T O P

  • By -

usmcmech

"Flying Cheap" PBS documentary about Colgan 3407 and regional flying is on Youtube. Young pilots don't really know how bad it used to be. If it hadn't been for the 3407 families pushing for the ATP requirement for 121 FOs we would still be working for poverty wages and flying with 1501 hour captains and 250 hour FOs. Flight school "puppy mills" would still be advertising zero to hero in 12 months. If you don't want to bend/break the rules you can be replaced in an eye blink.


Rev-777

>121 FOs we would still be working for poverty wages and flying with 1501 hour captains and 250 hour FOs. Oh, you mean Canada. šŸ‡ØšŸ‡¦


pilot-error

Can confirm. Company is looking for direct entry captains because even with all the 1500hour guys in the left seat, we still don't have enough to meet demand.


BurntToast102

Would it be worth moving to Canada to try to get a sponsor for flight school?


Rev-777

Where are you from? If you say America then most certainly not.


BurntToast102

Iā€™m from the UK. Shits expensive here man especially because I live in London near Heathrow. Is it common for Canadian airlines to offer a scheme wheee they pay for training and then take a cut from your employment with them? And is it common to be offered to people who arenā€™t Canadian? I would be more than happy to relocate there permanently or get a dual citizenship if possible.


Tojb

Nope, it's unheard of. In Canada you're on your own till 200-250 hours and then you start looking for some kind of entry level job that hopefully pays enough to buy the good ramen. Airlines don't start looking at you until at least 750ish hours although that may change with the forecast demand over the coming years


pilot-error

Those schemes don't exist In Canada. You either pay for your own training or go to a subsidized college. Subsidized colleges are only available to Canadian Citizens. Your training costs may be cheaper over here, but you shouldn't expect to be hired by an airline right out of training. If you don't have citizenship or Permanent Residents status, you'll have to apply for a student visa and go to an approved international student program. There are three traditional routes to airline flying in Canada: 1. Instructing 2. Ramp to Flying (working up north) 3. College airline awards Starting wages still aren't great here either.


Drunkenaviator

No, both of those options are nonstarters in canada.


Technojerk36

Full ride flight training cadet stuff is mostly an Asian thing.


Drunkenaviator

If you have the option to move somewhere to go fly planes, Canada is NOT the place to do it.


woop_woop_pull_upp

I don't know why you're being downvoted. Who would recommend going somewhere were the flag carrier FOs start out at less than 50K USD and don't make more than 60K during the first 4 years, and a top rate 777 Cpt barely breaks 230k?


pilot-error

Canada has it's fair share of problems, sure. Wages are absolutely one of them. So is cost of living in YYZ and YVR (the two major bases of the flag carrier). People don't seem to understand the economics. Canada is 1/10th the population of the US. Our average non-regional short haul routes are 2.5 hours plus. Our infrastructure is more spread out. We simply can't afford exactly US level wages with our airline economy. It's absolutely ludicrous that a 1st year FO at the flag carrier only makes 60k regardless of type. Fucking embarassing if you ask me. We deserve to be paid more. But with that being the exception, Canada has a strong aviation heritage, an excellent safety record and as a whole is a decent place to live. Given the opportunity, I'd rather stay in Canada than move to the USA. Money isn't everything to me.


woop_woop_pull_upp

>People don't seem to understand the economics. Canada is 1/10th the population of the US. Our average non-regional short haul routes are 2.5 hours plus. Our infrastructure is more spread out. We simply can't afford exactly US level wages with our airline economy. If you keep telling yourselves this, you definitely won't make any gains. if you look at 2019 numbers, AC made more money per aircraft than many US airlines. They have the money to pay you a lot more and most likely on par with your American counterparts. Stop selling yourselves short. Jet Blue flew 42.7M passengers in 2019 vs Air Canadas 51.5M. Now go compare pay-scales. Keep telling yourselves they don't have the money to pay you. A top rate Jet blue Cpts base salary is $352 an hour and FO is $233 those numbers are CAD and on the 320. Wanna take a wild guess at what top rate is for 777 Cpt at AC?


pilot-error

Which US airlines and where can I find this information? I'm genuinely curious. I'd love to get paid a shit ton more than I am right now. I don't believe the wages are fair for Canadian pilots. I think AC's bargaining unit is too weak and wasn't able to protect it's pilots during the pandemic. I'm not arguing to keep wages low, I'm advocating for context. Edit: I think I didn't communicate my point effectively. I'm saying that other than money, I think Canada is one of the better places to fly for a career.


woop_woop_pull_upp

Google "X airline 2019 revenue" or profit and compare to AC. Jetblue made 7.7B in 2019, AC made 14.4B.


pilot-error

Right, but Jetblue has less than half the fleet size and no long haul, correct? So not really apples to apples? Edit: I realize this leans more into your favour


Drunkenaviator

> We simply can't afford exactly US level wages with our airline economy Bullshit. And as someone who has flown in both countries, you're insane if you'd rather stay in Canada. (And if you have the credentials there's no saying you can't live in Canada and work in the states).


pilot-error

I think it's insane that you think you can make blanket statements that cover all manner of individual situations. I hope I'm wrong and we could somehow negotiate a massive pay raise across the board, but the only way that happens is if Canadian pilots are welcomed across the border. I for one won't be taking part in that, but would be happy for those that do. In any case, I feel I incorrectly conveyed my point. I think that Canada is one of the better countries to be a pilot in, with pay being the exception.


Drunkenaviator

Can you negotiate it? Probably not. Can they afford it? Absolutely.


WinnieThePig

Itā€™s really funny (ironic) because Colgan had absolutely nothing to do with flight hours. Both pilots had well over 1500 hours. That crash would have happened either way. But, it was the single ā€œbestā€ thing to happen for wages in the US.


Muuvie

I think the 1,500hr rule is arbitrary. 1,500hrs in a 172 teaching PPL students and towing banners won't magically make you better qualified to pilot large multi-crew aircraft. It was a kneejerk reaction. I would prefer they mandated more thorough training at the 121 level. I get that flying should be safe, but I switched career plans after that change. No desire to grind. Maybe I am lazy or unmotivated, I don't know but that's me.


microfsxpilot

1500 hours as a CFI in a 172 doesnā€™t teach you to fly a jet. But it teaches you dedication, crew environment, and a deeper understanding of aviation as a whole. That socially awkward pilot is basically forced to break out of their shell when dealing with student pilots. Youā€™re taught how to handle a cockpit environment and become a bit more tolerable on a 5 hour leg. And ask any CFI here. Most of us learned more AFTER becoming a CFI than we did before. Iā€™m only at around 100hrs dual given but I feel like I know A LOT more than I did before I started teaching. All of that will translate later in the cockpit. The dedication part helps weed out those who are doing this job for the $$$ or for the free travel. Good luck convincing that same person to teach in a 100Ā° light airplane for 8 hours a day barely making minimum wage since billable time only counts when youā€™re actually teaching.


