iPilot

Exactly! I think the biggest benefit to this is it's going to get pilots into the workforce before going to the airlines. I know by the time I got my ATP I knew a lot more about this business than I did at 300. I think once you get that fresh commercial license and you're chomping at the bit to get going with this career most of us are ready to "do whatever it takes" without considering the consequences. At least after a few years in the business actually working there I think the new pilot will have seen good and bad companies and will not be willing to "whatever it takes" to get into a cockpit as they've already been in one.

So basically, by making it near impossible to just whip through pilot training because you want to fly the shiny jet, I think it will leave this career to those who really want just that, a career. I remember CFI'ing back in 2006 and a lot of the pilots I trained only cared about flying an RJ or large T-prop. My favorite moment was when I was talking about how to save gas by pulling back the prop on the Seminole to a low RPM and the student turned to me and said, "yeah well that's nice but this Seminole is going to be the last piston plane I ever fly." Besides me laughing my arse off for the remainder of the flight, he sure got a surprise after he graduated a year later and couldn't find work doing anything, let alone flying jets.

TXTECHKA

Of course the pilot who would take a job for $19 per hour is probably not as experienced or safe as the pilot who won't work for less than $50. I say probably because there are tons of super experienced pilots willing to work for nothing so they can put food on the table.

The point is as far legal qualifications they could both be hired and an airline won't pay more than someone is willing to work for. It's econmics. As long as there are pilots, no matter their experience level, willing to work for a low rate then there is no motivation for an airline to pay more. Supply=demand, and there is a big supply of discount pilots. Why would an airline pay pilots more when so many are ok with working for less. It's not smart business on their part to pay more as long as applications are coming in. Until pilots, individually and as a whole, quit accepting jobs at low pay rates then those jobs won't pay more.

It is not complicated, now if this bill had also added a minimum wage specifically for pilots then this would maybe be a slightly different story. It would have to be pretty high to matter though

iPilot

The problem I think is that experience gets you nothing in this business. As far as the airlines are concerned all pilots certified by the FAA are legal and safe to fly anything. In theory, if the airlines really truly were short on pilots, you don't think they would put a 300 hour kid in the right seat of a 777? Or a 1500 hour kid in the left seat? There's nothing saying they shouldn't and its been proven in the past that they will do it. As someone said earlier, back in the day United hired zero time guys into the 727.

So being a 10,000 hour guy is great but if you aren't willing to work for less, they'll just get the 2,000 hour guy to do it. All that experience got you nowhere. So what we need to do is somehow make experience count and I think this ATP rule is a good first step.

DashDriverYV

Any thoughts on if this rule will affect international inbounds with low time guys at the helm?

I personally think this rule is a little excessive. As stated before, some guys are great at 250 and others will never get it.

Let the business regulate it's self. Just remove the barriers of liability and lawsuits for wrongful death. After the Colgan crash, if Continental could be sued to the point of extinction, other mainline carriers would take direct control of pilot recruitment and training. No insurance company would insure you if you have a spotty record. That is where the change need to come from.
Remember, you only need a private multi with the complex and high performance to fly a B200. What does that take? 60 hours? You would never touch one because of the insurance. That same mentality needs to fins its way into the airline world.

As for the industry going down the drain. Deregulation was not the cause. Partial deregulation is. Airline management is now able to slash and burn benefits, but we need to go to mediation before we can strike. End the RLA and let the Unions get what they can and it will all come out in the wash. A true free market with no Govt. control on who does what work when, that will make an accurate pay. Not depressed or over inflated. Just what we are willing to fly.

DashTrash

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm simply stating that flight instructing does not really prepare you for flying in the 121 or 135 world. The simple fact is that when you're instructing, you are really not "flying" the airplane. As for exceeding the limitations on the airplane, absolutely not!! I do think that pilots looking to fly commercially should have exposure to icing and the cosiderations that brings to the table. As for the speed, you WILL be doing appraoches at well above 200 KIAS. When I first started, it was expected by ATC, and the CA that you were doing 248 to the marker. Granted that was a turboprop and you could get slowed and remain on profile and be configured by 1000' and on speed by 500'.

ysslah

Dashtrash,
I wasn't trying to pick on you. But I just don't see adequate job options to get aforementioned experiences anymore. Time building jobs besides flight instructing is decreasing because there are less checks to be flown around, etc. I would think it would be more beneficial for safety if the airline training curriculum included more diverse and realistic scenarios a pilot may encounter on the line (ie: doing max forward until practical)

wi_pilot

So just to be clear, this bill does not have any language that exempts pilots from the 1,500 hour rule coming from pilot factories and universities? I thought I remembered reading that these organizations were lobbying hard for an exemption from the ATP requirement.

Grumble

Read "Fate Is the Hunter." Those guys wern't "Mentored." They were more often than not brow beat. Those were also the days before CRM when the FO had no say and to speak when not spoken to could be dangerous.

Sliceback

How about X hours before upgrade? X = 3000 hrs TT?

How about X hours, or months as FO in similar type a/c prior to upgrade? X being 500-1000 hrs/12 months?

Couple of people tried to play the seniority game and go from very senior FE to junior CA. Company said - nope, FO for a year first. Otherwise someone that had never flown(FE isn't a flying job) at the airline would go from 'no stick' to "I'm in command".

j1b3h0

Okay, I'll keep flogging the horse: On one hand we have a large number of big airplane pilots leading the charge for higher barriers to entry. And on the other, less experienced pilots saying "Hey, I did it and turned out OK, so what's the problem?" And, of course, we have the starving CFIs, who, while struggling to pay off their college loans, and get enough time to get hired, cry "Not fair!" to raising the bar.

One question: Doesn't it strike you as weird that the FARs require a great deal MORE experience to fly bank boxes, single-pilot in a light twin than they do to occupy a seat of a freaking AIRLINER? To me, if you can't do the former, you're too inexperienced to do the later!

If you'll pardon my outrageous opinion, the substantive prerequisites for becoming an airline crew member should be previous flying jobs that require daily DECISION making, while working in an airplane: How much payload. How much fuel. Can I go in this weather, with this MEL, and so on. You get to work, at 9PM in Pourin#ss rain, and there's 2000lbs of wet mailbags on the ramp, and the boss says "throw it on your Chieftain and get outa here". After a thousand hours of THAT, then you're ready for an airliner.

Arguably, it takes 1000 hours for an airline crew member to be worth a darn in each seat...there's that much more to learn AFTER you get there. I posit that if one lacks the lessons learned from the prerequisite courses, he won't learn them in an airline cockpit. The boating community calls this type of person a "hazard to navigation".