PontiusPilot

I agree. The regional industry could look entirely different 5-10 years from now. This is a small, but forward-looking program.

United isn't about to be flooded with CFI hires anytime soon.

Deafguppy

Had an interesting conversation with our director of training a while back. He was very focused on how great MPL was going to be for us.

Think this CFI deal is a toe in the water?

Grumble

Only as long as there is a reliable methode to flush those that can’t hack it.

MasterOfPuppets

I agree with this.....maybe extend probation and jeopardy checking events.

oldmako

There is a world of difference between passing the new hire check and flying the line with the level of knowledge, competency, and experience that our passengers have every reason to expect.

I was a CFII with about 1800 TT when hired at my first regional. I was probably behind the turboshaker on all but bluebird days. Sure, I could fly a decent ILS but there's more to competency than that isn't there? Aren't we supposed to be out in front of the plane? I then got an early upgrade and got to spend time with a mess of low time new hires. Many of them were fantastic. Some, not so much.

Companies can come up with all kinds of half-baked ideas and that doesn't mean that we have to support them. If you're going in for brain surgery, who do you want wrenching on your cranium? The new graduate who unwrapped his tools this morning or the guy/gal who has already opened up a whole mess of skulls and successfully buttoned them back up?

While old experienced pilots have been known to do some really stupid stuff, they have likely learned from their missteps. I know who I'd rather share a cockpit with, the one who is unlikely to do something stupid again, because he's already done it, or seen it done.

There are lives in the back. They have every right to expect the highest level of competency and experience that MU can hire. I'm with Floyd.

CAirBear

Yup... this is unreal. I update my App weekly, have met face to face with recruiters at various job fairs and someone literally just went from a light twin piston to sitting in Indoc at UA with 1500 hours. Gtfo. Wow. Just incredible.

MasterOfPuppets

I don’t disagree with anything you said. I would always like to have experience sitting next to me. I don’t disagree with Floyd either.

How can we say that a CFI is good enough to sit next to a brand new CA in a jet at a regional, But not good enough to sit next to one of us? I spent 4 years as a CFI and 2 Years 135 before my first 121 gig. My first leg was PHL - DCA I was wreck hanging out in the rear lav.......by the time IOE was over I was sitting in the front of the jet. I can’t imagine coming straight from CFIing without the 135 stop.....

I understand the experience argument and the best of the best but where’s the line? When does one have enough experience to be a mainline pilot? What about an Xjet pilot that spent 10 years as an FO, not by choice. Is that enough experience?

I can only think of 2 regional accidents Colgan and ComAir. Colgan was as much the CAs fault as the FOs and the ComAir guys were extremely experienced and made a mistake we all could have made with that runway configuration in Lexington. Yet for over a decade we hired 250hr commercial pilots straight into jets to fly with 1500 hr CAs and planes aren’t crashing. I agree with Grumble we need a way to weed out the bad eggs, but to label all these pilots as bad eggs is unfair. I agree that experience matters but the only way to build experience is to experience things......

oldmako

Perhaps, just perhaps you need to read a bit more history from the NTSB.

MasterOfPuppets

I was just talking fatalities. If you lump in everything the majors track record with running off runways, landing on taxiways, landing at wrong airports etc...isn’t any better.

He’ll DL totaled an MD80 last year at LGA and SW totaled a 737 at LGA 3 years ago. CAL totaled a 737 in DEN 7-8 years ago. AA totaled a 737 in Jamaica 10 years ago......these were all experienced pilots

John Carr

Those are valid points.

But there's 2 things at issue here;

1) At the regional level, sadly, that's just the way it is. Correct, there's NO DIFFERENCE between a 50 seat plane and a 150+ seats as far as getting from point A to point B, 3-4-5-6-7 times a day up to 16 hours pre 117 or the max FDP post 117. But the hiring of that lower time/less experienced pilot is out of necessity.

2) The point myself, and many others are having a problem with it is this;

We DON'T need to be hiring people with this level of (in)experience. Whether it's in an airplane or life in general. There's TOO MANY experienced pilots getting passed over via no Hogan, a Hogan unsat, or an F2F unsat. Doesn't matter if it's the RJ/ACMI/LCC/ULCC/Frac-corp/mil guy that's been grunting it out, the CPP pass overs that have damn near 20 years experience and are great pilots and people outside the airline, whatever.

For RIGHT HERE and RIGHT NOW, this ISN'T what we should be hiring. Sadly, there's been more than a few off the street that fall into that category as well. Doesn't matter if it's simply not having competitive experience, multiple screwups that have been forgiven by UAL HR, what have you.

This industry is long, long from being in this "pilot shortage" thing at the legacy/"big six" level that a "solution" has to be implemented.


Right, as well as took one off the runway in either DTW or MSP. Landed on a taxiway as well as had a couple guys shut off the engines on a 717 at TOD on a profile descent. Ha multiple foreign air force fighter intercepts for weak radio procedures.

As well landed on a taxi way, almost ran a 76 outta gas in the pacific. L-UAL almost smashed a 744 into the hills around SFO as well as shut the engines off on a 76 coming out of Hawaii[/quote]

As well as stalled an Airbus going into holding. Crashed a 75 in Colombia, etc.

And...............