NPRM.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic..._published/media/2120-AJ67NPRM.pdf

My comments? Good luck everyone trying to get a foot in the door in this industry.



To actively root against anybody is just low, and I hope karma comes back at you with a vengeance
User currently offlineindiansbucs From Costa Rica, joined May 2007, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5774 times:

Quoting jfritz (Reply 2):
So I'm sorry where are they supposed to build those hours? I know you need 500 TT hours for some airlines but now you will need an extra 1000hours up to 1500 hours? Good luck with that...

I remember this topic and the A.net Forum posted in 2011: Demand for Pilots is Set to Soar.

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/s...line-pilots-set-to-soar/48661596/1

I do believe, there will be a shortage of pilots mostly due to age of major airline pilots, and this proposal will definitively increment the restrictions to replace pilots, mostly in the regionals.


User currently offlinecomair25 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5759 times:

Like others have said good luck getting to the 1500 hours anytime soon. Im only at 300TT and 22ME. Even getting hired at part 135 jobs are hard enough and that would probably be the time builder now for those wanting 121 jobs. Depending on how busy your FBO is, you could be instructing for 10 years before you could even put an app in. Which would mean way shorter flying careers who want to make 121 a career.

[Edited 2012-02-28 08:01:31]

User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5702 times:

Quoting comair25 (Reply 8):
Like others have said good luck getting to the 1500 hours anytime soon. Im only at 300TT and 22ME. Even getting hired at part 135 jobs are hard enough and that would probably be the time builder now for those wanting 121 jobs. Depending on how busy your FBO is, you could be instructing for 10 years before you could even put an app in. Which would mean way shorter flying careers who want to make 121 a career.

That is a problem. I'm not sure 135 is going to be viable for time building. Much of the 135 flying is in single pilot aircraft. Some of the turboprop stuff (Air Cargo Carriers) might be an option, but I think the Falcon / Lear jobs may require as much time as getting on with a regional. Best alternative might be instructing at a college.

What I said above assumes the only change in all this are the raised minimums. I think the pilot market will adjust one way or another and new time building opportunities will arise.


User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2786 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5647 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

And how do they suggest someone like myself in flight training get to that level? It is just unrealistic. They are essentially making my already expensive flight training go through the roof. I am all for safety, it is always first. But this is just overkill.
Blue



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlineindiansbucs From Costa Rica, joined May 2007, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5625 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 10):
And how do they suggest someone like myself in flight training get to that level? It is just unrealistic. They are essentially making my already expensive flight training go through the roof. I am all for safety, it is always first. But this is just overkill.
Blue

And the time to get the required hours... unrealistic as well.


User currently offlineDeltaRules From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 3755 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5613 times:

Word on the street (from a friend working for a regional) is that anybody with less than 1500 hours when the law kicks in in August 2013 has to be furloughed. His particular regional, which was still hiring 500 hour guys (of which he was one), is now backing off hiring pilots in that time range.

Is it me, or is the government setting up a huge mess?

Mainline carriers suck up regional pilots to replace retiring baby boomers. Regional airlines need to hire replacements, but can no longer from the pilot pool featuring guys having 278, 510, 675, or 890 hours TT because 1,000 is the magic number? They'll also lose pilots from the word I'd heard above, as those guys now have to go find something to do to get to 1000/1500? And, if I read this right, time earned at some Part 91 or 135 companies MAY NOT COUNT?

Also, I'm amazed that, according to the FAA link posted above, 760 commenters were asked about a flight time minimum. 700 (including JetBlue) said that 750 hours was too high, yet they're going with 1,000 anyway?

Another question I have has to do with "accredited schools"? Is their definition of "accredited" any school with an aviation program that meets approval, or will it just be the big guys (ERAU, UND, Purdue, etc.)? I earned Private Part 141, did Instrument Part 61 because the 141 school left and its replacement wasn't 141 at the time, and am now starting Commercial, all of which in a program which ties into a Community College aviation degree. (I have an Associate's through the CC and a Bachelor's through ERAU-Worldwide, but none of the flight experience is/was through ERAU.)

edit-

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 9):
Much of the 135 flying is in single pilot aircraft.

This in itself could be a problem. Word from an ERAU instructor at my campus that had worked at ABX or DHL at one point was that a pilot with 10,000 hours applied there and was rejected because most of his flying was in Lears, single pilot, and he'd had very little experience working in a two-man cockpit with real-life, hands-on CRM experience.

