Should an ATP be required for both pilots?

[DX Rick]

Making an ATP a requirement is just that, another requirement.
Since the age of flight time requirements, people have been making their log books meet all the requirements. Some honestly, some not so honestly. I know a guy who whipped over 600 hours in a SUMMER!!! He had a friend in Hawaii who owned an Aztek and let him fly it for free. But that's another story.
You raise the requirement to ATP, people will gain the flight time, drop the $2500 and get the ticket.
The real winner is the flight school offering the rating.

 

[imacdog]

Works for me though. There is a HUGE difference between a 250 hr commercial certificate holder and a 1500 hr ATP holder, not to mention the difference in standards that ATP applicants are expected to fly to during their checkride.

 

[Flying_Hiker]

With all due respect to your career progression, just because you (and thousands of others) did it that way doesn't mean its the best or only way for one to go.

Having nearly a thousand hours of dual given myself, one reaches a point of minimal "experience" gained in proportion to the hours of dual given beyond a certain point; I'd say 500 hours. By that point, you've already had people try to kill you dozens of times over, already taken the airplane away from people, already made plenty of PIC decisions; after that point IMO most instructors are simply logging the same hour time after time after time. Is that really the kind of experience that provides value in an airline cockpit?

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that my career progression was the best or only way to go. The main point of my post was to disagree with your argument to lower 135 IFR PIC mins. Many 1200 hr pilots struggle with a transition to a single pilot 135 IFR environment, and I don't believe lowering those minimums would be in the best interest of safety.

 

[acpilot]

Speaking of minimum experience, shouldn't we also require airline pilots to have a minimum number of Dual Given (CFI or IP) in their logs? We can't downplay the importance of the experience gained by teaching people how to fly airplanes. As long as we're imposing minimum certification, why not require a CFI cert or time as an IP as a prereq. to an ATP? In the interest of safety, shouldn't pilots be exposed as many flight "environments" as reasonably possible?

 

[acpilot]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that my career progression was the best or only way to go. The main point of my post was to disagree with your argument to lower 135 IFR PIC mins. Many 1200 hr pilots struggle with a transition to a single pilot 135 IFR environment, and I don't believe lowering those minimums would be in the best interest of safety.

If anything, single pilot IFR mins should be increased (particularly in larger turbine equip).

 

[WayBack]

Someone said it above.
You make a new requirement, it will take a few minutes with a pen, and voila! You meet the new requirements.

 

[727gm]

NO.

I have known pilots that had thousands of hours, flew in many different facets of aviation, other than airlines, with lots of PIC time, and were consummate aviators. All the while never working where an ATP was required to do their job.

When their number came up for upgrade under FAR 121, they added an ATP along with the type-rating to their certificates.

The desire to see pilots having to acquire an ATP certificate prior to being hired at a FAR 121 carrier is really displaced horror/disgust at the hiring of applicants with no real-world experience.

This proposed change would not really change anything, as, when a requirement to be ATP-rated comes into being, those same "insufferables" will still show up (in times of hiring need), with an ATP in a Seminole or DA-42, and (probably) a lot of (shared) "time-building"/"safety piloting" and LSA pilot time, and possibly "Parker" time and still no real experience.

At least those complained about the most: Will they go out and get GA night cargo experience/Alaska/glider tow/forestry/fire-fighting/parachute drop/Ag/pipeline patrol/pax 135 on their way to 1500 hrs.? Probably not. But in times of need, they'll be hired anyway, with their ATP.

And at the same time adding to the expense/obstacles of getting an airline job for some of those you really would rather have.

It really boils down to those hiring the pilots (not HR, but the hiring captains) deciding what they really want to inflict on their long-suffering line captains, and customers.

 

[bendover]

Atp's should be required as well as a four year degree. It would help keep salaries up and limit the number of tools in the cockpits.

 

[JohnnyP]

........

Speaking of minimum experience, shouldn't we also require airline pilots to have a minimum number of Dual Given (CFI or IP) in their logs? We can't downplay the importance of the experience gained by teaching people how to fly airplanes. As long as we're imposing minimum certification, why not require a CFI cert or time as an IP as a prereq. to an ATP? In the interest of safety, shouldn't pilots be exposed as many flight "environments" as reasonably possible?

Na, that one wouldn't work in practice.

I think you'd be cancelling out a bunch of other quality guys that were brought up through different channels. It is good to be exposed to several different types of aviation-avenues to make you well rounded I supposed, but making CFI/IP time a hard requirement wouldn't work smoothly in practice.

A good way to harder them up is to stick them in the gnarly 135 crazy-town world, among others.