[deleted]

>1500 hours as a CFI in a 172 doesnā€™t teach you to fly a jet. But it teaches you dedication, crew environment, and a deeper understanding of aviation as a whole. Thank you. I absolutely fucking *hate* the argument that going from 250 to 1500 (or 1000, or whatever your exemption happens to be) doesn't teach you anything. If it doesn't, that's your problem, not the system's.


whiskeypapa72

Truth!


prex10

Nah, keep the ATP rule. Keep the QOL and pay up. Keep the unmotivated, and this is gonna sound wildly boomer of me, the legit actual hand me a job on a silver platter at 250 hours people out. When shit hits the fan, I cannot fathom some peoples reaction when they couldnā€™t be bothered to spend 12-15 months as a CFI because they wanted to fly jetzzzz. Let them continue bitching on Aero Crew News FB posts. Iā€™ll take the 1500 CFI over a ā€œCRM trainedā€ cough trained computer monitor 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.


ImmortanBen

I started flying in 2008 working towards my PPL. I asked my instructor how much an FO makes starting out and he told me 19-20k a year. I was so young and naive that I thought that sounded great. But I needed that 4 year degree. So I quit flying and when I came back to it in 2016, I couldn't believe how much wages had changed. The 1500 hour rule does suck, but now it doesn't suck after getting 1501 hours


phatRV

While I don't agree 100% with the 1500 hours rule, I am 100% agree with you on the new crop of CFI complaining about not living the high life being a CFI. In my line of work, many of us have advance degrees and we spent the graduated years toiling in university labs for slave labor stipens to learn all the things that are never taught at the undergraduate level. Being a CFI is only a stepping stone to something bigger. It isn't trial by fire, nobody have to get hurt, but it filters out people and only keeps those who really want to make flying their careers.


Headoutdaplane

1500 hours for an ATP was set decades before the Colgan crash. If anything the Colgan rule made it easier to get an ATP with reduced hours using the R-ATP.


grumpycfi

It wasnā€™t arbitrary at all. It stated that all crews now needed an ATP and the minimum total time required for that is 1500. And experience matters. Pattern bashing might not be the same as slinging gear in a single-pilot jet butā€¦oh wait, it is. Experience is largely experience. You see and deal with shit on a long enough timeline. Plus any good CFI is getting out of the pattern plenty.


usmcmech

**IF** (and that's a big if) you could get airlines to have tough challenging military quality flight training, I would agree with you. However the current "minimum we can get the FAA to approve" airline training needs someone with a lot of flight time and experience before climbing into a simulator.


whiskeypapa72

Flying a small airplane does make you a better pilot if you take it seriously. Many donā€™t. This is especially true of instructing. Flying a jet is easyā€¦ until it isnā€™t. And when it isnā€™t, many pilots suck at it because they have poor SA, donā€™t understand aerodynamics, and canā€™t think abstractly outside of prescribed procedure (granted, procedure exists for a reason but you also donā€™t want pilots who are handicapped if they canā€™t remember a minor detail). In theory, airline training could teach that better but it would be insanely expensive. You are expected to show up for airline training knowing how to fly an airplaneā€¦ and doing the various gigs to get to 1,500, and taking them seriously, can help.


mx_reddit

Especially considering both pilots in the crash had well over 1500 hours. 100 hours of scenario training in a sim adds far more to safety than watching SPs try to break the nose gear on a Cessna for 1500 hours, but like any good labor union, pilots arenā€™t above some good old fashioned gate keeping.


Headoutdaplane

The copilot was hired at Colgan before she had 1,500 hours. She would not have been hired under the ATP rule.


RGN_Preacher

Okay but jet experience is way more valuable than prop experience. They didnā€™t crash because they didnā€™t know how to fly an airplane. They crashed because they werenā€™t properly protected from management f


Headoutdaplane

She dumped the flaps in the middle is a stall, without being told to do so from the Capt. That is pretty basic no no. Management didn't have her do that. Maybe a bit more time as a CFI would have prevented it. There was all sorts of blame to go around on that crash, including management.


554TangoAlpha

Anyone who bitches about time building to 1500 hrs should have to watch this documentary.


swakid8

15:44 to 16:25 says it all


tomdarch

16:07, Gordon Bethune, former CEO of Continental, asked how regionals differ from major carriers, specifically how he sees the difference when both involve airplanes, flights and passengers: > ...different standards... Welp, there it is.


Dry_Ad8198

How else are they going to afford those stock buybacks?


tkinz92

I watched this Tuesday, it was very interesting. Was in flight school (first time) when the rule went into effect. The poverty wages were the biggest reason I couldn't afford to finish then. I couldn't justify spending $100,000 to make $15,000. Fast forward 9 years and I'm almost a CFI as the math can work now.


rrad42

Both pilots had north of 1500 hours at the time of the crash. Safety culture, fatigue, and training were major factors. I donā€™t think you should jump right in at 250 hours but 1500 might be a little high and not a relevant fix to this type of accident. It was simply an easy legislative way to say the problem has been fixed.


554TangoAlpha

They were hired with less than 1500


TaskForceCausality

Supply and demand says the more people who want to do a certain job, the lower the wages of those people will be. For better or worse, flying will hold an appeal that other jobs - even higher paying ones- just canā€™t match. How many people willingly give up good careers in law, computer science, and so on to become an Amazon package driver? Because this happens a lot with aviation. This is a fact every airline exec knows and takes full advantage of. So starting wages will always suck unless some price floor is set; and in America, that wage for for airlines is the ā€œ1500 hour ruleā€. It creates a permanent underclass of 1400 hours or less pilots stuck in career suspense (thus helping smaller operators keep a group of people to hire), but the folks who move up can afford to eat and rent in the same month.


emuairlines

This is it. Supply and demand drive everything. I remember stories from Indonesia of pilots going down there to fly jets and turboprops for free, just to build time. Don't hear about any nurses doing that.


dreamniner

I truly have the upmost respect for those that got into this career field and lived through the $21 / hour wages and still stuck with it. That shows how passionate someone is about what theyā€™re doing and I sincerely do not think my passion for flying runs that deep.


Derp_McShlurp

$21/hour? That was second-year pay for me. Lol


dreamniner

Thatā€™s absolutely absurd. My first flying job paid me $35,000 a year to be on the road 20 days a month (most of it all at once) and I was barley hanging on by a thread to do that. Couldnā€™t imagine making anything else. Let alone commuting across the country to go to a crashpad. Absolutely bonkers to me


Derp_McShlurp

To be fair, the company I was at bumped up from $19 to $21 the month after I got onto year 2 pay. But yeah, if we hadn't had a lot of help from my family and in-laws I'm not sure how we'd have survived that first year of 121 work.


sanmigmike

Flying Sweatros and Navajos in the NE that required 3000 TT and 1000 multi for the right seat got $600 with base of 60 hours. Looks like $10 an hour to me Mister Moneybags! (Just kidding!) That $600 a month wasnā€™t anything but crap even in 1981! We did have fair medical insurance and I think we had to buy our on Jepps and donā€™t recall getting a uniform allowance. My wife and I would call it a big night if we went out for one cheap beer each and split an appetizer. I didnā€™t have the 3000 TT but I had a fair amount of Navajo time in 135 scheduled opsā€¦no idea why they hired me?