[Edited 2012-02-28 08:52:57]


Let's Kick the Tires & Light the Fires!!
User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5549 times:

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
And, if I read this right, time earned at some Part 91 or 135 companies MAY NOT COUNT?

Where did you read that? I highly doubt that.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4263 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5548 times:

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
Word on the street (from a friend working for a regional) is that anybody with less than 1500 hours when the law kicks in in August 2013 has to be furloughed. His particular regional, which was still hiring 500 hour guys (of which he was one), is now backing off hiring pilots in that time range.

I was reading an article on the bad state of the regional industry. One problem the regionals have run into is their pilots are getting more senior and are topping out, which is keeping their costs high. Jonathan Ornstein admitted that he is bidding on flying at a loss intentionally just to stay in the game. That does not bode well either. And if suddenly regionals get new flying and can't hire pilots to fly it...the contracts are worthless and the majors may be forced with the prospect of bringing more regional flying back in house.

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
Another question I have has to do with "accredited schools"? Is their definition of "accredited" any school with an aviation program that meets approval, or will it just be the big guys (ERAU, UND, Purdue, etc.)? I earned Private Part 141, did Instrument Part 61 because the 141 school left and its replacement wasn't 141 at the time, and am now starting Commercial, all of which in a program which ties into a Community College aviation degree. (I have an Associate's through the CC and a Bachelor's through ERAU-Worldwide, but none of the flight experience is/was through ERAU.)

My guess is it would probably be similar to the CTI program that the FAA uses to hire Air Traffic Controllers, where the FAA approves schools and their grads become eligible for hire with the FAA. Naturally it will include the ERAU's and the UND's, but maybe some other programs as well and I think if the program is viable, then it would be accredited. Sadly with some noteable aviation programs being dropped by some colleges (Think Daniel Webster and St. Cloud State) these programs will become more rare, and unfortunately those colleges will be able to charge higher tuition that what is already out there (And its pretty high now, ERAU grads have the most student loan debt of any college in the country)


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5548 times:

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
Word on the street (from a friend working for a regional) is that anybody with less than 1500 hours when the law kicks in in August 2013 has to be furloughed. His particular regional, which was still hiring 500 hour guys (of which he was one), is now backing off hiring pilots in that time range.

Anyone at a regional now will most likely be OK. You fly 800-900 hours a year at a regional, and with the 250 you already have you'll meet the 1000 hour floor for the restricted ATP. Bear in mind the majority, if not all of the low time guys hired come from a flight school so that requirement will be satisfied as well.

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
Is it me, or is the government setting up a huge mess?

I wouldn't blame it on the Government. The airlines could have been sustaining an industry that was attractive to experienced pilots, but chose not to. The FAA turned a blind eye to airlines who had known deficiencies. No one forced them to nurse pilots through training and put weak pilots in the cockpit. This legislation brings years of those mistakes home to roost.

Watch that Frontline special "Flying Cheap" again. The practices in that show need to stop. This legislation might help.


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5535 times:

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
This in itself could be a problem. Word from an ERAU instructor at my campus that had worked at ABX or DHL at one point was that a pilot with 10,000 hours applied there and was rejected because most of his flying was in Lears, single pilot, and he'd had very little experience working in a two-man cockpit with real-life, hands-on CRM experience.

Lears aren't single pilot. Most of the single pilot jets are actually two crew aircraft with a waiver applying to both pilot and aircraft.

I can see ABX turning someone down in that situation because they don't have any 121, heavy jet, or international experience as opposed to the other applicants.


User currently offlineKaiTakfan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1588 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5491 times:

Quoting jfritz (Reply 2):
So I'm sorry where are they supposed to build those hours? I know you need 500 TT hours for some airlines but now you will need an extra 1000hours up to 1500 hours? Good luck with that...

Really?!? If this reg passes, then pilots will actually have to work for a right seat in a regional jet instead of getting out of a college course with a wet Comm Multi cert and 250 hours. Believe it or not their or numerous ways of building hours up to 1500. Will it suck and be frustrating to build that time? Yeeees. But so does making $19 an hour in the right seat of an RJ with 70 people behind you because pilots as of the past 10 years have been a dime a dozen willing to work for such crap wages fresh out of college. Bring on the 1500 hour requirments and make an airline position a PROFESSIONAL CAREER again.


