indiansbucs
Topic Author
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:31 am

FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:24 pm

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]
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:31 pm

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
 
jfritz
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:49 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:40 pm

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...
 
B727LVR
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:54 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:42 pm

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!
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:46 pm

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.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:50 pm

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
 
n6238p
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:35 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:52 pm

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
 
indiansbucs
Topic Author
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:31 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:57 pm

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.
 
comair25
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:45 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:00 pm

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]
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:14 pm

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.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:28 pm

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
All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
 
indiansbucs
Topic Author
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:31 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:35 pm

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.
 
DeltaRules
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 11:57 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:36 pm

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]
A310/319/320/321/333, ARJ, BN2, B722/73S/733/734/735/73G/738/739/744/757/753/767/763/764/777, CR1/2/7/9, DH6, 328, EM2/ERJ/E70/E75/E90, F28/100, J31, L10/12/15, DC9/D93/D94/D95/M80/M88/M90/D10, SF3, SST
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:54 pm

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
 
apodino
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:54 pm

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)
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:54 pm

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.
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:56 pm

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.
 
kaitakfan
Posts: 1475
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:04 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:15 pm

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.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:16 pm

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
 
comair25
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:45 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:45 pm

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.
 
DeltaRules
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 11:57 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:17 pm

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
A310/319/320/321/333, ARJ, BN2, B722/73S/733/734/735/73G/738/739/744/757/753/767/763/764/777, CR1/2/7/9, DH6, 328, EM2/ERJ/E70/E75/E90, F28/100, J31, L10/12/15, DC9/D93/D94/D95/M80/M88/M90/D10, SF3, SST
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:25 pm

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.
 
DeltaRules
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 11:57 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:32 pm

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.
A310/319/320/321/333, ARJ, BN2, B722/73S/733/734/735/73G/738/739/744/757/753/767/763/764/777, CR1/2/7/9, DH6, 328, EM2/ERJ/E70/E75/E90, F28/100, J31, L10/12/15, DC9/D93/D94/D95/M80/M88/M90/D10, SF3, SST
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:43 pm

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.
 
comair25
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:45 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 7:05 pm

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?
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:28 pm

Quoting comair25 (Reply 24):
Yes more flight time means more experience, but does more experience always mean a better pilot?


No, not necessarily. There are always outliers, and those with natural talent or conversely lack thereof. In general though, there is a strong correlation between more experience and better decision making, although there is some debate as to where that mostly occurs.

I found an interesting study from Dr. Paul Craig entitled "Flying Through the Zone." I apologize but every time I try to put the link here it doesn't seem to work. It studied the number of fatal accidents of student and private pilots over 17 years (1983-2000) and found the majority of accidents happen between 50 and 350 hours. The rate drops off significantly after 350 hours and tends to level off at about 500-600 hours, which also seems to agree with some other resources claiming there is a general leveling of the correlation between accidents and hours after 500 hours of total time. In this study, approx. 75% of all of the fatal accidents occurred at less than 500 hours of experience.

Granted, that study looked only at student and private pilots, and it included primarily fatal accidents. There was one chart on all maneuvering accidents, which was largely similar. The study did not look at commercial aviation or incidents.

[Edited 2012-02-28 12:41:07]
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
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:12 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 15):
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.

I suppose the airlines chose to lose money, too?

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 15):
Watch that Frontline special "Flying Cheap" again. The practices in that show need to stop. This legislation might help.

I've seen it, and that special leaves some important questions behind. Some of the questions left behind deal with the way the labor market for pilots has been distorted by the government.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 23):
Quoting comair25 (Reply 19):
Making higher minimums isn't going to change anything.

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

If in 1973 or whatever year it was the FAA thought raising the minimum from 200 to 250 hours was enough, raising it 600% on top of that today truly won't change anything at all. Meanwhile, it makes everybody else's life miserable.

And as pointed above, the Colgan pilots had more than 1500 hours, but still acted incorrectly. Experience can easily be overrated.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
n6238p
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:35 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:25 pm

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. And those job that are out there a majority are cfi, banner towing, sightseeing job that pay a wage that makes regional pilots look like rock stars. Anyone trying to make it must either A. Have parents that really really love giving their kid money to live or B. hold two or more jobs which personally I think brings into play a serious fatigue issue. I'm not saying working two jobs is a right of passage I shouldn't be entitled to, but i think mixing flying with no sleep is a difficult situation to mess around with. This really is just something that's not going to help low time guys survive in this industry. I myself had to stop flying full time just because it's not a livable income. The wages have to definitely change on all ends of the spectrum for this ATP rule to work.
To actively root against anybody is just low, and I hope karma comes back at you with a vengeance
 
KAUSpilot
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:15 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:31 pm

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 guess they'll just have to pay more to attract qualified applicants and/or entice young people to enter the career. Supply and demand, you know. Right now the career is not very attractive to a lot of young people.