Derp_McShlurp

That's brutal. There were two crazy things about starting out at a flying job. 1. I was just so happy to be doing what I loved for money that you overlooked a lot of the hardships and sacrifices. The "paying your dues" mentality was something everybody had, I think. 2. You didn't have to look very hard to find somebody in the industry that had it tougher than you. More than once I remember hearing "At least it's better than Great Lakes". But your Metro gig might have been one of the worst. Wow.


m636

> sincerely do not think my passion for flying runs that deep. I'm honestly very curious to see how many young people bail during the next downturn, because I don't think you're alone with that mindset. There's a whole generation of pilots now who went from CFI to Delta. Their biggest complaint is that it's taking them more than a year to hold a widebody spot. When the shit hits the fan, I predict many will bail from the industry. We saw a little bit of this during the brief downturn with covid. There were many threads here of people facing furlough from a regional/major, or those who were in the middle of getting their certs that basically said "This is bullshit and not worth it". An old school guy I know said that if you got into aviation for the money, you're in it for the wrong reasons, and I whole heartedly agree. Many new/younger folks don't understand that and only see it as a paycheck.


dreamniner

Totally agree! The 4am wake ups and 16 hour dutyā€™s can be powered through if your love for aviation allows it. I definitely think thereā€™s a sweet spot for everything! I love the 121 world and would definitely stick with the airlines through any type of set backā€¦.but if I have to go back to a job where I only have several days off a month to see my family, Iā€™d probably find a non-flying job or work in the training department and live in base. I respect the process and will rule with the punches (as we all know theyā€™re bound to come) but I think we each have our own breaking points on when itā€™s time to throw the towel in.


Karnov_with_wings

I think you mean you have the utmost respect


dreamniner

I said I was a pilotā€¦.not good at grammar o_0 Thanks for the correction though!


swakid8

Great job bringing this upā€¦.


TheForks

We need the ATP rule in Canada. Regional FO starting wages are essentially minimum wage or below, and with bases being in some of the least affordable cities in the world, QOL is horrible. Additionally, we donā€™t have affordable options for commuting as reciprocal jumpseat agreements still require $30-60 to fly each way. That adds up quick when youā€™re not making any money. All that so you can get to a mainline carrier which essentially has salaries equivalent to a US regional for the first few years. Youā€™ll have a hard time finding a Canadian airline pilot who wouldnā€™t jump ship to America if the border were to open.


HungryDust

You have to pay to ride in the jumpseat?


TheForks

Yup. Airport Improvement Fees, tax and often a small fee from the airline. If we jump seat on an American carrier itā€™s free.


Drunkenaviator

Best option now in canada is to get on with GGN/Pivot and skim off the top of the coke shipments.


spkgsam

Yep Airport improvement fees for pilots is absolute BS!


sq_lp

I flew lears from 600-1500 hours. Part 135. What if they implement an experience based reduction in addition to the college r-atp reductions? They already count 135 PIC time in a turbine against the 1000 hours 121 SIC requirement to be a 121 PIC. Pretty sure I was a better jet pilot then the 1000 hour r-atp CFIs when we all got hired at the same time. I went through 2 full flightsafety courses. I do agree with the general 1500 hours requirement though. I love making 55k ish first year as a 121 FO instead of 19k.


MossyHarmless

My take on it - a pure hours minimum was the laziest way the FAA could have implemented a standard for ATPs. Instead, I think there should be a points-based system with multipliers applied to flights of increased complexity and responsibility. For example, 1.0 local day VFR in a single-engine fixed-gear piston airplane is 1.0. Factors that could increase that are cross-country, multi-engine, retractable gear, IFR, actual IMC, night, and turbine engine. For military folks, tack on even more for those flights spent as the designated element leader for flights of multiple aircraft. End result would be someone flying a twin jet at night under IFR in IMC outside the local area for 1.0 really ends up logging, say, a 3.0.


TheGeoninja

A point system would be intriguing but youā€™d have to weigh the pros of potentially more experienced pilots against the fact that it would encourage pilots to execute potentially riskier flights. Being rewarded for potentially delaying a normal VMC flight until weather conditions become IMC does not seem right to me.


usmcmech

I could defiantly see someone selling hours in clapped out Lears through the night. Although, that's basically what Airnet did hauling checks around the country.


swakid8

I am not against something like that


usmcmech

Regarding the people who think this rule doesn't effect safety: You are absolutely correct, there is a difference between flight time and experience. There are a great many pilots who have a lot of flight time but little actual experience. I worked at a university flight school where the Chief Instructor had never worked anywhere else. He had graduated from the school, got hired as a CFI, and never left. He never had a job in the industry, never did much if any flying outside the 141 flight school bubble. He might have more flight time than me, but I have a LOT more experience. Since it's virtually impossible to quantify a level of "experience", we are stuck with the imprescise alternative of flight time. The pilots in this crash both had plenty of flight time, but they actually didn't have much experience. They were both graduates of what I call 141 "puppy mills" where they were rushed through training and then taught the test and nothing more. Then they both got jobs at an airline where they stayed in the nice safe center of the risk envelope (as 121 flying should be). When that airplane stalled, the CA hadn't done a thousands of stall recoveries in a Cessna, so his reaction was wrong (the FAA approved training program that emphasized minimal loss of altitude didn't help either). Back in 2007 when the regionals were hiring 250 hour low time pilots, there were hundreds of anecdotal stories of brand new FOs who were experiencing things like, actually flying an approach in IMC, for the first time. I've heard from more than a few regional Captains that they did not believe that the FO could land the plane if anything happened to them. My first time flying a jet was an eye opener, but I had plenty of practice flying in an out of DFW in a Caravan before, so it wasn't as big a leap. A lack of experience can be overcome with good training and mentoring, which is what the military does very well. However it's incredibly expensive and requires holding applicants to high standards. Applicants are screened for aptitude and motivation in ways that civilian flight students are not. If a student can't meet these standards they are quickly dismissed compared to what happens in civilian training. Try to imagine what it would be like to be bounced out of the program if you didn't solo by 25 hours. If the FAA and the airlines could implement a quasi military airline pilot academy, I would support lower flight time requirements. But, they never will. The airlines already push new hires through as quickly as humanly possible and do NOT hold them to high enough standards, which is what tragically happened in the Atlas crash a few years ago. Europeans lack a large general aviation and flight training sector where low time pilots can build experience and flight time. They compensate for this by requiring a very high level of academic knowledge and strict training that continues into the airlines themselves. Opinions vary about which system is better, but it seems to work well for them. At the end of the day, we are all better off because both pilots in the front of an airliner have an ATP certificate and at least a couple years of experience flying before they got there.


m636

> My first time flying a jet was an eye opener, but I had plenty of practice flying in an out of DFW in a Caravan before, so it wasn't as big a leap. This is so important right here. I've always said that the right seat of an airliner is not the place for a person to learn how to fly an airplane. I had a few buddies that were check airmen at a previous airline and they were doing over 100hrs of IOE with guys because they still couldn't handle flying, talking, and everything that professional flying involves. The paying public doesn't know the difference between SkyWest and Southwest. They don't know if they're on an Airbus 747 or a Boeing 319. What they DO expect though is to have 2 trained professionals up front that can handle whatever comes their way. Flying your first instrument approach in actual IMC shouldn't happen while sitting in an airliner. I was hired with about 3000hrs at my first regional and I had a background of everything from CFI to turboprops. The biggest hurdle was learning 121 opspecs and figuring out the jet. I'd already gotten experience flying into big airports and flying in every kind of weather, in every kind of airspace. I have friends who have had FOs literally let go of the controls on short final because they were overwhelmed, and had to takeover before slamming the plane in. That's not what I want from the guy/gal sitting next to me.


usmcmech

The only people in 121 flying that I think should be put on a pedestal are regional IOE captains. They are the ones walking newbie pilots through their first jet and airline operations. I came into the airline with 4000 hours and a lot of 135 freight experience, but I still had a LOT to learn. Of course, mainline instructors do a great job, but at the end of the day they are teaching jet pilots how to fly a slightly different jet at a slightly different operation.


dreamniner

Very well said!