And like someone else said above, the ATP is just a piece of plastic. Not really "proving" a whole lot, in my opinion. My sister could memorize the gleim portion (Ok im exagerating, but you get the point), and a weak pilot could muscle their way through a canned-florida ATP ride in a duchess.

But I cannot argue with making the ATP a req. for operations like 121 FO. Won't absolutely ensure anything at all, but at least a step in the right direction.

But then again, some guy made a good point above, about guys doing thouands of hours of flying only neededing a commercial ticket, then getting the ATP as an add-on with a type, etc. So then you have that situation. So hell, I dunno the answer. Carry on......

 

[rustypigeon]

It really boils down to those hiring the pilots (not HR, but the hiring captains) deciding what they really want to inflict on their long-suffering line captains, and customers.

But those that do the hiring are never going to increase the minimums unless it is required by law. They are only looking for the pilots who will work for the lowest pay, or even pilots will to pay to work.

 

[SpauldingSmails]

In addition to an ATP, why not require at least verifiable employment of two years exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate. Be it as a CFI, flying cargo, sightseeing tours etc... This way there's at least some verifiable history as to the performance of the applicant, an FAR121 carrier shouldn't be anyone's first flying job.

Additionally, the initial ATP rating should only be conducted by an actual FAA examiner (ie. not a DE). Anyone can go down to a puppy-mill flight school, pay their $2500 and walk away an ATP. If the FAA controlled all ATP checkrides directly, and the ride is provided without fee, the certificate gains credibility.

 

[BoilerUP]

...good intentions to reform the profession, if acted upon, which will lead to unnecessarily destroyed careers by the law of unintended consequences...

 

[SpauldingSmails]

...good intentions to reform the profession, if acted upon, which will lead to unnecessarily destroyed careers by the law of unintended consequences...

Languishing for years and failure to reform the profession have resulted in the unintended deaths of innocent people, and destroyed careers through miserable pay, work rules, and the success of sub-par operators.

 

[727gm]

But those that do the hiring are never going to increase the minimums unless it is required by law. They are only looking for the pilots who will work for the lowest pay, or even pilots will to pay to work.

What I was referring to was not the company's stated minimums or perverted desires, or FAA minimums, but the hiring captains retaining and exercising their own prerogatives in pilot selection.

 

[WayBack]

Languishing for years and failure to reform the profession have resulted in the unintended deaths of innocent people, and destroyed careers through miserable pay, work rules, and the success of sub-par operators.

Airlines have been crashing airplanes long before they were hiring guys with 300TT.
The ATP won't prevent airplanes from falling out of the sky.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

an FAR121 carrier shouldn't be anyone's first flying job.

That is the main issue. That GIA place has 250 hour "interns" flying the public around. That's just wrong. The requirements have to be raised.

 

[SpauldingSmails]

Airlines have been crashing airplanes long before they were hiring guys with 300TT.
The ATP won't prevent airplanes from falling out of the sky.

I won't dispute the fact many experienced pilots have also crashed airplanes.

What's the harm in mitigating another factor though?

Maybe we need to do more than just require an ATP, maybe its time we evaluate how and to whom we award an ATP. Many schools won't issue a student an MBA without experience in the business world, nor an MD without a residency. Why not some long-term demonstration of judgement, ability, and competence before we just hand a certifcate out. Reform is usually more encompassing than just "ok, now you need an ATP."

For every Marvin Renslow that makes a smoking hole and flattens a house, there's a thousand others at most every regional airline out there that slip through the cracks and plod along... and maybe nothing will ever happen. But to sit back and say, "planes have been crashing for years" is fool hardy and arrogant. In day to day operations these guys can throw up a facade of competence, but when the game is changed ever so slightly their true abilities are brought to bare. Most regionals screening process is an utter joke.

 

[WayBack]

In day to day operations these guys can throw up a facade of competence, but when the game is changed ever so slightly their true abilities are brought to bare. Most regionals screening process is an utter joke.

It's simple. It's not an ATP that will increase safety.
You want to hire well qualified people, raise the pay. Plain and simple.
You raise the pay and you will be getting the resumes that you want in your pile.
But we know that will never happen.

 

[imacdog]

Wayback, I'm not sure how you can argue that requiring 121 pilots to have more experience and a higher airman rating will not improve safety. Requiring an airline rating to fly an airliner, gee what a concept.

 

[Mike man]

What is the difference in a PIC type and an SIC type, the seat and an engine relight? Why not just type everybody, its not like it would cost much more...its just that most regional FO's don't have the time.

 

[WayBack]

Wayback, I'm not sure how you can argue that requiring 121 pilots to have more experience and a higher airman rating will not improve safety. Requiring an airline rating to fly an airliner, gee what a concept.

