A question regarding the state of the industry?
12-10-2008, 08:05 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Captain G1 & EMB120
Posts: 84
A question regarding the state of the industry?
I was thinking today about how bad things are across the industry and was wondering about different ways you may recommend to help get things moving in the right direction. It led me to question the hiring of lower time pilots and the insuring of those pilots.
What are your thoughts on firms strictly adhering to higher standards for employing pilots?
Do you think all pilots who are hired into an airline should posses an ATP?
Do you think all pilots hired into 135 operations should posses 135 minimums?
If the above were the norm, it would force pilots to become instructors, build time and experience. The majority of pilots in this scenario would be forced to obtain their CFI/CFII/and MEI.
Do you think this would help drive salaries back up?
According to the NTSB across the last 10 years, 50% of 121 operation accidents were due to pilot error. 97% of 135 operation accidents was attributed to pilot error. In GA pilot error is sited as 75% of the accidents.
Would it lead to safer operations?
Would it lead to lower insurance rates for companies?
How would this be regulated? FAA? Employers? Insurance companies?
I know there are many on this board that were hired to fly 135 below minimums and 121 straight out of a commercial multi ticket and others who built their time and moved on over 1000 or 1500 hours after instructing. I welcome all opinions.
It's a rainy day and I am off work so I just wanted to talk some shop.
What are your thoughts on firms strictly adhering to higher standards for employing pilots?
Do you think all pilots who are hired into an airline should posses an ATP?
Do you think all pilots hired into 135 operations should posses 135 minimums?
If the above were the norm, it would force pilots to become instructors, build time and experience. The majority of pilots in this scenario would be forced to obtain their CFI/CFII/and MEI.
Do you think this would help drive salaries back up?
According to the NTSB across the last 10 years, 50% of 121 operation accidents were due to pilot error. 97% of 135 operation accidents was attributed to pilot error. In GA pilot error is sited as 75% of the accidents.
Would it lead to safer operations?
Would it lead to lower insurance rates for companies?
How would this be regulated? FAA? Employers? Insurance companies?
I know there are many on this board that were hired to fly 135 below minimums and 121 straight out of a commercial multi ticket and others who built their time and moved on over 1000 or 1500 hours after instructing. I welcome all opinions.
It's a rainy day and I am off work so I just wanted to talk some shop.
12-10-2008, 10:11 AM
#2
Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Tiki bar
Posts: 2,634
Do you think all pilots who are hired into an airline should posses an ATP?
No, when you upgrade, your type ride will also be your ATP ride. I believe all should have the ATP written done prior to getting hired though.
Do you think all pilots hired into 135 operations should posses 135 minimums?
Yes, for 135 PIC: 500TT for VFR and 1,200TT for IFR ops... it's the law.
If the above were the norm, it would force pilots to become instructors, build time and experience. The majority of pilots in this scenario would be forced to obtain their CFI/CFII/and MEI.
Do you think this would help drive salaries back up? No
According to the NTSB across the last 10 years, 50% of 121 operation accidents were due to pilot error. 97% of 135 operation accidents was attributed to pilot error. In GA pilot error is sited as 75% of the accidents.
Would it lead to safer operations? No, I dont believe any correlation has ever been made in accident statistics to suggest that higher time pilots are safer than lower time pilots in Part 121 ops.
Would it lead to lower insurance rates for companies? Perhaps, but doubtful
How would this be regulated? FAA? Employers? Insurance companies? All three would... FAA mins, higher insurance mins and then company mins based on the hiring market.
I know there are many on this board that were hired to fly 135 below minimums and 121 straight out of a commercial multi ticket and others who built their time and moved on over 1000 or 1500 hours after instructing. I welcome all opinions. It's a rainy day and I am off work so I just wanted to talk some shop.
No, when you upgrade, your type ride will also be your ATP ride. I believe all should have the ATP written done prior to getting hired though.
Do you think all pilots hired into 135 operations should posses 135 minimums?
Yes, for 135 PIC: 500TT for VFR and 1,200TT for IFR ops... it's the law.
If the above were the norm, it would force pilots to become instructors, build time and experience. The majority of pilots in this scenario would be forced to obtain their CFI/CFII/and MEI.
Do you think this would help drive salaries back up? No
According to the NTSB across the last 10 years, 50% of 121 operation accidents were due to pilot error. 97% of 135 operation accidents was attributed to pilot error. In GA pilot error is sited as 75% of the accidents.
Would it lead to safer operations? No, I dont believe any correlation has ever been made in accident statistics to suggest that higher time pilots are safer than lower time pilots in Part 121 ops.
Would it lead to lower insurance rates for companies? Perhaps, but doubtful
How would this be regulated? FAA? Employers? Insurance companies? All three would... FAA mins, higher insurance mins and then company mins based on the hiring market.
I know there are many on this board that were hired to fly 135 below minimums and 121 straight out of a commercial multi ticket and others who built their time and moved on over 1000 or 1500 hours after instructing. I welcome all opinions.
It's a rainy day and I am off work so I just wanted to talk some shop.Management will always want to get labor as cheap as they can, if the FAA comes out and says that no pilot can go 121 until 1,500TT, the salaries wont change.... I doubt insurance will be less
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
