No more weak links in the cockpit boy and girls..
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1032
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1032
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.
yeah because those Delta Pilots are so much better!!!!
Anyone that thinks a new hour requirement translates into better pay or QOL is dreaming. What about the early mid 90's where a regional FO had to have at least 1500 hours and closer to 2500 to get hired, only to make 14,000 a year?
Wrong again Tarzan. The loophole about reducing time towards the ATP will mean more of the same. Although I do agree it's a move in the right direction. No more 251 hour wonders in the flight deck. They need to be gaining experience in aircraft they are "fit" to operate. Not increasing the workload of the PIC.First and largest nail in the coffin for the Regional airlines. Once retirements begin again, the bottom feeders are fooked. Maybe things will change before they all disappear costs for contract carriers will probably become high enough for the flying to go back to mainline. Less seats, less jobs, but better pay.
The "academic training hours" is the loophole for ERAU, Gulfstream, Comair and the rest. These training hours will have to be in an FAA approved school, in other words, same ol' same ol' + Govt b.s.
This is the sentence that concerns me the most...
Enables the FAA to consider allowing certain academic training hours that may increase the level of safety above the minimum requirements to be counted towards the 1,500-hour ATP certificate requirement.
If the ATP requirement sticks, I think the days of $20K/year regional pilot F/O's will be over on the next up cycle, and maybe permanently after that. I'll eat my words about there not being anything resembling a pilot shortage in the next several years in that case. However, if the sentence above allows the Regionals to reduce that 1,500 hr. ATP requirement by a significant amount (say half), it may just turn out to be more of the same.
I guess we'll see what the Senate has to say....