DashTrash wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

People don’t seem to understand what’s really driving the pilot shortage at the regionals. It’s not a lack of people applying to first officer positions - OO is filling classes 6-7 months out, it’s a lack of people sticking around as captains and check airman, both of which are essentially for the companies to function.

Now, 3-5 years down the road we may start getting to a point where even FO candidates dry up but for now, it’s a CA retention problem. And who can blame them - a lifelong captain at the regionals makes less per hour than a 2nd year FO at virtually every mainline carrier

Regionals for the most part never wanted “lifers”. The idea was get the job, upgrade in a year, spend another year or two in the left seat and get out before you’re hitting the higher parts of the pay scales. Mainline contraction changed that reality but the regional cost structure hasn’t followed. It’s only gotten worse.


It’s been pointed out, but pay isn’t the only problem at the regionals. Quality of life is the biggest issue. Schedules are garbage, work rules still awful and CBAs not complied with. I have seen numerous regional FOs bailing for the fractionals who also have higher hiring goals due to rapid expansion not seen since 9/11.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

THIS…..

I see it everyday, and have posted at length about it. Private GA travel, especially charter is storing in growth. And the pay is growing as well.

Revelation wrote:

kalvado wrote:

Pilot's career requires significant financial investment and time. Few young people would be willing to go that route with uncertain future and non-transferable skill.

More importantly, few parents will encourage their children to go that route or offer the financial support needed to go that route. I've seen the transformation in my life when an airline pilot job seemed to be nothing but glory in the 60-s70s and by the 90s-00s word had gone out and parents had realized that being a pilot means long hours far away from home for low wages for many many years till you start earning a decent wage. Given how much the cost of education has risen over that period, few parents are going to bankroll their kids to not just get an education but then help them for many years thereafter. Instead they'll steer them towards more traditional white collar work that offers good pay and benefits from year one and good options to change companies as needed/desired to move up the ladder in both title and salary. The airline seniority system really hampers career mobility IMO.

toxtethogrady wrote:

kngkyle wrote:

There is a shortage of pilots willing to fly 50-seat regional jets at the wages that make flying a 50-seat regional jet economical to fly.
.

There are some pilot organizations that raise money for aviation education scholarships and award scholarships to help defray the cost of obtaining pilot ratings. Also some airlines are thinking about starting their own flight schools and airline apprentice pilot programs.

FlyingElvii wrote:

meh130 wrote:

The changes in 2013 requiring an ATP for the SIC seriously reduced the pipeline for regional new hires. It effectively raised the requirement to the same as the mainline carriers, but with regional level pay.

Add to that there are a lot fewer military pilots today compared to the Cold War era. The USAF has about half the aircraft it had in 1989.

The regional airlines are pushing to change the rules to require fewer hours for new hires:

https://www.flyaeroguard.com/blog/regio ... hour-rule/

To be fair, most of today’s “Regionals” aren’t regionals anymore. They are lower cost ACM subcontractors.
They fly aircraft that would have been flown by mainline pilots 30 years ago, mostly on routes that mainline also flys. The mother carrier controls everything, from schedule to even owning many of the planes.

I have long said that a return to the “True” regional model is the way to go forward. But that won’t happen until the pilot unions step up.

I agree - the system worked fine with local carriers (North Central) for example.

Interesting topic which leads me to believe that some of the mid sized cities that are all regional jets now will begin to see a mix of regional jet and mainline flying within the next two years. UA has already proved this past NCAA Football season that they could make money and fill up 737's on reposition flights back and forth between the NCAA football city and their hubs. Some of these cities close to ORD they were putting 85-100 people on the aircraft reposition flights. There is no reason they cannot operate a few 737-800 tag flights in those cities where they have all CRJ200's now.

LCDFlight wrote:

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

What's arbitrary about the ATP requirements? Fifteen hundred hours was the standard for an ATP for decades globally. This is a function of a number of factors, all of which are coming to a head. The regional airlines just assumed there would always be a healthy GA community to provide a steady stream of highly qualified people, and without major hiring for most of the 1990s, regionals could afford to do pay for training/pay for application, high wash out training, and lots of other things. That doesn't exist, anymore.

This shortage is just a function of all of the hidden subsidies the airlines enjoyed for decades disappearing. The airliners were happy to exploit those subsidies as well. If there was side to this choking the Golden Goose, it was airline management that exploit bankruptcy, scope, RLA negotiation, FFD whipsaws and any other advantage they could to the maximum they could.

Too bad. Welcome to market economics.

freakyrat wrote:

There are some pilot organizations that raise money for aviation education scholarships and award scholarships to help defray the cost of obtaining pilot ratings. Also some airlines are thinking about starting their own flight schools and airline apprentice pilot programs.

True, but seems it may be too little too late.

IMO the airlines seem to believe in market forces only when they work in their favor. Now we see market forces working against the airlines their move is to lobby Congress for relief, rather trust in the market and offer incentives and training programs to fill vacancies.

The airlines learned from labor in that they have been going with the "full profit till the last day" strategy, now the depth of the training pipeline is biting them.

Well, if Kirby thinks he deserves to collect $8M in his pay package, maybe he should have been doing something about this years ago, rather than waiting till the spam hits the fan and then he has to go beg Congress for relief, which they are not likely to grant.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

I agree - the system worked fine with local carriers (North Central) for example.

That was part and parcel of an industry that was regulated.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

meh130 wrote:

The changes in 2013 requiring an ATP for the SIC seriously reduced the pipeline for regional new hires. It effectively raised the requirement to the same as the mainline carriers, but with regional level pay.

Add to that there are a lot fewer military pilots today compared to the Cold War era. The USAF has about half the aircraft it had in 1989.

The regional airlines are pushing to change the rules to require fewer hours for new hires:

https://www.flyaeroguard.com/blog/regio ... hour-rule/

To be fair, most of today’s “Regionals” aren’t regionals anymore. They are lower cost ACM subcontractors.
They fly aircraft that would have been flown by mainline pilots 30 years ago, mostly on routes that mainline also flys. The mother carrier controls everything, from schedule to even owning many of the planes.