I, and most civilian pilots I know, managed to have about 1000 hours (or more) before we landed a job flying 135 or 121 SIC. We made money however we could, primarily through flight instructing, but also sightseeing, aerial photography, pipeline patrol, banner towing, traffic watch, and anything else we could come up with. 1500 hours would've just meant another 6 months to 1 year of doing that work. While it wasn't very lucrative, it was still enjoyable and definitely helped build decision making skills and improve overall airmanship.

It's not just the Colgan accident that has caused regulations like this to come down the pipeline. Flagship 3701 is a big one as well. When you ramrod a kid through a fast-track flight school which relies heavily on non-motion simulators then slap him into a part 121 passenger jet at 200 hrs, you're doing that kid and the traveling public a disservice (and yes this has happened recently, by the same company that brought us 3701 & 3407 no less).

In the USA, the means exist for new pilots to cut their teeth in the realm of part 91 commercial flying before entering the arena of the airlines. We should continue to utilize these means to put well-rounded pilots in the flight deck rather than resorting to a cadet system like the Europeans and Asians have. 700 or 800 hours of single pilot flying, or giving instruction to a student, gives a pilot a much better resume than one who has been babysat by a captain or instructor for their entire flying career.
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3549
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:13 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 4):
FO's already have to be typed to fly outside the US

But what are the hours requirement?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:19 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 26):
I suppose the airlines chose to lose money, too?

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.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 26):
I've seen it, and that special leaves some important questions behind. Some of the questions left behind deal with the way the labor market for pilots has been distorted by the government.

Labor market distorted by the Govt? Care to expand on that?

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 26):
If in 1973 or whatever year it was the FAA thought raising the minimum from 200 to 250 hours was enough, raising it 600% on top of that today truly won't change anything at all. Meanwhile, it makes everybody else's life miserable.

You mean makes your life more miserable because with this ruling they won't be able to pass out pilot jobs like candy, as they have been doing for the last few years.

I'm sorry, but 250 hours and a pulse just isn't sufficient for you to fly my wife and son around. Airline management disagrees with me of course, which makes me thankful the Govt has finally called BS.
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:20 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 29):

But what are the hours requirement?

Commercial AMEL and a pulse.... That's it. The SIC type rating has no hour requirements, just training.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:14 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 30):
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.

You don't understand the economics involved with perishable goods, nor are you aware of the environment governments have created and its effects on the industry. And no, you do not subsidize it any way.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 30):
Labor market distorted by the Govt? Care to expand on that?

The outdated seniority system means experienced pilots are not being paired with inexperienced pilots, because the unions won't allow a new hire to sit next to a 737 or 767 captain with 5000 hours. You have to sit next to the also inexperienced Dash-8 captain that's flying EWR-ORD.

This system also led to the creation of the regional industry, which makes the whole situation worse by dividing experienced and inexperienced pilots between entire different companies.

Thanks to excessively powerful unions (you can thank government for this distortion) this is extremely difficult to change.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 30):
You mean makes your life more miserable because with this ruling they won't be able to pass out pilot jobs like candy, as they have been doing for the last few years.

I'm sorry, but 250 hours and a pulse just isn't sufficient for you to fly my wife and son around. Airline management disagrees with me of course, which makes me thankful the Govt has finally called BS.

Safety numbers say you are wrong.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:18 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):
You don't understand the economics involved with perishable goods, nor are you aware of the environment governments have created and its effects on the industry.

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 to the cockpit.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):
And no, you do not subsidize it any way.

I disagree.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):
The outdated seniority system means experienced pilots are not being paired with inexperienced pilots, because the unions won't allow a new hire to sit next to a 737 or 767 captain with 5000 hours. You have to sit next to the also inexperienced Dash-8 captain that's flying EWR-ORD.

