Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
1500hr / ATP for Part 121 rule passes >

1500hr / ATP for Part 121 rule passes

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

1500hr / ATP for Part 121 rule passes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-24-2010, 04:45 AM
  #121  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Reclined
Posts: 2,168
Default

Originally Posted by Corndawg88
A. I'm buying that Cessna first thing in the morning

B. Zoomie, I do agree 250 hour baby pilots should not be put in the right seat of regional jets to "build time/experience". However, you didn't provide a single valid arguement with regards to inexperience being the cause of Buffalo....
how about the excellent example of aeronautical decision making of raising the flaps and dumping what little lift was left.... how about not being experienced and assertive enough to recognize when you were flying with a "weak" other pilot, and then failing to say "hey, your airspeed is low" BEFORE the stall event occurrs.... that is what a PILOT monitoring does.
Mason32 is offline  
Old 07-24-2010, 04:50 AM
  #122  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Reclined
Posts: 2,168
Default

Originally Posted by gptjjbmj
I'm probably the only pilot that disagrees with most of the posts and this rule. I don't agree that numbers in the log book equates to saftey,
Apparently you have never read a Nall report.... they are free from AOPA.org Go read one.


hours do translate into safety levels.... even the aviation insurance industry is aware of it, which is why low time pilots pay much more for their insurance. Even plugging around the pattern in a C152, you will make more decisions than you ever will in the right seat of an RJ.... and when in the C152 bopping around the pattern if something does go amiss, or if the weather does turn foul.... when you look to your left all you will see is your own reflection... no Captain to make the decision for you.
Mason32 is offline  
Old 07-24-2010, 09:31 AM
  #123  
Gets Weekends Off
 
jiminmem's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: A320 B Side
Posts: 222
Default

Originally Posted by Mason32
Apparently you have never read a Nall report.... they are free from AOPA.org Go read one.


hours do translate into safety levels.... even the aviation insurance industry is aware of it, which is why low time pilots pay much more for their insurance. Even plugging around the pattern in a C152, you will make more decisions than you ever will in the right seat of an RJ.... and when in the C152 bopping around the pattern if something does go amiss, or if the weather does turn foul.... when you look to your left all you will see is your own reflection... no Captain to make the decision for you.

Exactly. If hour levels have no relationship to decision making and safety, why do insurance companies mandate experience levels for high performance aircraft.

Try to get insurance in a Baron with 300 hours, you'll hear the agent laughing at you a 100 miles away.
jiminmem is offline  
Old 07-24-2010, 11:44 AM
  #124  
RESERVE
 
gptjjbmj's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: 767/757 CA
Posts: 57
Default

Originally Posted by Mason32
Apparently you have never read a Nall report.... they are free from AOPA.org Go read one.


hours do translate into safety levels.... even the aviation insurance industry is aware of it, which is why low time pilots pay much more for their insurance. Even plugging around the pattern in a C152, you will make more decisions than you ever will in the right seat of an RJ.... and when in the C152 bopping around the pattern if something does go amiss, or if the weather does turn foul.... when you look to your left all you will see is your own reflection... no Captain to make the decision for you.
Actually the Army did a statistical study and found that there were cycles of experience: if my memory serves me correctly there was and increased danger between 500-750 hours then again at 1500hrs and then again at 3000hrs. Not an oppinion but a scientific study.
gptjjbmj is offline  
Old 07-24-2010, 11:56 AM
  #125  
RESERVE
 
gptjjbmj's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: 767/757 CA
Posts: 57
Default

Originally Posted by jiminmem
Exactly. If hour levels have no relationship to decision making and safety, why do insurance companies mandate experience levels for high performance aircraft.

Try to get insurance in a Baron with 300 hours, you'll hear the agent laughing at you a 100 miles away.
I have 1000 hours of turbine helicopter time from the Army there are two Regionals that I could not even submit an application to because they would not recognize my flight time. I flew Blackhawks a twin turbine helicopter that would require a type rating civilian side, yet insurance companys prefer I flew a Cessna 150, that they would count.
gptjjbmj is offline  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:28 AM
  #126  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 747 FO
Posts: 937
Default

Originally Posted by 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'.
I disagree. Instructing has definitely prepared me for 135/121 by developing my decision making and CRM perspective as well as adding diversity of flying in my background. No to mention, being and instructor really does develop basic stick and rudder skills through not only having to teach, but to let the student take their mistakes as far as possible to maximize learning without endangering the aircraft. Besides, the actual flying in the 135/121 world is the easy part. Almost anyone can be taught to fly a turboprop at 250 to the marker or fly approaches in a jet....it's just not that hard of a transition. The real challenges are ultimately in decision making.

I believe that someone with a CFI background has more to add to 135/121 flying than someone without.

Too many people dismiss instructing as flying umpteen hundred hours in the practice area or the pattern. There is much more to it.

BTW; My background includes instructing as well as flying checks
Zapata is offline  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:47 AM
  #127  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 747 FO
Posts: 937
Default

How is the safety level raised when any Joe Blow can buy block time to get up to the minimums? Flying when one wants to at their leisure is much different that flying when one "has to".
Zapata is offline  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:25 AM
  #128  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: 737 Left
Posts: 1,827
Default

You never HAVE to fly. Takeoffs are ALWAYS optional (Remember, you are the PIC who has to make a DECISION every time you take off, regardless of the rules you fly under). Landings are ALWAYS mandatory!

Fly Safe!
AtlCSIP is offline  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:34 AM
  #129  
Gets Weekends Off
 
LeeFXDWG's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
Default

Originally Posted by gptjjbmj
Actually the Army did a statistical study and found that there were cycles of experience: if my memory serves me correctly there was and increased danger between 500-750 hours then again at 1500hrs and then again at 3000hrs. Not an oppinion but a scientific study.
Air Force saw similar results many years ago at about the same milestones. Particularly with instructors and their comfort envelope.

Usually, you re-modified your sight picture after letting a student go a bit too far but not far enough you couldn't recover.

It all comes down to becoming complacent and too comfortable. Both can step up an bite you when you least expect it.

Frats,
Lee
LeeFXDWG is offline  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:40 AM
  #130  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: 747 FO
Posts: 937
Default

Originally Posted by AtlCSIP
You never HAVE to fly. Takeoffs are ALWAYS optional (Remember, you are the PIC who has to make a DECISION every time you take off, regardless of the rules you fly under). Landings are ALWAYS mandatory!

Fly Safe!
Well, of course, that goes without saying. That is why I put "has to" in quotes. In addition to that, I thought the context of my post would suffice. To further clarify; When one buys block time, they can fly whenever they want to. When one has a job, they "have to" fly, even when it is an inconvenience. Of course they can delay or cancel a trip based safety(which wasn't in the context of the post), but not for the same reasons that a block time buyer can....i.e., it's a little bumpy, or my butt hurts, etc.

Yes, there is a difference.
Zapata is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
av8rrob
United
13
09-02-2010 06:18 PM
jsled
Union Talk
2
05-18-2010 08:57 AM
BoilerUP
Regional
102
02-26-2010 02:31 PM
CaliPilot
Aviation Law
1
09-19-2009 11:33 AM
whoareyou310
Flight Schools and Training
7
09-23-2008 10:28 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices