Looks Like 1500 Hours May Become the New Hiring Minimum Among Other Things:

[General Lee]

Ultimately this will be good for Southwest. It will be harder for the legacies to feed from smaller markets that their cost structures won't support.

HUH? This will be good for us. We can get rid of more RJs that suck us dry. We need to bring more mainline flights back into the mix. Instead of having 10 daily RJs from Knoxville to ATL, try 4 DC9s (all owned outright, no leases). Guess what? The same number of seats allowed, and half the gas. We can funnel pax onto those flights, and compete in other cities with Airtran and their 717s. The RJs are the problem---do you see any at profitable Southwest, Jetblue, Allegiant, or Airtran? We need fewer of them around. Some city pairs can handle them, but at larger cities competing with Airtran, are at a loss.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Nevets]

It's simple economics. I agree. The flight schools need to some how be restricted. I have no idea how you might be able to do that in our country but it is just plain too easy to get technically "qualified" to work at a 121 carrier. Maybe limit the commercial and ATP tickets to a select few schools in the country, but, allow the current private, sport, instrument training to be pursued at your local FBO.

Here in China, where I am now. Two flight schools, that's it. It's simple economics!$

Here is what ALPA said about that:

Need for Stronger Academic Emphasis

The Joint Aviation Authority (JAA), now the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and FAA pilot licensing requirements are both ICAO-compliant. The single biggest difference between EASA and FAA is knowledge requirements. The FAA theoretical knowledge is simply not as demanding as EASA, which has 14 written exams versus one by the FAA, which is a multiple-choice exam. The EASA exams require the student to be tested for 30-40 hours. By stark contrast, the FAA publishes its exam questions with answers provided so a student can purchase them, study the questions, and pass its single exam. Examination questions are not available for EASA exams in such a manner.

The least demanding Federal Aviation Regulations which govern commercial pilot license requirements (i.e., §61.125 and §61.155) specify the aeronautical knowledge requirements for commercial and airline transport pilot ratings. These rules were written decades ago, when there was no expectation that they would be used as minimum standards to train pilots to take jobs as airline first officers. The requirements emphasize weather and navigation, including interaction with air traffic control. There is some mention of aircraft aerodynamics and human factors, including aeronautical decision making and judgment as well as crew resource management. The regulations allow self-study and many such training courses emphasize passing the test rather than learning the material. We do not feel these requirements are adequate to prepare a professional airline pilot. The ground instruction of these subjects needs to be strengthened with required formal classroom academic instruction and more extensive testing and examination.

The EASA-approved training course for a commercial airline pilot tends to be rather structured and rigorous. FAA should develop and implement a corollary ground school and testing process in FAR Part 121 for all pilots who seek commercial airline careers. Testing akin to the quality of the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) exams or bar exam for attorneys would benefit aviation by serving as a screening tool to ensure that, in the future, only the most knowledgeable and dedicated pilots join the ranks of airline pilots.

Ultimately this will be good for Southwest.

Here is one part of the new bill:

Establishes comprehensive pre-employment screening of prospective pilots including an assessment of a pilot’s skills, aptitudes, airmanship and suitability for functioning in the airline’s operational environment.

I wonder if this means the end of hiring pilots without sim rides?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Am I missing something here. Everyone is talking about how the 1500 hours will save everything and that if everyone has 1500 hours then there will never be a crash and so on. Well if we look at the pilots in question, did'nt they both have atleast 1500 hours? So how will making sure every pilot has 1500 hours change anything? It doesnt make sense the FO was a CFII, not sure on the MEI, and had over 1500hours, it just drives me crazy that everyone thinks if you have a CFII and over 1500 hours you will never make a mistake. She had little to no actual, nor had she ever seen ice to that extent, but she had over 1500 hours????? I do not think it is a matter of amount of hours but quality of hours that one needs. Where and how is the pilot supposed to gain those hours I do not have the answer but I think looking at just a ,total time, requriment will not solve the problem!

Both pilots were products of "pilot mills."

 

[exphojump]

Very positive,

Rest rules are the most critical, including commuting. It will raise payrates in places like New York, Chicago and San Fran if the airlines actually have to pay a liveable rate for these metro areas. We all have done very stupid things for our commute.

Pilot records would have possibly kept this guy from being hired.

1500 hours is very good. Not saying I haven't flown with 10,000 hour pilots that are dangerous and 500 hour pilots that are sharp. But I can personally say I was sharper 1500 than at 500, as most of you can say of yourselves. Also, now is the time to do this when the airlines are contracting. In 3 to 5 years when things rebound, and retirees kick it, regional pilots and major pilots will be in an excellent position.

Depending on the legislation, it may keep ab initio pilots off US soil, like Lufthansa FOs with less than 1500 hours )) Very good for those worried about cabatoge. No worries, the developing world pilots will just pencil whip it.

Any improvements are welcome, won't matter much now, but it will in the next upturn.