User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5486 times:

The largest problem I see with this is that it will create a huge bottleneck at the sub-regional level. There are only so many jobs available for pilots that do not require 1,000+ hours of time. Being a CFI is probably the best option, but at some point there will become a saturation of CFIs. In fact, even before this there pretty much already has been.

If you figure the average CFI becomes certified at around 300 hours or so, that means he/she will have to teach for approx 700 hours before being eligible for a 121 FO position. Even in a conservative situation we'll say 600 hours assuming the CFI still has some training to complete (ME, CFII, MEI, etc). Even if we were to assume that each CFI taught their student from day one through their own CFI rating (unlikely), that's only about 200 hrs of flight instruction time per student. This means that in theory each CFI will produce two to three more CFIs before they are eligible for 121. The more likely scenario is that each CFI would produce multiple private pilots and some instrument ratings and commercial licenses, so the market becomes even more saturated.

Part 135 won't help because the major 135 operators fly single pilot, and 135 IFR qualifications require 1,200 hours already. VFR ops only require 500 hours, but Part 135 VFR ops are rare.

Banner towing and aerial photography/mapping has limited jobs at best, and it is bound to get worse as fuel costs rise and those types of jobs (especially aerial photography/mapping) are taken over by satellite and UAV ops.

Part 91 private charter is again limited at best, and most of those also require 1,000+ hrs just for insurance reasons.

This could get ugly.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlinecomair25 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5428 times:

Quoting KaiTakfan (Reply 17):

My question is, how does hours make a pilot safer. Just look at all of the major airline incidents/accidents. How many of them are from regional airlines? The ones I can think of off the top of my head are the Colgan and Comair accidents. Other than that, most accidents are with majors who's pilots have thousands of hours. Making higher minimums isn't going to change anything. It all comes down to that airlines training practices/requirements. On top of that, I don't feel like instructing for 10 years making more than I would at a regional airline $20k a year as an FO. I make more in the military as an E3 than a lot of regional airline pilots. Something not wrong there? How does restricting pilots who would end up being 30-35 years old when they finally get in the right seat at a job they have always wanted to do make it more of a professional career. Your saying just because somebody doesn't have a certain number of flight hours doesn't make them professional enough to fly an aircraft with 100 people aboard. That's just crazy. My old flight instructor is one of the safest/professional pilots I have ever met in my entire life. After 2 years he is already upgraded to Captain and now flying left seat at a well known regional carrier. My argument is hours do NOT make a pilot more competent. Its up to that individual pilot and his abilities as a professional in what he does.


User currently offlineDeltaRules From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 3755 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5344 times:

Quoting comair25 (Reply 19):
My question is, how does hours make a pilot safer. Just look at all of the major airline incidents/accidents. How many of them are from regional airlines? The ones I can think of off the top of my head are the Colgan and Comair accidents. Other than that, most accidents are with majors who's pilots have thousands of hours.

The twisted part about all this to me is the amount of time the Colgan and Comair pilots had and how it relates to this new law. It's almost, in a way, hypocritical:

Colgan 3407:
Captain- 3263TT, 110 in type
F/O- 2200TT, 772 in type

Comair 5191:
Captain: 4710TT, 3082 in type, 1567 CRJ PIC
F/O: 6564TT, 3564 in type, 940 CRJ PIC



Let's Kick the Tires & Light the Fires!!
User currently offlineflyhossd From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 874 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5318 times:

Quoting DeltaRules (Reply 12):
Word from an ERAU instructor at my campus that had worked at ABX or DHL at one point was that a pilot with 10,000 hours applied there and was rejected because most of his flying was in Lears, single pilot, and he'd had very little experience working in a two-man cockpit with real-life, hands-on CRM experience.

Single pilot Lears? Is that what you meant to say or imply?

As far as I know, there's no such thing as a single pilot Learjet.



My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
User currently offlineDeltaRules From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 3755 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5281 times:

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 21):
Single pilot Lears? Is that what you meant to say or imply?

As far as I know, there's no such thing as a single pilot Learjet.

I may very well have misunderstood the story when I heard it, but I remember the pilot had roughly 10,000TT and was rejected because the majority of his resume included single-pilot flying.