I have long said that a return to the “True” regional model is the way to go forward. But that won’t happen until the pilot unions step up.

I agree - the system worked fine with local carriers (North Central) for example.

My airline for travel between SBN and ORD when I was in the military was North Central. Miss Herman The Duck.

FlapOperator wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

What's arbitrary about the ATP requirements? Fifteen hundred hours was the standard for an ATP for decades globally. This is a function of a number of factors, all of which are coming to a head. The regional airlines just assumed there would always be a healthy GA community to provide a steady stream of highly qualified people, and without major hiring for most of the 1990s, regionals could afford to do pay for training/pay for application, high wash out training, and lots of other things. That doesn't exist, anymore.

This shortage is just a function of all of the hidden subsidies the airlines enjoyed for decades disappearing. The airliners were happy to exploit those subsidies as well. If there was side to this choking the Golden Goose, it was airline management that exploit bankruptcy, scope, RLA negotiation, FFD whipsaws and any other advantage they could to the maximum they could.

Too bad. Welcome to market economics.

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Revelation wrote:

freakyrat wrote:

There are some pilot organizations that raise money for aviation education scholarships and award scholarships to help defray the cost of obtaining pilot ratings. Also some airlines are thinking about starting their own flight schools and airline apprentice pilot programs.

True, but seems it may be too little too late.

IMO the airlines seem to believe in market forces only when they work in their favor. Now we see market forces working against the airlines their move is to lobby Congress for relief, rather trust in the market and offer incentives and training programs to fill vacancies.

The airlines learned from labor in that they have been going with the "full profit till the last day" strategy, now the depth of the training pipeline is biting them.

Well, if Kirby thinks he deserves to collect $8M in his pay package, maybe he should have been doing something about this years ago, rather than waiting till the spam hits the fan and then he has to go beg Congress for relief, which they are not likely to grant.

I also think the Hub and Spoke model has contributed to the present situation. Before that United was operating a hybrid version similar to Southwest and flying those 737-200's almost everywhere. They were still filling them up and better utilizing their fleet. Then they went to Hub and Spoke as the local service carriers started merging till there was no local service carrier anymore. Then regionals came along and then the majors started buying them and merging them. At the same time United CEO Richard Ferris sold the 737-200's and leased them back as the airline abandoned their small and mid sized cities and gave them to the regionals. Now they have a pilot shortage exasperated by Covid and instead of working things out they want to scream to the Government for relief. A total mess.

I’m glad they have grounded 100 aircraft. Welcome to the free market where Walgreens employees start at $20 per hr. Deal with it! Try to live on $20 per hr.

LCDFlight wrote:

FlapOperator wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Look at the UK's EasyJet with their apprentice pilot program. Luke Elsworth was 19 in 2016 when he started flying as an FO on the Airbus A320. He's 24 now and has probably upgraded to Captain. The Airbus A320 is a very logically arranged Flight Deck and an apprentice pilot with great apptitude and work ethic can figure it out in the simulator quite easily. Airbus purposely designed the aircraft for easy transition. Maybe the airlines here need to start programs modeled after EasyJets.

There are solutions out there. The airlines and the FAA need to brainstorm and come up with them.

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Correction: 100 RJs are grounded because the airline industry did not fund and staff the training pipeline to meet the 1500 hour rule that has been the law for eight years now, and did not offer terms and conditions that would induce candidates to enter the training pipeline.

LCDFlight wrote:

FlapOperator wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

What's arbitrary about the ATP requirements? Fifteen hundred hours was the standard for an ATP for decades globally. This is a function of a number of factors, all of which are coming to a head. The regional airlines just assumed there would always be a healthy GA community to provide a steady stream of highly qualified people, and without major hiring for most of the 1990s, regionals could afford to do pay for training/pay for application, high wash out training, and lots of other things. That doesn't exist, anymore.

This shortage is just a function of all of the hidden subsidies the airlines enjoyed for decades disappearing. The airliners were happy to exploit those subsidies as well. If there was side to this choking the Golden Goose, it was airline management that exploit bankruptcy, scope, RLA negotiation, FFD whipsaws and any other advantage they could to the maximum they could.

Too bad. Welcome to market economics.

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

1500 isn’t arbitrary number. It’s always been the standard requirement for ATP. What happened was that the standards have been raised to occupy the flight decks of Part 121 operations for all crew members occupying flights to hold a ATP certificate and PIC type rating of said aircraft.

The goal of the ATP of those standards wasn’t to create a shortage, it only to increase the standards of flight crew members. It part of the reason that created the shortage but not the entire reason.

You have to remember that Shortage was always there to begin with even before the 1500 hour rule as the Military pipeline was drying up and the GA pipeline was drying up with folks being willing to enter the industry due to the lack of living wages and qol.

Quite frankly, it is my professional opinion that the ATP standards shouldn’t be lower instead the majors need to invest time building a flight training pipeline from from 0 to ATP minimums, then bring them onboard to their regionals where they can get x amount of experience.

There is a lot of intangible experience and skills to be gain flight instructing, or working smaller experience building jobs before getting into the flight deck of an airliner. I speak this with experience as pilot.

FlapOperator wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

I agree - the system worked fine with local carriers (North Central) for example.

That was part and parcel of an industry that was regulated.

Not really…
Local service carriers blossomed in deregulation. The big names like Atlantic Coast, Britt, Comair, etc. opened all kinds of short and medium haul traffic up profitably, right up until they got hit by a combination of regulation driving costs up to unsustainable levels, and an orchestrated media campaign against planes with props in the US. One being driven by legacy carriers that didn’t like the competition (Small carriers can grow into big ones), and manufacturers that were building competing small jets (Bombardier).

Add in regulated slot restraints, etc…

LCDFlight wrote:

FlapOperator wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

What's arbitrary about the ATP requirements? Fifteen hundred hours was the standard for an ATP for decades globally. This is a function of a number of factors, all of which are coming to a head. The regional airlines just assumed there would always be a healthy GA community to provide a steady stream of highly qualified people, and without major hiring for most of the 1990s, regionals could afford to do pay for training/pay for application, high wash out training, and lots of other things. That doesn't exist, anymore.

