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.