 

[Poahi]

HUH? This will be good for us. We can get rid of more RJs that suck us dry.
Bye Bye---General Lee

1. You're right about TYS - You don't need 10 flights a day out of TYS. I think most travelers can work with a flight leaving every three hours or so.

2. But remember, not all travelers leaving TYS are going to ATL. They are connecting where a SWA type operation is more often point to point. Since TYS doesn't seem to be a big enough market for SWA, you're probably safe doing that. I never understood why the legacies bought so many RJ's.

3. Cutting regional capacity is much cheaper than mainline capacity. The pen is mighty(er) than a major pull down.

4. Your reported passenger yield was nearly double for regional carriers as compared to the domestic ops for the first quarter of this year. Delta's major share of losses don't appear to be coming from RJ's.

 

[Trash8Mofo]

We could cut down the number pilots by making an SAT score of 1300 the minimum to get an ATP. That would thin out the ranks.

Pilotyip, I am pretty sure that you think some sort of pre-training screening is an elitist idea. I surely can understand you position as a manager. Your job is to find the lowest labor and operational cost; I understand that.

Pre-training screening or test, however, is completely necessary. A MD takes MCAT before entering med school, a JD takes LSAT before entering law school, and a military flight officer needs to jump through a few hoops before granted a flight slot. So why not civilian pilots? why not some sort of aptitude test before granted flight training. Flying an airliners with passengers on board is not the time or the place to weed out the weak ones.

 

[General Lee]

1. You're right about TYS - You don't need 10 flights a day out of TYS. I think most travelers can work with a flight leaving every three hours or so.

2. But remember, not all travelers leaving TYS are going to ATL. They are connecting where a SWA type operation is more often point to point. Since TYS doesn't seem to be a big enough market for SWA, you're probably safe doing that. I never understood why the legacies bought so many RJ's.

3. Cutting regional capacity is much cheaper than mainline capacity. The pen is mighty(er) than a major pull down.

4. Your reported passenger yield was nearly double for regional carriers as compared to the domestic ops for the first quarter of this year. Delta's major share of losses don't appear to be coming from RJ's.

Anywhere we compete with a 717 needs a DC9---at least. We lose everytime we go up against a larger plane with lower overall costs. If they charge $50 a seat and we match it, we are losing with an RJ (the DC9s are all paid for). So, look at all of the cities our RJs and their 717s fly to, and they need to be gone. If you want to go to Madison, WI on an RJ and that is the only plane on the route, then great. We will be basing 10 DC9s in ATL initially (before or after we combine certificates), and that is their purpose. Your role to medium and small cities just got smaller. Now, to very small cities that Airtran couldn't care any less about---those will be yours. Have at um.

Our major source of loss for the quarter was a guy in the fuel hedging department who rolled the dice and LOST. But you see we also have some contracts with you guys that have us at a loss ALL OF THE TIME. It is called "we buy your fuel regardless of the costs, and you get profit, regardless of our loss." That needs to change. And, eventually it will. Your CEO's at the regionals are now starting to sweat it. No more gravy train coming up here.

You are right that cutting regional capacity is easier than mainline capacity. Guess what? You feed us. You are contracted help, and the work is going to the lowest bidder most of the time (Mesaba and Mesa). That won't change in the future. Your costs will go higher (1500 hour newhires want more money), and at the same time you will need to be cheaper if you want Delta to give you any feed. That means you will get smaller. Sign of the times.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Poahi]

Anywhere we compete with a 717 needs a DC9---at least. We lose everytime we go up against a larger plane with lower overall costs. ...
Bye Bye---General Lee

This is what I meant about cost structure ~

Low-cost carriers, including Southwest, AirTran and JetBlue, in the U.S. have placed significant competitive pressure on us and other network carriers in the domestic market. In addition, other network carriers have also significantly reduced their costs over the last several years. Our ability to compete effectively depends, in part, on our ability to maintain a competitive cost structure. If we cannot maintain our costs at a competitive level, then our business, financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected. In light of increased jet fuel costs and other issues in recent years, we expect consolidation to occur in the airline industry. As a result of consolidation, we may face significant competition from larger carriers that may be able to generate higher amounts of revenue and compete more efficiently.

Source: DAL 2008 Annual Report

 

[Erlanger]

But also what needs to be done is oversight of the 1500 hrs that pilots will be building. It has to be good quality flying. The ATP requirements need to be changed.
Can't be someone who has a rich dad that bought them a C172 and they're racking up hours in it.

So someone get roughly 250+ hrs for their private thru commercial work and a few hrs for their ATP training and the rest needs to be either as a flight instructor or Pt. 135 work. BFR's and other training would count to. Must be verifiable flying or atleast most of it. Not going to be 100% foolproof of course but better then what's in place now.

 

[Singlecoil]

Rebecca went to Big Bend Community College, which is a two-year program and certainly no pilot mill. She also stated on the flight recorder that she had flown in ice since she got hired and was fine with it.