This shortage is just a function of all of the hidden subsidies the airlines enjoyed for decades disappearing. The airliners were happy to exploit those subsidies as well. If there was side to this choking the Golden Goose, it was airline management that exploit bankruptcy, scope, RLA negotiation, FFD whipsaws and any other advantage they could to the maximum they could.

Too bad. Welcome to market economics.

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

I agree. There is no “in between” solution so to speak that reduces hours in an economical and timely way to allow the majority of people to access it as a career.

Paying $80-100K in flight training and college tuition just to reduce your required hours from 1500 to 1000 is ludicrous, and I think most people agree you don’t learn too much in those 500 extra hours. Just as ludicrous is the constant “just join the military” chatter I hear from people in the industry - that’s a 7-10 year commitment… not exactly what people want when they’re trying to get to the airlines, especially if we somehow go to war and they’re shipped off in that time period.

The most economical way - the mom and pop shop route to 250 hours and then becoming an instructor - still costs 50K plus at most every flight school. Again, not accessible to most individuals… especially since hardly any of those offer any sort of financing.

Now, the obvious solution is some sort of financing and program (a la Europe) that pays for your training in exchange to a certain time period commitment to the company. Problem is - regionals don’t hardly have any spare money to front it. So the mainlines really need to be funding it themselves. This is coming… it’s a matter of when not if. It’s just got to get bad enough for the airlines to actually do it (and I agree with other posts, it’s their own fault that they don’t). If companies like United truly care about this career being accessible to everyone, including those less fortunate, they’d damn well better get on it

joeblow10 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

FlapOperator wrote:

What's arbitrary about the ATP requirements? Fifteen hundred hours was the standard for an ATP for decades globally. This is a function of a number of factors, all of which are coming to a head. The regional airlines just assumed there would always be a healthy GA community to provide a steady stream of highly qualified people, and without major hiring for most of the 1990s, regionals could afford to do pay for training/pay for application, high wash out training, and lots of other things. That doesn't exist, anymore.

This shortage is just a function of all of the hidden subsidies the airlines enjoyed for decades disappearing. The airliners were happy to exploit those subsidies as well. If there was side to this choking the Golden Goose, it was airline management that exploit bankruptcy, scope, RLA negotiation, FFD whipsaws and any other advantage they could to the maximum they could.

Too bad. Welcome to market economics.

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

I agree. There is no “in between” solution so to speak that reduces hours in an economical and timely way to allow the majority of people to access it as a career.

Paying $80-100K in flight training and college tuition just to reduce your required hours from 1500 to 1000 is ludicrous, and I think most people agree you don’t learn too much in those 500 extra hours. Just as ludicrous is the constant “just join the military” chatter I hear from people in the industry - that’s a 7-10 year commitment… not exactly what people want when they’re trying to get to the airlines, especially if we somehow go to war and they’re shipped off in that time period.

The most economical way - the mom and pop shop route to 250 hours and then becoming an instructor - still costs 50K plus at most every flight school. Again, not accessible to most individuals… especially since hardly any of those offer any sort of financing.

Now, the obvious solution is some sort of financing and program (a la Europe) that pays for your training in exchange to a certain time period commitment to the company. Problem is - regionals don’t hardly have any spare money to front it. So the mainlines really need to be funding it themselves. This is coming… it’s a matter of when not if. It’s just got to get bad enough for the airlines to actually do it (and I agree with other posts, it’s their own fault that they don’t). If companies like United truly care about this career being accessible to everyone, including those less fortunate, they’d damn well better get on it

The ATP rules have a place. Plenty of blood expended over the decades show why.

The real answer is returning to the much lower costs of the pre-Airline “Reform” regulations of the mid-90’s, for 30 seats or less, or even just 19, with slot exemptions in the top ten markets for small cities.

But, we live in Karen Nation now, and any politician that even thinks about such a thing will be crucified for it.

joeblow10 wrote:

Now, the obvious solution is some sort of financing and program (a la Europe) that pays for your training in exchange to a certain time period commitment to the company. Problem is - regionals don’t hardly have any spare money to front it. So the mainlines really need to be funding it themselves. This is coming… it’s a matter of when not if. It’s just got to get bad enough for the airlines to actually do it (and I agree with other posts, it’s their own fault that they don’t). If companies like United truly care about this career being accessible to everyone, including those less fortunate, they’d damn well better get on it

United is going to attempt it with their Aviate program. If it is successful others will follow.

bigb wrote:

1500 isn’t arbitrary number. It’s always been the standard requirement for ATP. What happened was that the standards have been raised to occupy the flight decks of Part 121 operations for all crew members occupying flights to hold a ATP certificate and PIC type rating of said aircraft.

The goal of the ATP of those standards wasn’t to create a shortage, it only to increase the standards of flight crew members. It part of the reason that created the shortage but not the entire reason.

You have to remember that Shortage was always there to begin with even before the 1500 hour rule as the Military pipeline was drying up and the GA pipeline was drying up with folks being willing to enter the industry due to the lack of living wages and qol.

Quite frankly, it is my professional opinion that the ATP standards shouldn’t be lower instead the majors need to invest time building a flight training pipeline from from 0 to ATP minimums, then bring them onboard to their regionals where they can get x amount of experience.

There is a lot of intangible experience and skills to be gain flight instructing, or working smaller experience building jobs before getting into the flight deck of an airliner. I speak this with experience as pilot.

It's just strange if not unseemly that an industry that plans aircraft purchases costing billions of dollars years in advance and has yield management systems that can and do adjust ticket prices and equipment in real time and deals with weather events with a small number of days of advance warning has not planned for the effects of the 1500 hour rule put in place eight years ago.

Seemed they hoped they could lobby Congress for relief, but as a friend of mine often says, hope is not a plan.

It suggests to me the industry really doesn't make much money on the RJ operations themselves or the feed they inject into their networks, and are okay with letting it shrink to just the most beneficial routes. If this upsets some Congress-person in an under-populated area, it means they will be more willing to support relief. Win-win for the airline and the Congress-person. Airline exec gets to say we bent over Congress, Congress-person gets to say I saved our area from being cut off from air service.

