ALPA backing "restricted" ATP? WHY??

[waveflyer]

To shorten my post- will we be limiting civilian pilots To those with the talent to make it through or to those with the $money$ (or more accurately- who's parents have the $$) to make it through.

I still think we'd be better off with a more stringent and standardized academic process- our writtens are a joke thus creating the disparity of talent within the civilian ranks.

Nevermind the hypocrisy of very low time military pilots commanding large jets...

The problem is, and always has been, LOW STANDARDS- not some random flight time requirement

 

[cale42]

I think it will in fact make it more difficult for civilian pilots, not just monetarily. However the system can work out for everyone.

If we treat professional flight training as some sort of rigorous post grad 18 to 24 month full time program it could work very well. Intensive course work with real exams about aerodynamics, and intensive flying. In fact modeling it on some sort of UPT could be a great way to go. I can't imagine it would be much more expensive than any current aviation program, and it's just what you'll have to do.

Overall that would create better trained pilots and at the same time limit the supply into the industry. Think how different it would be if you had to put your flight school GPA and performance on a resume, rather than just the fact that you have the ratings.

cale

 

[ACL65PILOT]

You forget that as the military goes we are decreasing the number of stick and rudder pilots too. Unless we allow UAV time to count toward ttl time, there are not going to be a sizable number of pilots entering our ranks from the armed services as we move forward either.

Of those that do gain the coveted wings, the selection will be even more stringent than it already is. Maybe they will be smart enough to steer clear of this car wreck of an industry!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

You forget that as the military goes we are decreasing the number of stick and rudder pilots too. Unless we allow UAV time to count toward ttl time, there are not going to be a sizable number of pilots entering our ranks from the armed services as we move forward either.

Of those that do gain the coveted wings, the selection will be even more stringent than it already is. Maybe they will be smart enough to steer clear of this car wreck of an industry!

The future of the profession..... and those pilots will be made at the regional level.....

Also, if 200 mutli crew and acredited school are requirements, then first year pay is going to have to go up... ROI via the indentured servitude isn't going to work...

 

[Lear70]

We'll see. I personally believe, even if those requirements are passed into law, it'll be at least one, maybe even TWO hiring cycles (7-10 years) before the Regionals feel the pinch.

Too many furloughed/unemployed high-time, experienced pilots on the streets right now with decreasing ASM's at almost every carrier. Will likely stay that way for a while, too...

 

[Flightdawg]

Nevermind the hypocrisy of very low time military pilots commanding large jets...

Update your rant file; military pilots aren't being trained in large numbers like before the end of the Cold War. Those who are trained are staying in until retirement because, as we all know, the airlines have been sucking for the past decade. Many on furlough who could went back on active duty and are not accepting recall until they can take military retirement.

Another note, for the first time the Air Force is now buying more UAV's than manned aircraft. It won't be long before they are training more UAV pilots than actual pilots.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-03/new-era-military-aviation-gets-new-set-wings

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/03/airforce_uav_audit_030109/

Sorry, but you're going to have to blame someone else for your failure to advance in this profession.

 

[waveflyer]

My failure?

That wasn't the point, (nor is it accurate- btw- I've advanced to the top in short order on several fronts- believe me- I'm good- this isn't about me- it's about making sure that broke kids like me have the same opportunities to work hard and succeed that I did)

The point that this law is making is that experience trumps training and education-
if that's true, why have we always let 20-something's with very low time command very advanced jets in the military?

I advocate for the talented to have the opportunity to work hard and get where I got. I have always said our academics require such little thought and discipline that any schlep can make it through - this isn't right. Talented people never want to make an average wage. Average people are okay with average wages. Up the standards and pay will go up.
Requiring more flight time just isn't the biggest safety or pay issue-

It's my feeling that this rule will put up financial barriers to entry in this career that very well could have excluded me from the career- and will not address safety or pay-

Trust fund babies will be the ones who can afford to get through the process- and it's been the self-entitled pilots that have been the worst to fly with.

 

[igneousy2]

Just a couple of things.

First off why do we allow 22 year olds to command military jets and have a problem with them being first officers at an airline. At least from the outside looking in as I was 100% civilian...the military process is about getting pilots to meet the standards or washing them out. On the civilian side, there is a lot of allowing students to go through over and over until they get lucky and meet the standard as long as there money accounts don't go negative. Military...3 lessons...meet these standards or you're out...civilian, take as much time as you need, need to repeat a lesson, no problem it's your dime. Before everybody gets their panties all bunchy i'm not saying that all military pilots are better than all civilian pilots, however, I am saying that an aircraft operator knows what he's getting with a greater certainty with a graduate of UPT then they are with a brand new Commercial pilot.

As far as worrying about the other pilots coming up through the ranks...don't mean to sound like an A*hole but hey...the first step in solving a problem is figuring out who's got the problem. ALPA does not collect 1.9% from most of our pay checks to make sure that a clear path exists to the left seat of a wide body. Part of our problem is that ALPA over the years has forgotten that it's ONLY primary mission is to increase the career value of the profession for those currently in the field. All other things need to be secondary.