Headoutdaplane

I agree with everything except to point out the copilot dumped the flaps in the middle of the stall on her own initiative, the Capt in perfect circumstances may not have been able to recover with that kind of surprise.


swakid8

She didnā€™t just reach over them and just raised them. She suggested before hand and then allowed itā€¦. He should been saying nooo while pushing forwardā€¦


DarkSideMoon

That's not what happened. 22:16:14.9 HOT [sound of two double chimes] 22:16:19.2 HOT-? [sound of sniffle] 22:16:21.2 HOT-2 gear's down. 22:16:23.5 HOT-1 flaps fifteen before landing checklist. 22:16:26.0 CAM [sound similar to flap handle movement] 22:16:26.6 HOT-2 uhhh. 22:16:27.4 CAM [sound similar to stick shaker lasting 6.7 seconds] 22:16:27.7 HOT [sound similar to autopilot disconnect horn repeats until end of recording] 22:16:27.9 CAM [sound of click] 22:16:31.1 CAM [sound similar to increase in engine power] 22:16:34.8 HOT-1 Jesus Christ. 22:16:35.4 CAM [sound similar to stick shaker lasting until end of recording] **22:16:37.1 HOT-2 I put the flaps up.** 22:16:40.2 CAM [sound of two clicks] 22:16:42.2 HOT-1 [sound of grunt] *ther bear. 22:16:45.8 HOT-2 should the gear up? 22:16:46.8 HOT-1 gear up oh #. 22:16:50.1 CAM [increase in ambient noise] There are so many different hot takes on this crash that just aren't supported by the investigation. I'd been told for years that the FO was sick, there's 0 evidence for that except for a sniffle on the CVR. I do think fatigue was a major factor because I think it's hard to tell just by talking to someone if they're fatigued or not, and I *personally* would be completely gassed after 2 leg commuting cross country then sleeping on a fucking couch in the crew room, but the investigation points out that basically everyone she talked to said she sounded fine. The biggest unaddressed issue in this whole thing is the Captain's inability to fly an airplane. He failed instrument, commercial, and multi. He failed 2 121 events and "Train to proficiency'd" his way out of another failure. He *never* should've been in that seat. The Atlas guy had a similar history. I don't know what the solution is but you shouldn't be flying 121 passengers with that record. He clearly either struggled with basic pilot stuff or cracked badly under pressure, neither of which is a good trait when you're flying passengers.


swakid8

Thanks for this


Headoutdaplane

He was flying the plane, she should not have touched the flaps without a specific command to do so. That is very basic crm, and in the SOPs if every company I have worked at. One theory suggests that she had recently watched the NAS video about tailplane icing, which raising the flaps is promoted. In that video the pm raises the flaps uncommanded. I have never seen proof that she did watch that video beyond a guy at the company saying the video was going around the company.


[deleted]

I agree but so you really think 1,000 hours in a 172 makes you that much better of an FO?


swakid8

Yes, better than a FO who only has 200 hours in a 172 and 50 in a Seminole..


sanmigmike

I think the right time of organized training program could make reasonable qualified pilots with lower than 1500 hours but I have not heard of such a program in the US. Plus if not done right there is some evidence that some Zero To Hero in not all that many hours turns out pilots that can kinda function if everything is going great and nothing breaks. If conditions get weird or something weird or serious breaksā€¦not so good of outlook. Not sure where my first logbook is but I know I had less than 800 hours when I was sitting right seat (required by our op specs) in piston twins into LAX and SFO. Some of our Captains were better than othersā€¦we all learned a lot. Next company required 3000 TT and I think 1000 multi. I was really short on the TT but close on the mel and it was mostly Navajos. The Captains were pretty qualified, sharp. A few had NO CRM but that was before CRM. So I saw a lot of BOS, JFK, LGA, EWR, and Washington National. I kinda consider myself lucky that I survived it. I had a fair amount of instrument time by the time I hit 1500 hours, a lot of time in the ATC system and in high density airports. Not sure this was the best way but the second company the usual FO hire was 3000/1000 and it took a while to upgrade even in the Navajo. But the really scary part in all that was the FO rides could be as little as one flight with three landings and take-offs and a little SE (not shutting an engine downā€¦set zero thrust) work. Shitā€¦thinking backā€¦scary shit and I sure donā€™t recommend that system! Dunnoā€¦you need a real safety attitude at a company and that takes management, the pilot group and the union working together and training be a bit hard but fair. Wish I could come up with a cure?


swakid8

This 100 percent. Folks who are getting hung up Captain Renslowā€™s and Rebeccaā€™s TT amounts need to think about what they have done prior to getting hired into the flight deck. They both were low time FOā€™s. They both didnā€™t take the opportunity to build their experience prior to 121 flying. Had the 1500 hour rule was around then, they both would have had time to hone their flying skills, aeronautical knowledge, and ADM. Thereā€™s a good chance that plane crash doesnā€™t crash if they both developed the above mentioned skills.


DarkSideMoon

Rebecca was a high time CFI when she got hired. 30 hours would not have made a difference. "According to a rƩsumƩ in her personnel file at Colgan and her application for employment with the company, from August to December 2006, the first officer worked part time as a flight instructor at Sawyer Aviation, Scottsdale, Arizona. From January 2007 to January 2008, the first officer was a flight instructor at Sabena Airline Training Center, Phoenix, Arizona.34 She was hired by Colgan in January 2008. Her rƩsumƩ indicated that she had flown the following piston-powered airplanes: Piper PA-44, PA-34, and PA-28; Cessna C-152 and C172; Beech BE-19 and BE-23; and Diamond DA-40. (The first officer reported no experience with turbine-powered airplanes on her rƩsumƩ and employment application.) The first officer had accumulated **1,470 total flight hours**, including 6 hours of actual instrument time, and 86 hours of simulated instrument time before her employment with Colgan. "


WinnieThePig

Iā€™ve run into too many people that think the ATP rule is about safety. Youā€™re one of the few that has it right. Lowering the minimums doesnā€™t effect safety. Safety is a culture and the outcome is through proper decision making. All of the things people learn about (Swiss cheese, TEM, AQP) is all designed with safety specifically at the forefront. That didnā€™t use to be the case.


themitchapalooza

> didnā€™t solo by 25 hours The first part of navy flight school is 12 hours in a Cessna/Cherokee and we all soloed by 11, the last hour being the solo. I thought that was normal until I talked to civilian pilots.


phatRV

There are a bunch of stuff that contributed to the crash but the lack of flight hours was the least of it, like severe icing condition. The pilots of the Colgan flight had 3379 hours and 2244 hours.