Of course this doesn't solve the issue that the sneezing the RJ operators are now having will spread to a full scale flu at the major network carrier level, and no swipe of the Congressional pen can solve that problem.

And as mentioned, all the Congress-people from the under-populated areas some how have to get the support from the ones from the over-populated area who will not want to be seen "sacrificing safety for profit" in the post-MCAS world where FAA coziness with industry and pilot training was raised as an issue.

Revelation wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Correction: 100 RJs are grounded because the airline industry did not fund and staff the training pipeline to meet the 1500 hour rule that has been the law for eight years now, and did not offer terms and conditions that would induce candidates to enter the training pipeline.

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

LCDFlight wrote:

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

And Congress won't want to be seen compromising on safety after the recent problems with FAA and safety. Seems like very little room to budge. More likely to end up in less air service rather than more, IMO.

Revelation wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

And Congress won't want to be seen compromising on safety after the recent problems with FAA and safety. Seems like very little room to budge. More likely to end up in less air service rather than more, IMO.

The problem for the big airlines, mainly the biggest three, is that every pullback opens a door to someone else, that may eventually compete with them. Commercial and government contracts are a big part of it.
Historical fact: Whenever airplanes become cheap and plentiful, there is always someone willing to throw money at trying to build an airline.

Most recently, the focus of the the big three on business travelers, and basically telling the great unwashed to “go away, we don’t want deal with you anymore”, pre-Covid, opened the door to the likes of Allegiant and Spirit, both now large enough to give the majors headaches, now that they need that leisure revenue. This is nothing new, it has always been that way.

The problem now is the near monopolistic power of the Big Three, and to some extent, four. They protect their turf by any means possible, including using politicians to do it for them. (Delta, anyone? Why is there no second commercial airport allowed anywhere near Atlanta?)

Delta going after JetBlue in Boston, to run them out of New York, or after Alaska in Seattle are just two of the many examples we can site over the years.

FlyingElvii wrote:

Revelation wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

And Congress won't want to be seen compromising on safety after the recent problems with FAA and safety. Seems like very little room to budge. More likely to end up in less air service rather than more, IMO.

Most recently, the focus of the the big three on business travelers, and basically telling the great unwashed to “go away, we don’t want deal with you anymore”, pre-Covid, opened the door to the likes of Allegiant and Spirit, both now large enough to give the majors headaches, now that they need that leisure revenue. This is nothing new, it has always been that way.

What are you talking about? All 3 major US carriers have launched basic economy products targeted for the low-cost seasonal flier. All 3 have slashed fares aggressively with those BE products in markets which compete with an ULCC. All have added economy seats in some airplanes to gain more “unwashed masses” rather than pull seats out to add more premium seating. The exception are the relatively small fleets of premium-heavy airplanes; but the vast majority of the US fleet has been densified to capture more of the low-fare market. This all was in motion well before COVID.

LCDFlight wrote:

Revelation wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Correction: 100 RJs are grounded because the airline industry did not fund and staff the training pipeline to meet the 1500 hour rule that has been the law for eight years now, and did not offer terms and conditions that would induce candidates to enter the training pipeline.

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

Bingo. Something has to give eventually though, we just don’t know what yet. Going to be a really interesting 5-10 years in the industry in the US. Between the shortage, EAS service, lack of 50/<50 seater replacement, and the airlines themselves (consolidation), there is a lot to be sorted out.

My personal WAG is that wholly owned regionals end up becoming a part of a pipeline that mainline carriers funnel pilots through. AA, DL, and UA for example will pay off-the-street pilot wanna-be’s fairly decent money to cover training, while airlines like F9 and B6 just start hiring 1500 hour candidates. You’re already seeing this beginning with the growth of flow programs like Aviate and huge eye watering retention bonuses at AA wholly owneds.

The reality is there probably will never be a shortage of people who WANT to be a pilot, but there certainly already is one of people who CAN afford doing so or find the value in it.

LCDFlight wrote:

Revelation wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

Correction: 100 RJs are grounded because the airline industry did not fund and staff the training pipeline to meet the 1500 hour rule that has been the law for eight years now, and did not offer terms and conditions that would induce candidates to enter the training pipeline.

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

They aren’t paying people money to get over the wall. They investing in creating the pipeline for folks to buy into to go from 0 to mainline. Folks are still having to fund their flight training. The investment is worth it to folks if there is a defined path to mainline. Not getting stuck at the regionals which has happened to a lot of folks in the past.

FlyingElvii wrote:

joeblow10 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In market economics, they call things like the 1500 hour rule a "cartel" and a regulatory barrier to entry. The goal of this is to restrict too many people from entering the industry, so income is higher for the people in the industry. Scott Kirby knows this.

If qualified people can get in the right seat of an RJ at a few hundred hrs, they can quickly get 1500 hours on the job within 1 to 2 years. Having FO with a bit less time was not any measurable safety concern. It also fully solves the pilot shortage. Which is exactly what pilots don't want.

Many times, issues are complicated. But this one is simple. 100 RJ are grounded because of the 1500 rule. Now, Kirby is using that as a bargaining chip.

I agree. There is no “in between” solution so to speak that reduces hours in an economical and timely way to allow the majority of people to access it as a career.

Paying $80-100K in flight training and college tuition just to reduce your required hours from 1500 to 1000 is ludicrous, and I think most people agree you don’t learn too much in those 500 extra hours. Just as ludicrous is the constant “just join the military” chatter I hear from people in the industry - that’s a 7-10 year commitment… not exactly what people want when they’re trying to get to the airlines, especially if we somehow go to war and they’re shipped off in that time period.

The most economical way - the mom and pop shop route to 250 hours and then becoming an instructor - still costs 50K plus at most every flight school. Again, not accessible to most individuals… especially since hardly any of those offer any sort of financing.

Now, the obvious solution is some sort of financing and program (a la Europe) that pays for your training in exchange to a certain time period commitment to the company. Problem is - regionals don’t hardly have any spare money to front it. So the mainlines really need to be funding it themselves. This is coming… it’s a matter of when not if. It’s just got to get bad enough for the airlines to actually do it (and I agree with other posts, it’s their own fault that they don’t). If companies like United truly care about this career being accessible to everyone, including those less fortunate, they’d damn well better get on it

The ATP rules have a place. Plenty of blood expended over the decades show why.