I hope ALPA attempts to take the next step in the example of the ABA and the AMA and start to convince congress that they should be the ac-creditors of the flight schools...or at the very least, the authority in setting the standards. There is 10 times the need for doctors as pilots in this country yet there are only 130 accredited medical schools in the entire United States...far less than the number of 141 flight schools.

As far as Gulfstream profiting from this...not a chance...this nearly destroys there business model...or at least pushes out the point in time when clients could benefit from there program to a point where much of the luster of a flying job has gone away.

I think we are long way from calling this complete but at least we are headed in the right direction.

 

[ACL65PILOT]

This will sound rash, but the 22 y/o that is flying a f-16 is expendable. His jet is expendable and that is why he is the one that is first to go.

He/she has an ejection seat to save the investment in the pilot, but simple put as a butter bar lieutenant you are young fearless and expendable. Add to it the screening process is just a tad bit higher than all of the pft joints.

Places like DAL were predominately military for many years for one reason, it was and still is a know quantity. Civilian training used to be spotty at best. That changed in the late 80's. More civilians were hired. With the advent of regional airline the entry position has a very low bar. There has traditionally be a job for every applicant. That lends itself to bigger issues.

Raising the mins means that it give pilots a change to go kill themselves without unsuspecting passenger along for the ride. Much like we let our military pilots go take the same change in a 30 million dollar fighter. Both are expendable, and generally will just kill them and their RIO/right-backseater.

1500 or 750 hrs will not make a better pilot, it will just help thin the heard a little bit. Maybe scare a few pilots prior to gaining entry to a 121 cockpit. In the end that is good.

 

[beagle pilot]

All accurate points, ACL65 except the initial premise; it isn´t a "22 y/o" pilot. By the time they complete training and are allowed to fly that F-16 they are pushing 25 years old. The parts about expendability and the ejection seat are 100% accurate.

 

[waveflyer]

I agree too acl- that's why I say make the ratings and written process more comprehensive and the truly dangerous pilots will be weeded out- right now, the process ONLY weeds out the extremely bad. An increase in flt time doesn't solve that problem-

 

[imacdog]

I really don't care.

Really.

I did it. Thousands of other pilots I know did it. Upcoming pilots can, too. Don't like it? Go do something else for a living.

200 Multicrew means they have to get a JOB that REQUIRES them to be in the aircraft, not just hopping back and forth in a Cessna/Piper/Cirrus to see your hot girlfriend/boyfriend in grad school upstate. That means a jet that requires an SIC (over 12,500 or in Part 135 operations) or in an aircraft that requires an SIC in lieu of an approved autopilot by Ops Spec.

It will take them that much longer to get through the requirements, give them some REAL WORLD experience to go with it, and add another bar to reach in the pursuit of a flying career. The only downside is operators like GIA would still have a way to function. I can see the ad now:

"Want to get that airline job? 200 Multicrew the only thing standing in your way? Come pay us $75,000 and we'll give you what you need!"

All-in-all, I wish the multicrew requirement were higher, say half that 750 hours required TT. Hope it makes its way into the bill.

I see. Do you realize how few opportunities there are to fly in a multi-crew environment that isn't A) 121 already or B) a 135 or 91 operator that won't look at you without an ATP, which is what you're trying to get. There is plenty of opportunity for pilots to become exceptionally skilled and experienced without being in a crew - in fact I would much rather fly on a regional where the FO got their time flying single pilot freight instead of being a gear bitch on a King Air.

 

[Lear70]

I see. Do you realize how few opportunities there are to fly in a multi-crew environment that isn't A) 121 already or B) a 135 or 91 operator that won't look at you without an ATP, which is what you're trying to get.

No fewer or more than there were when I was trying to do it in '94 after I graduated college and spent 2 years instructing while beating the bushes and networking on the field to get that first Part 135 King Air job.

Which means, again, that I don't really CARE how long it takes other people. I did it. Thousands of other pilots did, too. So can the up-and-coming pilots as well. It made me a better pilot by having to do it, and I'm now thankful for that experience.

There is plenty of opportunity for pilots to become exceptionally skilled and experienced without being in a crew - in fact I would much rather fly on a regional where the FO got their time flying single pilot freight instead of being a gear bitch on a King Air.

Granted. But you'd have to write that into the legislation. Instead of 250 multi-crew, let 500 hours of single-engine Part 135 PIC time count 1 hour for every 2 towards that 250. I don't have a problem with that, but you have to specifically and STRICTLY delineate that requirement and not just 500 hours be-bopping around Part 91 in a Cherokee or Seneca.

If it's something you're concerned about, call ALPA and suggest it. Seriously.

 

[imacdog]

I'm not an ALPA member. I'm just sitting back and enjoying as the law of unintended consequences unfolds, lead by completely out-of-touch union leaders and elected government officials. Have fun. I also paid my dues and had over 2500 hours of 135 PIC experience before joining a 121 carrier as an FO. Highly qualified by most people's standards, yet because I didn't sit bitch in a turboprop I would not have been eligible. Go figure that one out.

 

[waveflyer]

What about tougher academics more in line with the military and JAA?