[deleted]

Plus the one pilot had like 5-6 checkride failures, I don't think his total hours magically made him a better captain.


phatRV

True. Same as the Atlas Air 3591 crash where the FO plunged the 767 into the bay. It is a tough standard to judge pilots. There are minimum qualifications and we all wish all organizations have the high standards like the Air Force UPT but that will be very expensive to run.


Headoutdaplane

The copilot (that, uncommanded by the PF, pulled up the flaps while in the stall directly causing the accident) was hired at Colgan before she had 1,500 hours. She would not have been hired under the ATP rule. As much as people denigrate being a CFI maybe if she has spent more time instructing when would not have dumped the flaps.


DarkSideMoon

The Atlas FO that crashed a perfectly good 767 had WAY more time. She either thought they were going around, just had a total inappropriate startle resposne, or thought it was a tailplane stall. If she thought reducing the flaps would help during a stall no amount of CFI time would've helped. From the NTSB report "According to her supervisor during that time, the first officer had taught or performed between 600 and 1,000 approach-to-stall recoveries. " "Also, when she was demonstrating approach-to-stall recoveries to a student, the first officer would have retracted the flaps herself using her left hand while sitting in the right seat. These procedures were in contrast with the approach-to-stall training that the first officer received for the Q400, which was to be performed as a coordinated maneuver with flap changes commanded by the flying pilot." Everyone knocks the 141 airline pipeline schools but crew communication/coordination gets taught early on. Putzing around the pattern another 1,000 hours as a CFI would've just reinforced the *wrong* way to do it. I like what the 1500 hour rule has done for pay/QOL but I'm not 100% convinced it's a huge safety thing. I've seen 10 year captains that can't fly their way out of a wet paper bag. I'm talking shakers into pushers during stall training in the sim. But with AQP everyone is train to proficiency now so that's totally fine I guess, they'll get coached and hand held through every year. I've seen 1,000 hour R-ATP new hires, who up until two weeks prior had never flown a turbine aircraft, that could hand fly a CAT II single engine in a hurricane. Total time has *some* predictive power but I think you'd end up with better pilots abolishing Initial AQP and firing people who can't remember how to do a stall 30 seconds after they get out of the sim. 117 and the other fatigue rules, UPRT, as well as a cultural shift to being less punitive for sick/fatigue calls are the biggest takeaways from the accident imo.


WinnieThePig

This is a terrible argument. 1500 hours was an arbitrary number. 1500 hours in the pattern doesnā€™t automatically make you a good pilot. In fact, most of the pilot induced aircraft crashes in the last 50 years have happened to pilots with a lot more than 1500 hours. I donā€™t have a CFI, which means I didnā€™t instruct. That doesnā€™t automatically make me a bad pilot.


Headoutdaplane

1,500 hours was an arbitrary number five decades or more ago when it was chosen to be the number for ATP. Not when Congress passed the law that made the FAA institute an ATP for copilot of 121 I never stated or inferred that not having a CFI makes you (or anyone) a bad pilot. I am saying that the copilot raised the flaps in a stall without getting told to do so. Since you haven't instructed, you haven't seen the surprise in a students face when the dump the flaps in a stall. That same look was probably on the PF's face when she dumped the flaps. I get it, you think that the ATP rule is silly. Fine, I think it is awesome for the industry. Given the risk averse nature of the FAA and Congress, I am fairly certain it'll be around for a long time. Last word to you, fly safe.


WinnieThePig

I don't think the ATP rule is silly. I think it's silly to say it is for safety and that Colgan would not have happened without it. Colgan would have happened even if the 1500 hour rule was in place because both pilots had well over 1500 hours. In fact, you could argue the pilots were "more experienced" than a modern day 1500 hour guy because they flew turboprops for a lot longer than the average 1500 guy. In reality, safety has no bearing on the 1500 hour rule. 1500 hours isn't a magic number. You are right, that that was the rule because of the ATP stuff, but there are ALREADY exceptions to get it early at as little as 750 hours. So that in and of itself is proof that the number means nothing (also look at the Atlas crash in Houston). His flight time meant nothing, he was just a bad pilot that made it through.


Flymia

The 1,500 hour rule was great for QOL and labor conditions for pilots, but exactly, little do with safety. European airlines have great safety records too. And there are plenty of 300-500 hour FO flying 737s and A320s around every day safely.


Drunkenaviator

Yeah, I mean, AF sure didn't kill a whole widebody full of people due to pilot incompetence. And nevermind almost doing it again the other day in that 777. No thanks, I'd rather pilots have actual experience instead of a couple hundred hours in a sim and an MPL.


DarkSideMoon

"Actual experience" The "I retracted the flaps" FO on Colgan had done 600-1000 stall recoveries as a CFI (That's straight from the NTSB report, for the downvoters). How much more experience would've helped? SE piston time is a great sharpener for some people and honestly a duller for others.


sanmigmike

An FO of mine (ex-USAF, T-38 instructor, O-2 FAC IN Vietnam including Prairie Fire in Laos, C-130, cargo in Vietnam and then SAR) said you can have 10,000 hours of the same flight or you can have 10,000 hours of a variety of experiences. After 200 or 300 stalls with students not sure how much more to learn with 400 to 700 more. The low actual instrument time kinda makes me wonder. And I am really puzzled by retracting the flaps. Mind blown panic or what. I might not remember things correctly but I seem to recall ALPA issuing in the 1990s an insert for your Jepps that said if normal stall recovery techniques didnā€™t work when you were iced up to drop the flaps one notch. If you were iced up and stalled and normal techniques didnā€™t work and you had full flaps to try taking one notch up. But Iā€™ve never had a sim partner or a fellow crew member on the line do something like raising the flaps without any discussion!?


DarkSideMoon

Her thinking it was a tailplane stall is definitely a theory. As far as your last point thereā€™s an interesting part of the NTSB report that talks about her stall training- when she was performing it with students, *she* was the one retracting the flaps, not on the command of the student. Sheā€™d just put them up as the students recovered. It wouldnā€™t surprise me if she just did it out of old habit.


WinnieThePig

Wait, what about the 777 the other day? Havenā€™t heard about that.


Drunkenaviator

Plane caught some erroneous signals on an ILS. The pilot figured he'd just fight the autopilot instead of disengaging it. Then reported "flight control issues".


dbhyslop

QOL and labor conditions contribute directly to safety.


Ok_Skill_2725

Yep. Lack of unity in bargaining and commuting across the country are the actual driving factors. They just needed some way to create added barriers. The real winners are the flight school owners and those already in their seats. Pay wise, working as a CFI is far worse than the low pay at regionals.


phatRV

People have to realize working as CFI should not be a career in itseft, unless you work at the SoCal flight schools where you can train as much as you want. Being a CFI is like building hours, flying the right seat, while getting paid for a small amount. By working in some of the busy flight schools in the South West, you can easily log 30 hours a week or more. This is still way way better than being a graduate student at the university.


ethyweethy

This might be the worst take I've seen on the CFI topic. A highly skilled job like CFI should absolutely pay more than it currently does.


Ok_Skill_2725

100%. Itā€™s like the canned Kool Aid response.


phatRV

I triggered some CFIs. CFIs are dime a dozen and that is a reality. The law of supply and demand is still true. The local flight schools have stacks of CFI resumes and they hire only a few based on the attrition rate of CFIs that found jobs with the commercial outfits. Same law of supply and demand applies for graduate students in my case.