The real answer is returning to the much lower costs of the pre-Airline “Reform” regulations of the mid-90’s, for 30 seats or less, or even just 19, with slot exemptions in the top ten markets for small cities.

But, we live in Karen Nation now, and any politician that even thinks about such a thing will be crucified for it.

What you call “reform” is the “single standard of safety”. Any passenger flying an airliner should expect one level of safety and operational performance. The line was drawn at 10 seats or more—you’re a scheduled 121 carrier. It was blood regulation that enacted that reform. No more large planes under less regulated 135 rules.

bigb wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Correction: 100 RJs are grounded because the airline industry did not fund and staff the training pipeline to meet the 1500 hour rule that has been the law for eight years now, and did not offer terms and conditions that would induce candidates to enter the training pipeline.

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

They aren’t paying people money to get over the wall. They investing in creating the pipeline for folks to buy into to go from 0 to mainline. Folks are still having to fund their flight training. The investment is worth it to folks if there is a defined path to mainline. Not getting stuck at the regionals which has happened to a lot of folks in the past.

Nothing says, “pay X dollars” and you’re a legacy airline pilot guaranteed. You pay for the training, IF you pass, you’ll get an opportunity to interview for regional job flying, IF you get called, you might get to a seat at a major. There’s no guarantees—pay your money, take your chances. I’ve known lots would paid their money and lives and never made it. Life’s not fair, no guarantees.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

bigb wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

I don’t think airlines really wanted to pay RJ pilots $120k-$150k instead of $60-80k to get people over the wall, funding avgas flying in a circle for 1000 extra hours. (Which is a $100,000 cost). They probably won’t do that. So we see a game of chicken developing between the pilot special interest groups, airline special interest groups and communities wanting service to be maintained or improved

They aren’t paying people money to get over the wall. They investing in creating the pipeline for folks to buy into to go from 0 to mainline. Folks are still having to fund their flight training. The investment is worth it to folks if there is a defined path to mainline. Not getting stuck at the regionals which has happened to a lot of folks in the past.

Nothing says, “pay X dollars” and you’re a legacy airline pilot guaranteed. You pay for the training, IF you pass, you’ll get an opportunity to interview for regional job flying, IF you get called, you might get to a seat at a major. There’s no guarantees—pay your money, take your chances. I’ve known lots would paid their money and lives and never made it. Life’s not fair, no guarantees.

I understand that, the odds increase if one has a clear defined path like a flow through program vs coming in off the the street through ATP then going to the a regional then trying to get hired on off the street to a mainline carrier.

At the end of the day, folks are not going invest a large sum of money to get stuck at the regionals. The dry pipeline speaks to that. However, the AA cadet academy, JetBlue flight academy and Aviate flight schools have full classes.

The only guarantee path to the majors is the military route.

in more ways than one -
GI Bill benefits for vocational flight training or a bachelor's degree program at a college with an aviation program. Enlist in the Armed Forces and have Uncle Sam pay for your flight training.

bigb wrote:

The only guarantee path to the majors is the military route.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

in more ways than one -
GI Bill benefits for vocational flight training or a bachelor's degree program at a college with an aviation program. Enlist in the Armed Forces and have Uncle Sam pay for your flight training.

No guarantee in that path either.

Plenty wash out then end up having to be Uncle Sam's indentured servant for the rest of their time of service with no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow waiting for them, just the prospect of trying to find a job with skills that may or may not be compatible with civilian life.

Plenty of opportunities to fail along the way, some involve loss of life, your own.

At least you don't have to be concerned about your rights, you sign most of them away on your enlistment day.

Yes but with the GI Bill at least you are not in debt for your flight training and college. And being concerned about signing away your rights when you enlist? At 18? If you're smart, you've become an Avionics Tech or mechanic in the Air Force. And your resume would be way better than someone just with a college education.

Was a Personnel Manager for 17 years hiring Merchant Mariners - vets made better employees.

Revelation wrote:

bigb wrote:

The only guarantee path to the majors is the military route.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

in more ways than one -
GI Bill benefits for vocational flight training or a bachelor's degree program at a college with an aviation program. Enlist in the Armed Forces and have Uncle Sam pay for your flight training.

No guarantee in that path either.

Plenty wash out then end up having to be Uncle Sam's indentured servant for the rest of their time of service with no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow waiting for them, just the prospect of trying to find a job with skills that may or may not be compatible with civilian life.

Plenty of opportunities to fail along the way, some involve loss of life, your own.

At least you don't have to be concerned about your rights, you sign most of them away on your enlistment day.

Usually, wash out of UPT and you’re separated from the service.

A question, does SCOPE have any role to play in this situation, was it supposed to prevent, assist or have any effect on this type issue?

SCOPE wasn’t a carefully crafted part of Muadibs 100 year plan for airline stability.

Scope was the natural result of:
1. Unions carving excellent careers for US pilots flying jet Airliners.
2. During the time that scope was evolving, there were a lot more pilots than there were excellent pilot jobs.
3. Normally this would have had a downward pressure on those excellent jobs. But, due to the power of those unions they were able to hold the line at the top. The inevitable compromise, a b-scale. Newer pilots, doing the same job, but for much less pay under much crummier work rules.
4. If Muadib had been running the union maybe theywould have gone with more of b-scale rung that pilots had to pass through to get a chance at 15-30 years in the bigs.
5. What actually happened was more like a d-scale. And, to hold on to those excellent jobs during a 50 year decline in American working standards, the unions had to allow scope to expand dramatically at every major recession.
6. The result, too many pilots spending too long at the d-scale. The declining standard of living also made flight training much more expensive. Ergo, no more slave labor and an end (or at least radical evolution) of the regional airline industry as it has existed for the last 20-30 years.