Let's Kick the Tires & Light the Fires!!
User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5253 times:

Quoting comair25 (Reply 19):
My question is, how does hours make a pilot safer.

You're gaining experience while flying those hours. Even doing hours worth of touch and goes helps. You're making command decisions.

Quoting comair25 (Reply 19):
Other than that, most accidents are with majors who's pilots have thousands of hours.

Accidents are a small part of the whole picture. Start pulling ASRS and ASAP reports and you'll get a broader picture.

Quoting comair25 (Reply 19):
Making higher minimums isn't going to change anything.

Yes it will. It puts more experience in the cockpit.


User currently offlinecomair25 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5217 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 23):
Accidents are a small part of the whole picture. Start pulling ASRS and ASAP reports and you'll get a broader picture.

You could say the same for senior pilots. Doesn't really matter.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 23):
Yes it will. It puts more experience in the cockpit.

And age too. Age does not always equal a better pilot and neither does flight hours.


If a pilot knows his "stuff", then well a pilot knows his "stuff". I'm sorry, but I don't agree that upping the hours is going to change anything. Even though I myself would love a career at part 121 ops. My argument has nothing to do with that saying it will push me back. I've got another 5 years in the military anyway and plan to get through my MEI by the time I separate and should have enough TT and ME to apply either way. When I was able to fly full time before I joined, I knew a lot of pilots who may or may not make the best decisions when it comes to certain aspects of flight. At the same time I knew a lot of pilots with my TT and found them more competent than those with a lot more. Yes more flight time means more experience, but does more experience always mean a better pilot?