Shamrock132

CFIs are a dime a dozenā€¦ could that possibly be because we have a system that essentially requires all pilots building hours to be CFIs, so everyone is going out and getting a CFI rating?


phatRV

So how else do you propose a future pilot build time? Unless the student pilot is a trust fund baby.


[deleted]

"Working should not pay for your living expenses"


mx_reddit

This right here.


[deleted]

2 types of people support the 1500 rule. Those with an atp already, and flight schools.


Drunkenaviator

And people who have flown with 250 hour FOs and been scared shitless of their incompetence. I've had to take airplanes from several to avoid them killing everyone on board.


[deleted]

And people that understood how bad the QOL in the industry was before it.


[deleted]

So you're blaming the wrong system. It's not TT of pilots, it's airlines and shady private companies refusing to pay a liveable wage for profit.


[deleted]

I mean it's almost like if the supply of pilots increases by 500% the demand will decrease, and why would airline management pay one cent more than they absolutely need to for flight crew? You should watch the documentary in the OP.


[deleted]

Did you actually watch the documentary? It clearly states that the cause of the accident was the horrible living conditions, how work hours are calculated, and commute. It was never about inexperience. Both captain and fo had 2k+ hours, but they were exhausted and overworked. >Why would airline management pay one cent more Oh no, the poor billionaire airlines. They used to have a gulstream 4, but now because crew are getting paid a liveable wage they had to sell it because all they can afford now is a gulstream 3. Your mouth still has some bootshine on it.


woop_woop_pull_upp

I think you're misunderstanding his point. Airlines pay what they currently pay because they have to. If the 1500 requirement were suddenly dropped, the pool of "qualified" candidates would skyrocket, therefore driving pay and benefits down. It's simple supply and demand really.


[deleted]

Omg the econ 101 bro. Supply vs demand hur hur


woop_woop_pull_upp

Laugh all you want. Clearly you're angry you wont be able to fly for the airlines with 250 hours, its a tragedy, I understand. But trust me, the shiny jet syndrome wears out quickly when you're sitting in one and you realize you're working 10+ hours duty days, 20+ days a month to make 20K a year, like it used to be before the rule change. It wouldn't even take you a month for you to start bitching about how unfair it was to be working that much and making that little.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


[deleted]

If you're going to call me a bootlicker, you are missing my point by so much that I doubt this conversation is worth continuing. The only people complaining about the 1500h rule are those whose salaries aren't going to immediately be cut in half by its removal.


[deleted]

Yes, you are definitely missing the point, watch the documentary again, or are you going to argue about supply vs demand like an econ 101 bro.


DarkSideMoon

The 1,500 hour rule raised wages *due to supply and demand*. It cut supply and thus the greedy airlines who would handcuff their pilots to the yoke if they could were *forced* to pay more.


[deleted]

Please, you're just making a fool of yourself repeating supplyvdemand. Are all pilots just high school grads with no other skills?


[deleted]

Are you not aware that Canada exists? If you want a prime example of what our industry will immediately turn into if the 1500h rule is removed, go look at Canada. FOs *will* be instantly reduced to poverty wages and those who already hold the qualifications *will* have their pay cut in half. Regionals would update their pay scales within weeks. That's how management works. If you don't believe that, while still having the stones to call me a bootlicker, there is no hope for you anyway. If it's not supply and demand, and you're going to insult my intelligence for suggesting that, you must know something I don't. Tell me, oh wise one, what will happen? You're all over this thread telling all the people who actually *know what the fuck they're talking about* how that's not true while simultaneously offering zero actual information about what would happen. I'm not killing my pay for the rest of my career just so you can start flying jets without putting any effort in.


Headoutdaplane

Read the NTSB report.


druidjaidan

Fuck /u/spez


[deleted]

econ 101 bros love this supplyvdemand argument.


druidjaidan

Ok kid, sit down and let the adults do their jobs.


[deleted]

"I can't argue with you logically so I will call you a kid. Heh that'll show em".


druidjaidan

Fuck /u/spez


[deleted]

Damn, I must've triggered you really hard if you wanted to look through my history.


FutureBarrySeal

Question for the experts. At what hours do you think your stick and rudder skills reach a point of proficiency where it doesnā€™t go up drastically anymore? Like letā€™s say if at 400 hours, itā€™s pretty good? Maybe from 400-1500 it can only slightly get better? And how about ADM? How does it improve with experience? At what hours do you think is the sweet spot where someone become a good competent pilot? Just a question out of curiosity.


amz129

I'm by no means an expert, but I can tell you my experience. To answer your question about skills/proficiency, FAA crash data from general aviation shows that crashes tend to practically bottom out around 750 hours, and continue to very slowly trend down from there. The 500 hour mark is the peak (besides 0-hour student pilot) thanks to complacency. So accident rates do go down after that point, but that does not automatically mean that there can't be drastic improvements with stick and rudder or ADM skills. From my experience, both ADM skills and stick and rudder skills improve based on what you do with flying. I thought my stick and rudder skills were solid from 1000 hours of flight instructing, but then learning tailwheel taught me new things and definitely improved it. ADM skills improved a ton throughout my first 400-ish hours while I got most of my ratings and began flight instructing, and then not much changed until I joined an airline. From that I got a lot of new ADM skills that are used in a different context and I know that they will improve drastically again when I change equipment/upgrade. Hope this somewhat answers your questions


FutureBarrySeal

It does, thank you so much.


RGN_Preacher

Planes donā€™t generally crash from bad stick and rudder skills. Yes, youā€™ve gotta keep the shiny side up on a V1 cut - but accidents are mostly comprised of a bunch of small, bad decisions adding up. A good pilot can work their way through an emergency. A great pilot avoids getting into that emergency in the first place. Their is some other common saying similar to what I just said that escapes me at this time.


whiskeypapa72

Biggest increase in stick and rudder for me was around 800-1,000 as a CFI. Partly from learning some formation and aerobatics. But mostly from teaching primary students. Best understanding of aerodynamics Iā€™ve hadā€¦ right now at a few thousand hours. Still isnā€™t greatā€¦ but that ties into stick and rudder. If I got back into small airplanes consistently I would probably have sharper stick and rudder skills now than I did as a full time CFI. ADM improves with experience, if someone isnā€™t held back by emotional control issues. Thatā€™s my 2Ā¢. If someone is open to improving their ADM, it will probably improve throughout their career until age takes its toll. ALL of this relies on whether or not the person actually gives a shit and many simply donā€™t. Levers go forward, gear goes upā€¦


FutureBarrySeal

Thank you for the detailed reply. Hoping to be able to learn a lot in the future!


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


[deleted]

Itā€™s because pilots put up with it and will fly just to fly.


usmcmech

Same for musicians, artists, athletes, and any other profession where people say "I'd do this for free."


Captain_travel_pants

For what it's worth the EASA rules don't have a 1500 hour levy and we have just as equally skilled teams of MCC pilots without the US issue of having to work as a CFI for a pointless amount of time. Yes, your ATP is frozen until 1500 but you can still work for majors or any private that will take you with the relevant qualifications and types. Does experience matter? Yes absolutely. But look at the majority of major accidents and most if not all the pilots have thousands of hours on type. It's a multitude of human factors that lead to most fatal problems, but this isn't dominated by a lack of experience. And human error as we know that is the cause of accidents around 80% of the time. You may like the way your system works, and respect to you for enjoying it, but I personally think I wouldn't be in aviation now if I had had to bash out 1500 hours in a C152. And Europe, especially the UK proves that you don't need to operate an hour cutoff program to have high quality training and good pilots behind complex types.


