Check out these times

[CF34-3B1]

I just wanted everyone to see that those 12 and 2 minimums that ASA and Comair promote, aren't so true.

Can't speak for Comair, but the low time newhires at ASA are few and far between these days, and mostly they're still being hired to fulfill the contract ASA and FSI had. I know the bridge programs with many of the colleges have stopped. I think the advertising of super low time newhires you see are mostly just that, Advertisements, trying to sell something.

I don't have any official #'s, but of the newhires I've flown with or spoken to lately, the vast majority are coming from other 121 carriers. Lots of Eagle, Commutair, etc coming over. We've got furloughed Delta guys in class, I just flew with a newhire who has 3 type ratings. Trust me, we're not hiring very many low timers.

That being said, the low timers generally do fine, and almost always have a good attitude and work ethic. The lack of experience is an issue, but not a huge one, and most of our line Capts have no problem with them.

 

[gump88]

There must have been some really "experienced" pilots on the Korean Air flight that sqwauked 7500 for the last 90 minutes of their flight on Sept. 11 due to a "misunderstanding" of ATC instructions! Yea, ab initio works?!?!?!? RIGHT!

Pay your freakin dues!!!!!!!!!!!

gump

 

[Benzene]

paying your dues

There is always someone else out there with more experience tand has supposely paid more dues than you. Get off that spot.
On the other hand, there is no short cut in aviation that will not eventually injur person or property, more than likely it will do both.

However, for the last eight months my dues have been going absolutely out the door. There is no magic number, our bussiness is not run by the FARs its run by the insurance man, with no other knowledge than averages and mean percentages.

 

[gump88]

Yea, but 500 hours and a commercial certificate should not put you anywhere near a 121 Airline!!!!


Flame away!!!!!!! I have been there......13 years in 121 ops and 20 years in aviation! And if you try to say its all about the "quality of training", thats BS!!!!! I have been actively involved in training for AOPA for the past 7 years, it's about EXPERIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can't teach JUDGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Oh well, here it comes..................haha

gump

 

[gump88]

You **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** right it reflects on their training and inexperience!!!!!


gump

 

[MetroSheriff]

Gump,

Take a deep breath...if you don't learn to relax, you are going to loose you medical.

 

[sleepy]

Those times look like they come from someone in the intern program. They work at ASA for six month as a gofer in operations or the CP's office, then go through the interview process, and are usually hired to fly. It is a pretty good deal for them. They seem to be pretty good quality people for the most part.

 

[Yankee301]

Ya, I'm happy for them, but if it is a bridge/intern program, you would think they would have them build up a few hours first. I am sure his chandelles pretty good.

 

[cpierse]

I actually know several of the 300 hour pilots that ASA just hired. As happy as I am for them to have gotten a great job, I'm not a huge fan of the program, which is essentially a PFT through FlightSafety. Pay 30 Grand after your comm/multi/inst and they essentially guarantee you the job, though your final checkride in the FlightSafety program is with an ASA guy.

As far as "paying dues" goes, I firmly believe that the quality of your flight time is DRAMATICALLY more important that the quantity. Having to get 1000s of hours is part of the game in the civilian world, but right now there are 300 hour pilots flying single seat Hornets off aircraft carriers in all kinds of weather. While we're having our little arguments about who's paying dues and who isn't, these guys - because of the quality of the training they got - are on the tip of the spear, flying 6+ hour missions in combat.

It probably took most of those guys close to 3 years or more to get those 300 hours, and for every hour in flight, they probably spent 4 or 5 in study, prep, brief and debrief, but the bottom line is that TT isn't eveything. I don't think you can look at one number and arbitrarily rate someone's experience and ability.

(And I don't just say this because my TT is low, but I admit that's probably part of it...

I'll get off my soapbox now!

 

[Wasatch CFI]

Gump88,

I half-way agree with your position. However, there is no substitute for training, and excellent training goes a long way. I've got two Navy buddies who were landing their F/A-18's on carriers with only several hundred hours to boot.

If they can do it, so can folks who come from well structured civilian training programs.

 

[gump88]

You are comparing apples and oranges! Would you take that same 300 hour F 18 pilot and put him in the cockpit of a modern commercial airliner and think that he/she could effectively operate as part of the cockpit "team" in the safe and efficient transport of paying passengers from point A to point B in low IMC? Not without a LOT of applicable training. Nor do I think that I could strap on an F 18 and safely engage the enemy!

Let's don't start the ole military versus civilian thing again. I think it has been beat to death on this board! Plus I dont think a 300 hour F 18 pilot would be paying ASA $30,000 for a freakin job!!!

Peace,
gump

 

[cpierse]

I am absolutely NOT in any way whatsoever comparing Naval Aviator training to FlightSafety's ASA program.

My discussion of Navy training is simply an illustration of how a very select group of pilots are capable of doing an extremely demanding job despite the fact that they would be considered "low time" in the civilian world. That's all...

 

[Otto]

Would you take that same 300 hour F 18 pilot and put him in the cockpit of a modern commercial airliner and think that he/she could effectively operate as part of the cockpit "team" in the safe and efficient transport of paying passengers from point A to point B in low IMC? Not without a LOT of applicable training.

Okay, definitely don't want to go down the road of civ versus military again but in answer to your question...I think you could put that F-18 guy in that situation and he would handle it extremely well. Flying in a combat tactical environment makes flying point A to point B seem really, well... EASY. Heck, in the Herc we don't even fly that fast (relative to a fighter) but I can tell you I'm a lot more task saturated flying a low level 300 hundred feet off the ground, dodging mountains, talking to other formation aircraft, talking to AWACS, talking to ATC, while reading a chart, avoiding threats while backing up the other pilot than I ever am flying point A to point B (yawn). And yes...I've flown plenty in the northeast corrider and in weather down to mins and I'm telling you, it doesn't come close. Just wanted to share my 2 cents from my own experience. Flame away!

 

[MetroSheriff]

Oh boy...It's a slippery slope and here we gooooooooooooo!

 

[gump88]

Oh boy...It's a slippery slope and here we gooooooooooooo!

Its OK MetroSheriff, I am not gonna take the bait. But why am I not surprised that a military pilot has shot his load all over this one!!