You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about..... Company SOP's generally prohibit "green on green" pairing. You have ideas other than seniority to use? I've never seen anyone come up with something doable.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):
This system also led to the creation of the regional industry, which makes the whole situation worse by dividing experienced and inexperienced pilots between entire different companies.

The major airlines created the regional industry. Not the pilots.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):
Thanks to excessively powerful unions (you can thank government for this distortion) this is extremely difficult to change.

Which 'excessively powerful union" are you referring to? It sure as hell isn't ALPA. If it were, we wouldn't have cargo haulers cut out of the new rest requirements and age 65 would never have happened.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 32):

Safety numbers say you are wrong.

Bring on the numbers. The ones I'm referring to come from ASAP reports, which aren't public. They're internal to the company and FAA. You still can't back your statement up with facts.

What exactly is your experience in the cockpit? I'm guessing little to none...
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:36 am

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 1):
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.

Nope. Domestic operations don't require any sort of certificate qualification for the SIC.

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...

1500 hours is not that hard to build (though this will create a real oversupply of pilots at the sub-1500 hour level, and that's not good). What's hard is the cross-country time. Flight instructing won't get you that unless you do it for a long time, nor will traffic reporting, flying skydivers, banner towing, etc.

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 5):
It was at least partially attributed to inexperienced pilots not understanding the situation they were in.

Their experience had little to do with it. They were tired, and thus they were behind the airplane.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 9):
I'm not sure 135 is going to be viable for time building.

I'll have been at my present 135 job for a year at the end of March, and I'll probably have flown only 200 hours in that time. It's quality time (jet, cross-country, multi-pilot, etc.), but still only 200 hours of it. Not exactly making progress toward an ATP that way.

Requiring the type rating will definitely be a good thing, though. That should have been done a while ago.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
tb727
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:53 am

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 cargo guys aren't going to have to follow? No one cares if a freighter biffs it in, might as well let them learn with boxes in the back right?

The sad part is, someone might actually take me seriously Sad

[Edited 2012-02-28 18:54:13]
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
aa757first
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:40 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:14 am

What are these numbers based on? Is there statistical evidence that shows co-pilots with these qualifications have fewer accidents or incidents? And why the carve out for military pilots? Why does military experience count more than university-based experience which counts more than non-university based experience? This seems very arbitrary.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 23):
You're gaining experience while flying those hours. Even doing hours worth of touch and goes helps. You're making command decisions.

Why not 2,000 hours? 3,000? 5,000? Why not legally require a Bachelor's too?

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
Bring on the numbers. The ones I'm referring to come from ASAP reports, which aren't public. They're internal to the company and FAA. You still can't back your statement up with facts.

You just told him to present you with numbers that he doesn't have access to.  
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 7:06 am

Quoting aa757first (Reply 36):
What are these numbers based on? Is there statistical evidence that shows co-pilots with these qualifications have fewer accidents or incidents?

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 holds true for everything.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 36):
And why the carve out for military pilots?

Different training standards, disciplines, equipment and mission.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 36):
Why does military experience count more than university-based experience which counts more than non-university based experience? This seems very arbitrary

It wouldn't bother me to see more of a break for military guys. The other part starts getting into politics.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 36):
Why not 2,000 hours? 3,000? 5,000? Why not legally require a Bachelor's too?

You have to set the floor somewhere. Perception is the airlines couldn't do it themselves.

Quoting aa757first (Reply 36):
You just told him to present you with numbers that he doesn't have access to.

Yes I did. The poster is doing little than baseless whining about the new reg. We all get it. "I'll never get an airline job". "It will sink the airlines..."... There are numerous reasons people here (non-pilots of course) who think this is BS. Fact is we wouldn't be having this discussion if regionals didn't hire low time guys, push pilots, schedule 14+ hour days with RR overnights, pay shit, treat you like a slave, etc...

I encourage everyone here to go look at the ASRS database and see who files more reports. Guys flying a Boeing, or guys flying an RJ. You won't be able to see ASAP reports as they are not made public, but those tell an even bigger story as most airline use this system. Accidents only paint a small part of the overall picture. I can tell you I've never heard a Boeing or Airbus driver handed a pilot deviation over the radio. I've heard a handful of RJ guys get them.