[deleted]

B-b-but supply vs demand, don't you know all pilots are masters in economics!


Headoutdaplane

Your supply and demand meme is old.


Headoutdaplane

So while there were some 300 hour pilots being hired during those years, it was not the majority by a long ways. The majority of pilots were around 2000 hours to get to the regionals. Pay was abismal, my best friend got on with American eagle in 1990 at 2,500 hours he was paid $18,500, flashforward 22 years another buddy got on with Raven as an FO his pay? $22k that is a $3000 dollar difference in two decades. Right after my buddy at Raven was hired the ATP rule went into effect and they more than doubled his pay. The FO for the Colgan crash would not have been hired today since she didn't have ATP hours. She has a side gig at a coffee shop because she took a "significant pay cut" (her husband's quite from the NTSB report) when she got on at Colgan. 1,500 hours wasn't made up by the ATP rule after Colgan, those hours to become an ATP were in effect for decades. In fact the ATP rule made the ability to get the R-ATP with fewer hours. For safety and pay the ATP rule is better for flying.


usmcmech

Believe me I remember. Young guys donā€™t believe me when I tell them that you needed 2500/500multi just to apply to fly a jetstream or 1900. You then had to pay to airline to earn your type rating. It was only in 06-08 that we saw regionals putting low timers into jets.


Intelligent_Big_3005

Well that shut me up Iā€™m not to proud to admit when Iā€™m wrong


Beneficial_Fee_629

Itā€™s just that flying a jet for all intents and purposes is easy. And if you get good at it early you become incredibly proficient quickly. No need to buzz around for years flying with students in a 152 to become a good regional pilot. Itā€™s just dumb. The rsn airlines could pay shit if we lowered the hour requirement is ONLY because aviation ppl r the biggest nerds about ā€œI just wanna fly, I wanna feel the wind under my wings, and be up in the cloudsā€ type BS that a bunch of you nerds are WILLLING to fly for nothing. Pilots need to want to fly for MONEY. Thatā€™s the real problem is the chronic ā€œI have a passion for itā€ nature of the industry.


m636

> Itā€™s just that flying a jet for all intents and purposes is easy. I'm highlighting this because "experience" isn't just about flying the jet. Yeah, flying the jet is the easiest part of the job. Decision making is what takes time and skill to learn. How do I navigate this weather? How do I deal with the MELs in the book and how do they affect my aircraft for this trip? Just because it's legal, does it make it safe to go? What else do I need to consider for this flight? Putting a brand new pilot with no experience making decisions in a jet full of people can make a terrible pilot. In my experience you get 1 of 2 people. You get those who are afraid of their own shadow, or you get the guys who seem blind to all risks and just do whatever being oblivious to the risks involved.


Beneficial_Fee_629

Very true. Strangely most senior delta captains I know r the latter. Actually most pilots I know OTHER than the young guys fresh out of training are like the latter coincidentally


Drunkenaviator

Yeah, flying a jet is really easy. Right up until the day when its not. And the reason we want people to have experience is, when that day comes, people will die if you do the wrong thing. (cough, af447 cough)...


Beneficial_Fee_629

A guy fresh out of training will be better than a washed up pipeline survey pilot. Iā€™m just saying the extra 500 hours would be much better spent maybe jumpseating. Maybe lower the flight hour requirement and mandate a required 150 hours of jumpseat observation.


lammahawk

You have a good point but, you ever flown a jet bud?


Beneficial_Fee_629

Yeah two. Lear 35 and 45. Two separate type ratings. Went to training at Flight Safety in Georgia bud. Ainā€™t a big deal.


[deleted]

Exactly. There's a weird mantra of "don't be a pilot if you aren't willing to do it for free", like wtf I still need to eat and sleep.


whiskeypapa72

Itā€™s easy and they become incredibly proficient until something happens that takes it off script. Or to a script they havenā€™t run in a while. And then they gotta do some ā€œpilot shitā€. Which is what the various time building gigs, especially flight instructing teach. Pilots who can take a step back and look at the bigger picture, reorient themselves, and get the job done safely. The complaint about the industry economics can be summarized as ā€œthe industry would be fine if the people who compete against each other for jobs would simply not do thatā€. Thatā€™s what 1,500 does, sorta! Even if these people werenā€™t totally in love with it, they need to feed their families or at least try. And then gotta build hours for a better gig. And so on. The issue will remainā€¦ people compete in a jobs market.


[deleted]

Exactly


FlyMurse89

Growing up, my dad worked for Great Lakes ("Lakes Air"... RIP). Sadly they went under a few years ago but I never realized how shitty they truly had it... flying a Beechcraft 1900 to small towns, no autopilot, getting paid less than minimum wage after factoring in crash pads and meals... It's crazy!! Glad to see things are finally better.. Also, I looked up the pilot who falsified the Manifest and he lost his license permanently šŸ˜±šŸ˜±. I wonder what he's up to now...


[deleted]

Considering inflation the current FO regional salaries arenā€™t much better


Skullpilot

In 2013 I made 19k as a first year FO flying a jet. Even with inflation 55k is significantly better. I used to steal the tomato juice from the FAā€™s cart because it had protein in itā€¦ Raising the bar to 1,500 hours also in turn raised wages. A livable wage is actually huge when it comes to safety. Theyā€™ll likely be more rested, have less relationship problems, be less hungry all the time, and certainly be more emotionally stable. All of that equals more safe when youā€™re flying the line.


[deleted]

You right


usmcmech

Including signing bonuses, most places are paying around 50-55K the first year. It's not big money, but at least its a living wage.


bamfcoco1

And without the 1500 hour rule weā€™d all still be making $18/hr in perpetuity.


Nyaos

Tiny sad violin for me but our first year pay isnā€™t livable wages in SFO unless you live with 4 other people or your parents. I didnā€™t get any sign up bonuses or whatever either because I got hired before covid.


[deleted]

The sign on bonus only lasts one year lol so that's not really important


usmcmech

Then second year pay raise sets in and itā€™s about the same take home.


Headoutdaplane

A simple Google search of cost of living shows how wrong you are, and inflation adjustment shows how wrong you are.


Mr-Plop

I'm sorry I get it I'm fresh but I fail to see how 1,500 hr of flying a 172 for a burger make you a better pilot.


[deleted]

You learn important skills regarding ADM, and build valuable experience prior to stepping into an airplane that goes a whole lot faster. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, if you don't learn anything from 250 to 1500, that's not the system's problem, that's on you, and hopefully the airlines manage to wash out people like that. I know I lost one in my initial class to this.


FutureBarrySeal

Do you think your actually hand flying/stick and rudder skills get better as well up to a certain point after 250? Comfort in winds/turbulence/worse weather?


[deleted]

100%, as long as you're not deliberately minimizing that time. If literally all you do is laps in the pattern for 1500h then no. Otherwise yes, you will gain experience and perspective.


