CA1900
Big Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2002
- Posts
- 5,436
Way to generalize while at the same time contributing absolutely nothing.
Welcome to FlightInfo. :laugh:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Way to generalize while at the same time contributing absolutely nothing.
In general, I feel that a low time FO is not a safety hazard alone, but when combined with an inexperienced captain, it is a recipe for disaster. The problem lies with the rapid upgrade times. A 1000hr FO knows enough to watch and learn for a few years. However, he will not learn enough in two years to then be ready to captain the ship with another 1000hr FO.
I think you find a safer approach to flying at places like Eagle and ComAir (despite the Lexington accident) because you don't have low time upgrades. Same applies with the major airlines. You are going to see places like RAH and Skywest develop a safer approach to flying as the sit in the right seat grows from 2 years to 5.
As for 250 and 500 hour FOs, well that is just stupid. I have seen those guys fly the heck out of the sim, but they just haven't seen enough to develop proper reactions to sudden events, or thorough thought processes for handling complex weather or rerouting situations.
I think that part 135 PIC minimums ought to apply to part 121 FO's as well. If you aren't ready to handle a cherokee with checks, you aren't ready to wrestle a Dash 8 or a CRJ full of people. Also, if everyone had to acquire 1200 hours to make it, the herd waiting outside the gate would be a lot thinner.
In a nutshell I'd tend to think those guys are more mature and have better judgement than the 20-year-olds. See, you can argue it either wayDid this guy first start flying in his early 40's at some sort of ALLATPs bridge program for Colgan?
I hate to be a wet blanket, but what is your opinion on guys who begin flight training (with the goal to become a professional pilot) at such a late age. The mind does not absorb information or training like it does as a teen/ early 20's student. Your attitudes and perceptions are much different between those two ages.
In general, I feel that a low time FO is not a safety hazard alone, but when combined with an inexperienced captain, it is a recipe for disaster. The problem lies with the rapid upgrade times. A 1000hr FO knows enough to watch and learn for a few years. However, he will not learn enough in two years to then be ready to captain the ship with another 1000hr FO.
I think you find a safer approach to flying at places like Eagle and ComAir (despite the Lexington accident) because you don't have low time upgrades. Same applies with the major airlines. You are going to see places like RAH and Skywest develop a safer approach to flying as the sit in the right seat grows from 2 years to 5.
As for 250 and 500 hour FOs, well that is just stupid. I have seen those guys fly the heck out of the sim, but they just haven't seen enough to develop proper reactions to sudden events, or thorough thought processes for handling complex weather or rerouting situations.
I think that part 135 PIC minimums ought to apply to part 121 FO's as well. If you aren't ready to handle a cherokee with checks, you aren't ready to wrestle a Dash 8 or a CRJ full of people. Also, if everyone had to acquire 1200 hours to make it, the herd waiting outside the gate would be a lot thinner.
That would be the old "if the minumum wasn't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum" argument. True. However, you can bump standards up to the point where NO ONE can pass.
And then there's the law of supply and demand. We're talking the regionals here. Just last spring, they were hiring 500/50. You can't give those guys a NASA checkride. When there's lots of job candidates you can be stricter.
The telling point is that Colgan has "fired" Check Airmen and had a couple big Kahunas in the Training Department "resign". You don't think there was a little FAA pressure to make that happen? Slack standards have come home to roost, apparently.
Should this raise questions as to the qualifications and competence of all colgan pilots?
Watching Colgan shed all the blame of this accident and hang it on the flight crew is disgusting. Sure they made some deadly mistakes which they should be held accountable for, but this accident started a long time ago.
What kind of times did the ski bunny (FO) have?