In the US government is largely not in the business of organizing the training of people for careers. Also business does not organize nor carry the cost of training for most professions. Labour laws allow relatively easy removal of people and also facilitate easy transfer between businesses. The reason that people had loyalty to a single employer was because of an incentive that rewarded long term commitment. These days the laws and prevailing corporate culture has broken these ties. For this reason business do not want to pay to train people who can then be easily poached. So it has been left up to the individual to decide and cover the cost. Unsurprisingly these long term trends have resulted in the problem they now have.

As both government and business are not actually willing to do anything about this it will not go away. Best way to do this? have a industry sponsored training scheme that cover the cost with everyone chipping in, will that happen no. Because there will always be those who would not contribute but happily take advantage of such a schemes output, which is where government can come along and offer some sticks in regards to access to government controlled aspects of air travel like public airports. Now will this happen, absolutely not. It is not seen as governments job to facilitate the supply of trained people to private industry. So we will keep bemoaning that there is no one available and do nothing to actually make it happen.

Exeiowa wrote:

In the US government is largely not in the business of organizing the training of people for careers. Also business does not organize nor carry the cost of training for most professions. Labour laws allow relatively easy removal of people and also facilitate easy transfer between businesses. The reason that people had loyalty to a single employer was because of an incentive that rewarded long term commitment. These days the laws and prevailing corporate culture has broken these ties. For this reason business do not want to pay to train people who can then be easily poached. So it has been left up to the individual to decide and cover the cost. Unsurprisingly these long term trends have resulted in the problem they now have.

As both government and business are not actually willing to do anything about this it will not go away. Best way to do this? have a industry sponsored training scheme that cover the cost with everyone chipping in, will that happen no. Because there will always be those who would not contribute but happily take advantage of such a schemes output, which is where government can come along and offer some sticks in regards to access to government controlled aspects of air travel like public airports. Now will this happen, absolutely not. It is not seen as governments job to facilitate the supply of trained people to private industry. So we will keep bemoaning that there is no one available and do nothing to actually make it happen.

The government doesn’t train people for careers? Have you heard of public universities which make up the vast majority of education hours, or the publicly run vocational schools where I got my A&P from?

The government is most definitely in the career development business, it is probably the largest provider of career development combined.

jetmatt777 wrote:

The government doesn’t train people for careers? Have you heard of public universities which make up the vast majority of education hours, or the publicly run vocational schools where I got my A&P from?

The government is most definitely in the career development business, it is probably the largest provider of career development combined.

I suppose you are right, but one of my criticisms of the US way of doing education is it does not try to match supply with demand in any meaningful way.

Given the current situation there is no entity to talk to and say supply is not matching demand, please increase production of pilots and mechanics. It is all distributed across countless jurisdictions, with each deciding their production based on local considerations. I get it, we prefer local decision making to central decision making, but it often means there is a huge lag between supply and demand.

It seems crazy to me that we give eighteen year olds the means to get themselves in debt of tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money with no checks and balances to see that they'll have a chance to ever pay that money back, but that's a more general issue.

1. Todays “rj” is yesterday’s dc9 and Fokker 100. Who flew those, and on what scale?
2. Most of todays cost in small aircraft is insurance liability. This country is stupid with lawyers. And everyone wants free money.
3. Getting 1500 hours is only a problem if the small company you are trying to get a job with requires 1500 hours to sit right seat in a citation due to “insurance”(lawyers).
4. I await the mpl in the USA

Revelation wrote:

It seems crazy to me that we give eighteen year olds the means to get themselves in debt of tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money with no checks and balances to see that they'll have a chance to ever pay that money back, but that's a more general issue.

[/quote]

Student loans can’t be expunged. By the time they are paid back the actual money borrowed is paid 2-3 times. Indentured servitude. Trade schools are highly underrated and universities are way over rated.

jetmatt777 wrote:

Exeiowa wrote:

In the US government is largely not in the business of organizing the training of people for careers. Also business does not organize nor carry the cost of training for most professions. Labour laws allow relatively easy removal of people and also facilitate easy transfer between businesses. The reason that people had loyalty to a single employer was because of an incentive that rewarded long term commitment. These days the laws and prevailing corporate culture has broken these ties. For this reason business do not want to pay to train people who can then be easily poached. So it has been left up to the individual to decide and cover the cost. Unsurprisingly these long term trends have resulted in the problem they now have.

As both government and business are not actually willing to do anything about this it will not go away. Best way to do this? have a industry sponsored training scheme that cover the cost with everyone chipping in, will that happen no. Because there will always be those who would not contribute but happily take advantage of such a schemes output, which is where government can come along and offer some sticks in regards to access to government controlled aspects of air travel like public airports. Now will this happen, absolutely not. It is not seen as governments job to facilitate the supply of trained people to private industry. So we will keep bemoaning that there is no one available and do nothing to actually make it happen.

The government doesn’t train people for careers? Have you heard of public universities which make up the vast majority of education hours, or the publicly run vocational schools where I got my A&P from?

The government is most definitely in the career development business, it is probably the largest provider of career development combined.

Universities teach general principles of subjects they do not provide for the most part technical training of how to use that knowledge in a work environment outside the medical profession and a couple others like teaching. These institutions are administered by sates rather than the federal government and the cost is borne by the individual attending.

In my area of work chemistry, by contrast Germany has education/industry partnerships with students going to class and working at a company to learn how to employ their knowledge in a practical way. After training there is normally an option to extend employment and the learning is at little cost to the person.

In America what I get (and this was me in the UK too) is a person who has book knowledge, spent a little bit of time in the lab and I have to teach them everything they need to do their job after they are hired. Once they become proficient at about 3 years they leave to cash in on their experience and I start over. Unlike my German colleagues within my company who have a steady stream of people who work their way up.

The difference is that Germany sees value in facilitating having people with the necessary skills and the US takes a more lets see what happens approach. If airlines would like a more predictable influx they need to partner up is all I am saying, or they can treat it like a free market with a long lag time built in.

LCDFlight wrote:

Longhornmaniac wrote:

FlyingElvii wrote:

Let's be clear about this....
There is not a pilot shortage.
There is, however, a shortage of pilots willing to fly regionals for what United wants to pay them, when so many other opportunities are available. It is not 2008, anymore.