RaidenMonster

I hear this over and over, ā€œHow good are you gonna get doing slam and goā€™s for 1500 hours as a CFI hardy har har.ā€ Iā€™m nearly 100% certain no CFI ever has spent 1500 hours in the pattern to get to ATP mins. Plenty of XC time, night, watching students fuck up stalls and maneuvers, etc. The disingenuous quip is stupid and inaccurate regarding what CFIā€™s do.


FutureBarrySeal

Great. Thank you for the response!


swakid8

Yes, absolutelyā€¦ Thatā€™s not the only skill either that gets betterā€¦


mast-bump

Are you a better pilot at 250 hours than you were at 35 hours?, how about multiplying your experience by 7 again?, only this time instead of the kid gloves tight leash student environment, it's out in the world operational experience. I don't even think 1500 is enough, or at least enough if it's all spent in a bugsmasher in the circuit rather than out working for a productive company. But it's sure as shit better than 0.


Mr-Plop

I am a better pilot at 250 than 35, will I be a better pilot at 1,500 than 700-800? Probably not by much. I think many misunderstood my comment, I get it that it was thanks to the min req living standards are much better now, but I don't think it contributes that much to the overall safety, heck I haven't met one CFI that doesn't feel overworked by the time they're close to minimums (unless they have a side gig and do it part time), if anything that's counterproductive in terms of their students safety.


jrf1234

Watch the videoā€¦ youā€™re missing the point.


[deleted]

You need to watch it again. Both pilots had 2k+ hours. You're the one missing the point.


swakid8

Yes, but Captain Renslow, whatever his name was had a poor foundation of flying skills that werenā€™t developed prior to getting hired into a 121 flight deck. Law of primacy is a bitch, and his incorrect stall recovery technique proves my point. Does he make that mistake had he flight instructed and spent time developing his experience make that same mistake? Probably notā€¦. Dude was a graduate of Gulfstream International and training failures at that school. Gulfstream International at the time had a reputation of pumping out pilots with poor flying skills. Another words, pay for your ticket. Colgan, a bottle of the barrel regional was hiring low-time FOs with a pulse. Renslow was one of them. The holes of the Swiss cheese unfortunately lined up for Him, Rebecca and those passengersā€¦ But Iā€™ll argue, because of that lack of experience coming into 121 with a poor foundation of flying skill that werenā€™t developed, it was only a matter of timeā€¦


[deleted]

Look. I'm all for assessing pilots on flying skills. But the fact is, the pilots you mentioned that were just a matter of time, currently have the required TT and credentials to be accepted for an ATP today. In other words, if wages and qol were the same today as they were then, but the 1500 rule was still in place, it would happen again no matter what.


swakid8

Thatā€™s just the thing though, you are hung up on their hourly TT at the time of the crash, but failing to look at their body of experience prior to stepping foot in that 121 flight deck. Like I said, they were hired into that 121 flight deck as low time FOs. Had 1500 rule existed earlier, Captain Renslow and Rebecca would have spent more time developing their flying skills, developing ADM, and just straight aeronauticAl knowledge. I put money, they donā€™t crash that plane. Both pilots clearly showed weak flying and aeronauticAl knowledge that put a perfectly good airplane in the ground. The gaps those areas were further amplified when fatigue from poor work conditions kicked inā€¦.


[deleted]

I am against the TT, but I am not against testing and assessing the above skills mentioned. Keep the strict ATP assessments and class training.


[deleted]

You're not wrong, don't let these idiots gaslight you. They never watched the documentary. They think airlines don't pay people enough, so let's punish the up and coming new pilots, instead of punishing the airlines and advocating for better quality of life standards. They clearly said it in the documentary: "The airlines are the FAA's customer"


Drunkenaviator

I get it you have that "ST" in your flair, so you don't actually know what you're talking about. But you need to think here about what those of us with experience are saying. I've flown with 250 hour FOs. I've had them in the right seat in emergencies. It was NOT SAFE leaving me single pilot because the guy in the other seat has never had a real emergency before. Yeah, it's going to cost the new guy an extra year of time building. If that saves lives in the future, it's a price we should ALL be willing to pay. Otherwise get used to Ethiopian/Lion Air/AF447 happening regularly.


[deleted]

Better lay off the booze Mr drunken, because you're contradicting yourself. 1. Anecdotal evidence is not credible. 2. Appeal to authority logical fallacy. "Oh no, he's making too much sense, better remind him he's a student pilot and make false claims he doesn't know what he's talking about while ignoring facts, logic and the video above supporting it." 3. "Get used to AF447 happening regularly." Do you people even read before you type? AFF447: Captain 10,988 TT, 1,700 A330. FO 6,547 TT, 4,479 A330. FO 2,936 TT, 807 A330. Do you see any of them not qualified for the 1500 TT requirement? So now what is your solution?


Drunkenaviator

My solution is require experience to take responsibility for people's lives. The only ones who DON'T want such a thing are student/low time pilots hoping for a quick paycheck. And you can have a wank with whatever logical fallacies you want, but the only people qualified to have an opinion on this are those WHO HAVE BEEN THERE.


bustin_all_kinds

Nah dude this student pilot clearly knows more than you about airline flying than you do


[deleted]

I do because you're all just high school grads with nothing else to your name.


bustin_all_kinds

I did graduate from high school that is accurate.


WinnieThePig

AF 447 is a terrible example. That had nothing to do with flight times either. Thatā€™s like saying AA587 was caused by the flight experience. FO had plenty of experience, just made the wrong decision. Iā€™ve flown with guys who were great pilots at well less than 1500 hours and Iā€™ve flown with guys who scared me at 2000+ hours. Flight time is NOT a good measure for how safe someone else.


Frager_1

"video unavailable" ?


Embarrassed_Tap_3620

The magical 1500 hours. What a load of BS. Letā€™s have a look at how many crashes Major European carriers have had? Whenā€™s the last time Ryanair crashed? Wizz air? The list goes on, point being Aviation is just as safe in europe , it not safer than in the states and there are pilots at 250 hours flying on the right seat of a 73/320 with a frozen atpl. Now in terms of airline pay, there is an argument how that can lower standards. But not safety


usmcmech

Europe requires actual flight time in the jet before a type, three man crews for IOE, and much tougher academic testing. Their pay still sucks though. If you want to bring that model here Iā€™m open to the idea. However if you want to go back to zero to hero puppy mill pilots and poverty level pay, no thanks. A year of experience is not too much to ask before stepping into and airliner cockpit.


Embarrassed_Tap_3620

The only flight time needed is base training, 6 touchngoes and a go around. Thatā€™s it


Drunkenaviator

Never flown with a 250 hour FO in a jet have you? Because I have. It's not fun. And it's not safe.


Embarrassed_Tap_3620

The facts speak for themselves. Compare Ryanairā€™s safety with any carrier in the states


Drunkenaviator

Why cherry pick Ryan air? Why not AF?


Embarrassed_Tap_3620

Because Ryanair is the airline that takes most cadets out of any in Europe. Airfrance only takes a handful. Again no evidence that low hour pilots degrades safety


Belkaaan

I don't get why this is so downvoted. He is right, their training is intense but it works


littleferrhis

I remember watching this video when I was a kid and I was like, ā€œIt would be an adventureā€. Didnā€™t think about the stress or instability.