One last shot. A low time pilot with little PIC has not had the opportunity to make command decisions before getting into a two man cockpit where that becomes someone else's responsibility. You can learn all you want from the guy in the left seat, but it becomes an entirely different story when you're making the calls. You need a knowledge base and confidence to make the right decisions. You may have the knowledge base gained from flying FO, but where did your confidence come from? A few sim sessions, or the real world flying as PIC? Speaking from my own personal experience, so is no substitute for ass in seat of real airplane. Any airplane....
 
aa757first
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:40 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 7:20 am

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 37):
You have to set the floor somewhere. Perception is the airlines couldn't do it themselves.

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 if there is actual statistical evidence that this will make our skies safer, then I'm all for it.
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:19 pm

Quoting aa757first (Reply 38):

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 airline before upgrade that make too much sense. That brings the days of street captains to an end unless you flew somewhere else first.

I do wish they'd release their statistics. I'm interested in that as well.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:21 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
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 to the cockpit.

Congrats.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
I disagree.

Basic economics disagrees with you.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about..... Company SOP's generally prohibit "green on green" pairing. You have ideas other than seniority to use? I've never seen anyone come up with something doable.

Now you are even contradicting the very program you referenced. "Green" is relative.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
The major airlines created the regional industry. Not the pilots.

That's exactly what I said.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
Which 'excessively powerful union" are you referring to? It sure as hell isn't ALPA. If it were, we wouldn't have cargo haulers cut out of the new rest requirements and age 65 would never have happened.

Your best counter argument is a minor set back? And I am not sure age 65 is necessarily something the unions don't like!

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 33):
Bring on the numbers. The ones I'm referring to come from ASAP reports, which aren't public. They're internal to the company and FAA. You still can't back your statement up with facts.

What exactly is your experience in the cockpit? I'm guessing little to none...

Cockpit experience means little to nothing in this subject. And the numbers that really count are made public.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:49 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 40):
And I am not sure age 65 is necessarily something the unions don't like!

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 pushed through. They did this in order to have a say on how it was implemented.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 40):
Cockpit experience means little to nothing in this subject. And the numbers that really count are made public.

Cockpit experience means everything in this subject. Hell, It IS the subject....

[Edited 2012-02-29 06:50:17]
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11368
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:52 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 39):
I don't know what evidence the Feds used, but I don't think this NPRM was arbitrarily written.

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?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:24 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 41):
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 pushed through. They did this in order to have a say on how it was implemented.

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's internal politics, I couldn't give a rats ass.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 41):
Cockpit experience means everything in this subject. Hell, It IS the subject....

The subject of this thread is indeed experience, but understanding why the industry looks like the way it does has nothing to do with how good a pilot you are.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
xdlx
Posts: 676
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:30 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 31):

The # of hours has little relevance in the quality (experience) derived from them.

In WWII, the system demonstrated ( without simulators ) trained crews with less than 1000hrs COMBINED
flew complex B17, B25 missions to target and back.
Many foreing countries are succesfull at ab-initio training and it is not uncommon to see an F/O with under
1500TT hrs flying A320, B738, E190 in many routes.

Now if the entry level salary also came up above poverty level, things would be looking up!
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:30 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 42):
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?

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. It has historically been up to the individual airline to decide when that is. Some airlines failed this, hence a blanket total time requirement.

You all can certainly comment on the NPRM. Legal mumbo-jumbo here:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic..._published/media/2120-AJ67NPRM.pdf
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11368
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:56 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 45):
Some airlines failed this, hence a blanket total time requirement.

Why not fix the problem (i.e. airlines' failure to self-police) rather than imposing a rule with no basis in fact?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:59 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 46):
Why not fix the problem (i.e. airlines' failure to self-police) rather than imposing a rule with no basis in fact?

And how would one do that?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11368
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:08 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 47):
And how would one do that?

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 couple of weeks ago. He spent as much time in the cabin fussing about carryon bags as he did in the cockpit. That's a problem.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: FAA Proposes Higher Co-pilot Qualifications

Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:29 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 48):
Well, one might start with the cozy relationship that airlines and in particular pilots and FAA enjoy.

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 airline hiring policies using metrics that are fair, yet measurable and non-arbitrary?

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 48):
I was on an F9 flight with an FAA inspector a couple of weeks ago. He spent as much time in the cabin fussing about carryon bags as he did in the cockpit. That's a problem.

Maybe that's what he was there to observe.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AA333PHL, AirIndia, Baidu [Spider], cornishsimon, David L, EIA359, flyDTW1992, jeffrey0032j, jonchan627, Lofty and 175 guests