This was true 5 years ago. It's not true anymore. There is a pilot shortage, period. The numbers of retirements (accelerated by COVID) have put an enormous strain on the airline industry. The choke point is at the pilot training level, not at the regional level. Pay is not what it was 15 years ago. It's a perfectly livable wage. Six figures by year three as a regional pilot is attainable.

The issue is the lead time it takes to take a student to a qualified line pilot. This is precisely why you saw a litany of programs, pre-COVID, designed by mainline carriers to provide people an avenue to get their ratings/time and "flow" straight into a partner regional.

To put this into perspective, the majors (non-regional airlines) want to hire about 9,000 pilots next year. Using past percentage breakdowns as informative, we can expect somewhere between 5-6000 pilots to come from the regionals, with the remainder from the military/corporate worlds. There are only 18,000 regional pilots in the United States, so we're talking about a single year gobbling up roughly a third of all regional pilots. That is simply not sustainable. The numbers don't add up.

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

Wrong. The “1500 hour rule” is a misnomer. It’s more of an ATP rule, as in an airline pilot has to hold an ATP certificate.

It absolutely WAS brought about for safety concerns with the root cause being regional airline training departments spitting out pilot mill grads who had no business being in the cockpit. At the time it was pushed for and passed, I knew of one regional airline was not allowed to fail anyone. I knew new hires that had more sim time upon passing their check ride than I had after going through initial and four recurrents. I also saw those same guys spending a month or more on IOE before being released.

You can place that blame solely on managements that needed bodies in the seats and refused to wash out those that weren’t ready.

For some stupid reason we viewed, and some continue to view the cockpit of a turboprop or RJ as a training environment while an Airbus or Boeing is not. They are the same. Period…..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The US Federal Government spends millions training Merchant Marine officers. There is a free Academy - Kings Point in New York. Graduates have 3rd Mate or 3rd Assistant Engineer USCG license. In addition to the Kings Point, there are state marine academies in Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Texas, California and Michigan. The US Government provides them a training vessel. They are ex-mine sweepers or surplus vessels currently but the US is building a new generation of ships for these schools. The government pays for all the boats operating costs including fuel and dry docking. Students still have to pay normal tuition of around $20,000 per year to get their Bachelor degrees. Not all the graduates go on to sail - many used to go work in power plants work as inspectors for the American Bureau of Shipping, work in a shipyard, or get employed in a shore-side support position for a shipping company.

Shipping companies commit to taking cadets from these academies and give them real world training at sea or in the office. The cadets are paid (not much) when they are working similar to a co-op position. We would then choose amongst those cadets who worked best for us and then offer them a job upon graduation and passing their USCG exams.. Entry level 3rd Mates and 3rd A/E make around $100k working 180 days a year. Some make way more, some less. They are around 22 to 23 years old if they started right out of high school. All the Engineers are able to find employment, not so for the Mates who drive the boats.

I should add the justification for these schools is mainly for the defense of the country. The academies were set up to provide replacements for officers killed during WWII by enemy action mainly by submarine and air attacks. They are currently the main source of officers for what's left of our merchant marine in case of war.

DashTrash wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Longhornmaniac wrote:

This was true 5 years ago. It's not true anymore. There is a pilot shortage, period. The numbers of retirements (accelerated by COVID) have put an enormous strain on the airline industry. The choke point is at the pilot training level, not at the regional level. Pay is not what it was 15 years ago. It's a perfectly livable wage. Six figures by year three as a regional pilot is attainable.

The issue is the lead time it takes to take a student to a qualified line pilot. This is precisely why you saw a litany of programs, pre-COVID, designed by mainline carriers to provide people an avenue to get their ratings/time and "flow" straight into a partner regional.

To put this into perspective, the majors (non-regional airlines) want to hire about 9,000 pilots next year. Using past percentage breakdowns as informative, we can expect somewhere between 5-6000 pilots to come from the regionals, with the remainder from the military/corporate worlds. There are only 18,000 regional pilots in the United States, so we're talking about a single year gobbling up roughly a third of all regional pilots. That is simply not sustainable. The numbers don't add up.

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

Wrong. The “1500 hour rule” is a misnomer. It’s more of an ATP rule, as in an airline pilot has to hold an ATP certificate.

It absolutely WAS brought about for safety concerns with the root cause being regional airline training departments spitting out pilot mill grads who had no business being in the cockpit. At the time it was pushed for and passed, I knew of one regional airline was not allowed to fail anyone. I knew new hires that had more sim time upon passing their check ride than I had after going through initial and four recurrents. I also saw those same guys spending a month or more on IOE before being released.

You can place that blame solely on managements that needed bodies in the seats and refused to wash out those that weren’t ready.

For some stupid reason we viewed, and some continue to view the cockpit of a turboprop or RJ as a training environment while an Airbus or Boeing is not. They are the same. Period…..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I want to give you credit for your expertise. Still, RJ and prop airline operations in the US had an enviable safety record both before and after the 1500 hour requirement, rule, ATP qualification. You did not explain how that rule prevents poor candidates from getting in. I am all for bad pilots getting washed out. Almost everybody agrees
With that. Nobody wants pilots like Colgan 3407 pair. But the hour requirement did not pertain. Maybe more pilots need to go in the front door and out the reject door.

Not being allowed to fail anyone is unconscionable. It’s madness. No one should want that.

DashTrash wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Longhornmaniac wrote:

This was true 5 years ago. It's not true anymore. There is a pilot shortage, period. The numbers of retirements (accelerated by COVID) have put an enormous strain on the airline industry. The choke point is at the pilot training level, not at the regional level. Pay is not what it was 15 years ago. It's a perfectly livable wage. Six figures by year three as a regional pilot is attainable.

The issue is the lead time it takes to take a student to a qualified line pilot. This is precisely why you saw a litany of programs, pre-COVID, designed by mainline carriers to provide people an avenue to get their ratings/time and "flow" straight into a partner regional.

