Wasn't there a time back pre 2001 when 300 - 500 hours was the norm? I hear alot of Captains complaining about low mins when a lot of them where hired 9 or 10 years ago with the same time. I can honestly say that I've flown with low time FO's and they do a great job. I think in comes down to training.
NOT flying an RJ, there weren't too many around before 2001 anyway. In the late 90's after most regionals did away with the pay for training programs, you could get on with the lower tier turboprop 19 seat airlines with low time, IF you knew people and had a BS degree from the right university. Back then, if you wanted to get with Comair, SKW, or Am Eagle, you needed good cargo or commuter T-prop time, or jet time. Now, you need a pulse and a 500 TT.
What concerns me with the low timers I see having trouble the most are deficiencies in landing a swept wing no-slat jet. They aren't used to the speed regime (which a turboprop would assist in teaching greatly) and will float, balloon, drift, land with too much sideload, too much vertical rate, too slow, you name it. They
don't have the experience, ability, and confidence to quickly see and fix problems that can arise in the seconds from thrust reduction to touchdown. The CA ends up actually giving flight instruction to save the landing, it's either that, a balked landing, 'my aircraft'.
My fear is this will happen: a weak CA permits a new FO to flare and float an RJ too high (hung up at 50') with too much of a thrust reduction (flight idle), and the A/C crashes in a high sink rate/low energy state (stalling) because no one called for or performed a balked landing. IMO it's just a matter of time. I've seen this happen a few times at night, the last time I told my FO to lower the nose twice, I'm sure we would've impacted hard otherwise (rather than very slightly firm).
Anyway, be careful guys, and listen to those Radio Altimeter calls.