25 MountainFlyer : No, not necessarily. There are always outliers, and those with natural talent or conversely lack thereof. In general though, there is a strong correl
26 PPVRA : I suppose the airlines chose to lose money, too? I've seen it, and that special leaves some important questions behind. Some of the questions left be
27 n6238p : I'm not going to argue whether or not this proposal is fair or not, I'm just simply going to say today's low time flying job market is extremely thin.
28 KAUSpilot : More experience in airline cockpits is a good thing, end of story. If the airlines have trouble finding people with the necessary experience, well, I
29 bjorn14 : But what are the hours requirement?
30 DashTrash : No one forced them to sell their product for less than the product costs to produce. We as airline employees subsidized it with pensions and pay. Lab
31 DashTrash : Commercial AMEL and a pulse.... That's it. The SIC type rating has no hour requirements, just training.
32 PPVRA : You don't understand the economics involved with perishable goods, nor are you aware of the environment governments have created and its effects on t
33 DashTrash : Based on your age in your profile, I started working in this industry while you were in middle school. My aviation background is not solely limited t
34 Mir : Nope. Domestic operations don't require any sort of certificate qualification for the SIC. 1500 hours is not that hard to build (though this will cre
35 Post contains images tb727 : Hey, these low time guys should come and fly freight! Why not make a loop-hole like they did with the long awaited new rest requirements that the carg
36 Post contains images aa757first : What are these numbers based on? Is there statistical evidence that shows co-pilots with these qualifications have fewer accidents or incidents? And w
37 DashTrash : I'm sure there is some, but to me it seems like common sense. The more experience you have with something, the less likely you are to screw it up. It
38 aa757first : I agree, but I think the floor should be evidence based. Now I don't know for sure, but it seems that this rule was just pulled out of thin air. But
39 DashTrash : I don't know what evidence the Feds used, but I don't think this NPRM was arbitrarily written. There are other components, namely 1000 hrs SIC at an
40 PPVRA : Congrats. Basic economics disagrees with you. Now you are even contradicting the very program you referenced. "Green" is relative. That's exactly wha
41 DashTrash : Based on? ALPA National came out against it, then went against the membership and changed it's tune when it became apparent the legislation would get
42 Cubsrule : If it was not arbitrary, it was at least wrong unless you believe that no f/o with less than 1500TT is safe. Do you believe that?
43 PPVRA : An extra five years for the highest paid pilots after a decade that was brutal for these pilots too, sure doesn't sound like a bad thing. As for ALPA
44 xdlx : The # of hours has little relevance in the quality (experience) derived from them. In WWII, the system demonstrated ( without simulators ) trained cr
45 Post contains links DashTrash : Never said that. Every pilot is different in the amount of total time before they're competent to serve as a crewmember in the airline environment. I
46 Cubsrule : Why not fix the problem (i.e. airlines' failure to self-police) rather than imposing a rule with no basis in fact?
47 Mir : And how would one do that? -Mir
48 Cubsrule : Well, one might start with the cozy relationship that airlines and in particular pilots and FAA enjoy. I was on an F9 flight with an FAA inspector a
49 Mir : And at the risk of being repetitive, how would you do that? Remember that we're talking about hiring specifically, here - how are you going to police
50 Cubsrule : Personally, I think a lot of FAA management needs to go. But we may disagree on that.
51 Mir : We don't, actually. But that still doesn't answer how you'd develop enforceable hiring standards that are still fair. Let me put it to you this way:
52 Cubsrule : I'm not certain that hiring standards are the right answer. I'd support a hiring standard of X hours where X is the number of hours below which a pil
53 Mir : But without examples, this doesn't mean a whole lot. You're not the only person to be thinking the way you are - a whole training industry is as well
54 flightsimer : Here is my valid question one needs to ask yourself. Why is it that foreign carriers can send their prospect pilots to AMERICA for flight training and
55 planespotting : Military pilots aren't God's gift to aircraft. If you're flying a single-seat fighter, you're going to need some time to adjust to an extra crew memb
56 par13del : One thing's for sure, becoming a qualified pilot will cost more, as to whether this will bring back the glory days where pilots are paid a "professio
57 xdlx : Basically, in the 250h CPL enviroment a 0-CRJ-interview was costing around $75-85k and there was financing for it. I find it difficult to find financi
58 apodino : I was wondering if this would actually make training more affordable in the long run. Lets say that all of the people who would have been hired with
59 PPVRA : An increase in the supply of CFIs and a decrease in students means CFIs are going to go hungry. They have less work, whatever work is left is spread
60 mmedford : Until foreign governments like the idea the FAA is proposing and change their regs to be aligned with the FAA; to have one standard. This is just a b
61 aviateur : In a way this returns things to certain historical norms. Not that hours in a logbook are necessarily a good indicator of skill or talent or judgment.
62 Post contains links cbphoto : Their is no such thing as historical norms, it's merely cyclical. Before you were hired, in the 70s and 80s, guys were being hired at places like Nor
63 Post contains links and images lightsaber : Maybe not. The military is getting its budget cut. What if this was to ensure jobs for a large number of about to be displaced military pilots? Forge
64 KAUSpilot : Do you have any proof that it doesn't matter, or is that just your opinion?
65 vegas005 : So you have a tough cross wind landing in poor visibility and some slush on the runway. Do you want a: The 777 captain with 12,000 hours but only a fe
66 PPVRA : A very real possibility. I will add this, it's unlikely the likes of Emirates and Singapore will be willing to hire a green student to fly a couple t
67 727forever : I'm hearing a lot of crying and moaning by those trying to get their time up and get a gig. I'm going to be direct. Suck it up. If you can't handle so
68 cbphoto : It's not quite Apples to Oranges the way you make it out to be. The industry today is completely different then the ones you and aviateur got hired i
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Fact Filled Flight With CO Pilot posted Thu Nov 10 2011 07:05:58 by STT757
EK Flight Recalled, Co-pilot Ill! posted Mon Jul 5 2010 09:47:26 by UAEflyer
FAA Proposes Fine Against FedEx posted Thu May 20 2010 08:45:38 by upsphl
FAA Proposes $1.5M Fine Against DL/NWA posted Tue Mar 23 2010 22:59:41 by PlanesNTrains
9L 3407 Families Helped By US 1549 Co-pilot posted Fri Oct 30 2009 08:18:24 by KBUF
CO Pilot Dies In Flight, BRU-EWR posted Thu Jun 18 2009 08:03:34 by Klwright69
FAA Probes 9L On Pilot Overscheduling posted Thu May 7 2009 21:08:39 by KBUF
LX TLV-ZRH Cancelled Today; Co-pilot Not Licensed posted Tue Feb 17 2009 00:24:09 by CastropRauxel
Comair Co-pilot Wants To Fly Again posted Thu Mar 6 2008 14:34:09 by PilotNTrng
Virgin Co Pilot Arrested For Drinking Before Fligh posted Mon Oct 29 2007 10:14:17 by Varigb707