To put this into perspective, the majors (non-regional airlines) want to hire about 9,000 pilots next year. Using past percentage breakdowns as informative, we can expect somewhere between 5-6000 pilots to come from the regionals, with the remainder from the military/corporate worlds. There are only 18,000 regional pilots in the United States, so we're talking about a single year gobbling up roughly a third of all regional pilots. That is simply not sustainable. The numbers don't add up.

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

Wrong. The “1500 hour rule” is a misnomer. It’s more of an ATP rule, as in an airline pilot has to hold an ATP certificate.

It absolutely WAS brought about for safety concerns with the root cause being regional airline training departments spitting out pilot mill grads who had no business being in the cockpit. At the time it was pushed for and passed, I knew of one regional airline was not allowed to fail anyone. I knew new hires that had more sim time upon passing their check ride than I had after going through initial and four recurrents. I also saw those same guys spending a month or more on IOE before being released.

You can place that blame solely on managements that needed bodies in the seats and refused to wash out those that weren’t ready.

For some stupid reason we viewed, and some continue to view the cockpit of a turboprop or RJ as a training environment while an Airbus or Boeing is not. They are the same. Period…..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aviation legend Bill Britt once said that the regional airlines are like the baseball minor leagues. It is the place to find out if you have the skills, temperament, and the discipline to make it in the majors.

This was when regionals were still regionals, of course, not low cost subcontractors flying mainline sized equipment.

LCDFlight wrote:

DashTrash wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

The pilot shortage is being created by the 1500 rule, which was an arbitrary rule that was enacted with the goal of creating a pilot shortage and raising existing pilot compensation. None of this is a big mystery. A bunch of pilots are probably flying in circles, polluting the air and going into debt, to get to 1500 and get over the wall. We knew this when that reg was designed. That was the whole point. To wring the neck of the golden goose. Nothing to do with safety.

Wrong. The “1500 hour rule” is a misnomer. It’s more of an ATP rule, as in an airline pilot has to hold an ATP certificate.

It absolutely WAS brought about for safety concerns with the root cause being regional airline training departments spitting out pilot mill grads who had no business being in the cockpit. At the time it was pushed for and passed, I knew of one regional airline was not allowed to fail anyone. I knew new hires that had more sim time upon passing their check ride than I had after going through initial and four recurrents. I also saw those same guys spending a month or more on IOE before being released.

You can place that blame solely on managements that needed bodies in the seats and refused to wash out those that weren’t ready.

For some stupid reason we viewed, and some continue to view the cockpit of a turboprop or RJ as a training environment while an Airbus or Boeing is not. They are the same. Period…..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I want to give you credit for your expertise. Still, RJ and prop airline operations in the US had an enviable safety record both before and after the 1500 hour requirement, rule, ATP qualification. You did not explain how that rule prevents poor candidates from getting in. I am all for bad pilots getting washed out. Almost everybody agrees
With that. Nobody wants pilots like Colgan 3407 pair. But the hour requirement did not pertain. Maybe more pilots need to go in the front door and out the reject door.

Not being allowed to fail anyone is unconscionable. It’s madness. No one should want that.

There is a fundamental difference between "safety" and "not crashing." I can speak from personal experience that 1500 hour FOs still mess up...a LOT. That number was far, far higher with 250 hour FOs. As a 250 hour commercial pilot, I had neither the knowledge nor the experience to do much of anything, much less be a contributing member of a crew on a jet aircraft. The training was designed (and still is, in many respects) to get anyone to a type rating, but that is a minimum qualification. These planes are not designed to be single-pilot aircraft, and it's a testament to the inherent safety of the entire process that there weren't more issues. It's not an endorsement of a 250 hour pilot, though. An average pilot with that little experience should not be in the cockpit during an emergency situation. They simply don't possess the good instincts that come with experience, regardless of what training was provided.

That said, I think there is probably some happy medium between 250 hours and 1000 hours. I know I didn't learn a whole lot my last 500 hours instructing, but there's something to be said for the consistency and repetitive nature of that experience.

Exeiowa wrote:

Universities teach general principles of subjects they do not provide for the most part technical training of how to use that knowledge in a work environment outside the medical profession and a couple others like teaching. These institutions are administered by sates rather than the federal government and the cost is borne by the individual attending.

In my area of work chemistry, by contrast Germany has education/industry partnerships with students going to class and working at a company to learn how to employ their knowledge in a practical way. After training there is normally an option to extend employment and the learning is at little cost to the person.

In America what I get (and this was me in the UK too) is a person who has book knowledge, spent a little bit of time in the lab and I have to teach them everything they need to do their job after they are hired. Once they become proficient at about 3 years they leave to cash in on their experience and I start over. Unlike my German colleagues within my company who have a steady stream of people who work their way up.

The difference is that Germany sees value in facilitating having people with the necessary skills and the US takes a more lets see what happens approach. If airlines would like a more predictable influx they need to partner up is all I am saying, or they can treat it like a free market with a long lag time built in.

It works both ways: in Germany employees are more loyal to companies, but companies are also more loyal to workers.

Revelation wrote:

It works both ways: in Germany employees are more loyal to companies, but companies are also more loyal to workers.

That's the bit we have certainly lost here. if any of you have been in a shop recently you will probably notice how little the current crop of employees know about what things are and where they are at, simply because these stores had people who had been there for years who all got tossed on their ear the first sign of trouble. That core of knowledge was never respected at the time or had to be valued, but now its gone you definitely notice. I am not blaming the new staff they are doing their best. Now apply the same to planes and it going to take a while to work itself out of the system

There is indeed a pilot shortage, but it was created by the airlines. I know one person who flew ExpressJet with the promise of flying mainline UA. He saw the writing on the wall as things started going south and decided to join the police academy to be a chopper pilot for them. There are others who have made career changes like that as well too just because it wasn't worth the drama. Don't be surprised if you see non-US citizen pilots take over the regional jet market.

bennett123 wrote:

If this was a looming shortage for the last decade, what steps have the US3 made in the last decade?.

Exactly, none. Reap the buzzsaw for spending $7 billion in executive compensation and enriching shareholders, not employees or labor. Delta and the “Big 3” expect the US Government (aka……taxpayers) to fix their mistakes. Remember in the USA, we privatize the gains, but SOCIALIZE the losses.