But you have to think about the guys who really have the ATP mins, vs. the guys who whip their books to reach the ATP mins.
It's been done by most pilots out there, and if you require a kid with glitter in his eye, he's going to find a way to get the time that much faster.
Also, like others said. Make it a ATP ride with a fed at an airline. These flight schools that offer the rating just cram it down your throat, 10 hours later you have a ATP....are you really gaining anything? FAA holds their standards a bit higher than some DE looking for a quick $500

 

[BoilerUP]

What is the difference in a PIC type and an SIC type, the seat and an engine relight? Why not just type everybody, its not like it would cost much more...its just that most regional FO's don't have the time.

There is no total time requirement to get a type rating.

 

[imacdog]

Oh please, what a retarded argument. There will always be those who cheat the system. It doesn't change the fact that the airlines would be forced to hire people who have more experience than 250 hours and a wet commercial ticket. You do seem to have quite a bit of familiarity with pencil whipping a logbook.........

 

[imacdog]

A question for all ATP holders out there that voted no.........

Do you think you were a more experienced, well-rounded pilot when you got your ATP rating versus when you passed your commercial checkride?

 

[acpilot]

Na, that one wouldn't work in practice.

I think you'd be cancelling out a bunch of other quality guys that were brought up through different channels. It is good to be exposed to several different types of aviation-avenues to make you well rounded I supposed, but making CFI/IP time a hard requirement wouldn't work smoothly in practice.

A good way to harder them up is to stick them in the gnarly 135 crazy-town world, among others.

And like someone else said above, the ATP is just a piece of plastic. Not really "proving" a whole lot, in my opinion. My sister could memorize the gleim portion (Ok im exagerating, but you get the point), and a weak pilot could muscle their way through a canned-florida ATP ride in a duchess.

But I cannot argue with making the ATP a req. for operations like 121 FO. Won't absolutely ensure anything at all, but at least a step in the right direction.

But then again, some guy made a good point above, about guys doing thouands of hours of flying only neededing a commercial ticket, then getting the ATP as an add-on with a type, etc. So then you have that situation. So hell, I dunno the answer. Carry on......

I was only half serious with the CFI crack. My point is why just stop with an ATP? If we're adding regulation, let's go for the gold. As many have said before, getting an ATP takes a weekend in an "airworthy" twin and a DE that will play along. An ATP guarantees nothing at all other than the applicant claimed to have accumulated 1,500 hrs. You can buy your way to an ATP if necessary. Why not require a minimum number of verifiable jobs in the aviation industry? There are too many jobs to list, but examples might be banner towing, Single Pilot IFR PIC, CFI-ing, aerial application, traffic watch, jumpers, fire fighting...anything but regional F/O apparently.

If you are going to force operators into hiring experienced pilots, why stop at an ATP? Is that just good enough?

 

[WayBack]

A question for all ATP holders out there that voted no.........

Do you think you were a more experienced, well-rounded pilot when you got your ATP rating versus when you passed your commercial checkride?

No, but I was always flew by ATP standards during my training and time building.
Flying to ATP standards isn't rocket science.

 

[imacdog]

Sure you did, WayBack. We were all born perfect pilots.....

 

[imacdog]

If you are going to force operators into hiring experienced pilots, why stop at an ATP? Is that just good enough?

Asking airlines to hire folks who are appropriately rated for the type of operation they do would be good enough, yes. Requiring a CFI is a retarded statement because it does not matter how one gets to the experience level to pass an ATP ride, only that they do pass an ATP ride. If you think asking a pilot to have an ATP to fly an airliner is excessive then I hope I don't have to ride in the back of one of your flights.

 

[WayBack]

Asking airlines to hire folks who are appropriately rated for the type of operation they do would be good enough, yes. Requiring a CFI is a retarded statement because it does not matter how one gets to the experience level to pass an ATP ride, only that they do pass an ATP ride. If you think asking a pilot to have an ATP to fly an airliner is excessive then I hope I don't have to ride in the back of one of your flights.

I might be reading this wrong, but are you saying all you want them to do is pass the ATP ride?

 

[StarHustler]

In addition to an ATP, why not require at least verifiable employment of two years exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot certificate. Be it as a CFI, flying cargo, sightseeing tours etc... This way there's at least some verifiable history as to the performance of the applicant, an FAR121 carrier shouldn't be anyone's first flying job.

Additionally, the initial ATP rating should only be conducted by an actual FAA examiner (ie. not a DE). Anyone can go down to a puppy-mill flight school, pay their $2500 and walk away an ATP. If the FAA controlled all ATP checkrides directly, and the ride is provided without fee, the certificate gains credibility.

This is actually a very good idea. While I generally abhor goverment intrusion, if the FAA oversaw the granting of the ATP like they do the granting of the CFI certificate, it would help to ensure a better quality ATP rating.