Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

FAA Proposes to Raise Airline Pilot Qualification Standards

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

dirkdigler

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2002
Posts
143
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 27, 2012
Contact: Les Dorr, Jr. or Alison Duquette
Phone: 202-267-3883

FAA Proposes to Raise Airline Pilot Qualification Standards

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today proposed to substantially raise the qualification requirements for first officers who fly for U.S. passenger and cargo airlines.

Consistent with a mandate in the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010, the proposed rule would require first officers – also known as co-pilots – to hold an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate, requiring 1,500 hours of pilot flight time. Currently, first officers are required to have only a commercial pilot certificate, which requires 250 hours of flight time. The proposal also would require first officers to have an aircraft type rating, which involves additional training and testing specific to the airplanes they fly.

“Safety in all modes of transportation is our number-one priority,” said Secretary LaHood. “This proposed rule reflects our commitment to the safety of the traveling public by making sure our pilots are the most qualified and best trained in the world.”

“Our pilots need to have the right training and the right qualifications so they can be prepared to handle any situation they encounter in the cockpit,” said FAA Acting Administrator Michael Huerta. “I believe this proposed rule will ensure our nation’s pilots have the necessary skills and experience.”

Other highlights of the proposed rule include:

◘ A requirement for a pilot to have a minimum of 1,000 flight hours as a pilot in air carrier operations that require an ATP prior to serving as a captain for a U.S. airline.

◘ Enhanced training requirements for an ATP certificate, including 50 hours of multi-engine flight experience and completion of a new FAA-approved training program.

◘ An allowance for pilots with fewer than 1,500 hours of flight time, but who have an aviation degree or military pilot experience, to obtain a “restricted privileges” ATP certificate. These pilots could serve only as a first officer, not as a captain. Former military pilots with 750 hours of flight time would be able to apply for an ATP certificate with restricted privileges. Graduates of a four-year baccalaureate aviation degree program would be able to obtain an ATP with 1,000 hours of flight time, only if they also obtained a commercial pilot certificate and instrument rating from a pilot school affiliated with the university or college.

The proposal addresses recommendations from an Aviation Rulemaking Committee, the National Transportation Safety Board, and the FAA’s Call to Action to improve airline safety.

The proposed rule can be viewed at: http://archives.gov/federal-register/public-inspection/ The public may comment on the proposal for 60 days after publication on February 29.
 
Say good bye to 300 hr new hires.. anyone really think this will help raise salary if passed?
 
I don't see the problem, if John Q. Public thinks he's safer after a dude drops $5000 and five days of training time so we are safer, so be it....

Sarcasm off.
 
It seems like the type rating requirement for copilots would be a safety win, the college degree thing seems like crony capitalism.
 
this is a terrible fix for a problem that they are manufacturing. Did Congress even read the NTSB report? Total hours were not a major concern, but fatigue was a HUGE factor. Fixing fatigue issues= costs airlines $$$. Making pilots fly longer= costs low/underpaid new hires more time/money AND doesn't solve ANYTHING.
 
This is one of the puzzle pieces that needs to fall into place for our profession to start making gains again.

Reducing supply of pilots by raising barriers to entry, increasing demand for pilots through the new flight and duty time regs, the upcoming retirements. All of these things fall on the right side of the equation to make pilots have more strength in negotiating.

As the contracts improve, there will be a better reward for the pilots who do put in the effort to get their 1000 or 1500 hours and ATP.

I expect the airlines to start applying for all kinds of waivers to these two new regs, if the FAA and DOT hold the line and the unions negotiating contracts realize that they are in a stronger position because of it, we could finally start to see some gains for a change after a losing decade for our profession.
 
Last edited:
This is one of the puzzle pieces that needs to fall into place for our profession to start making gains again.

Reducing supply of pilots by raising barriers to entry, increasing demand for pilots through the new flight and duty time regs, the upcoming retirements. All of these things fall on the right side of the equation to make pilots have more strength in negotiating.

As the contracts improve, there will be a better reward for the pilots who do put in the effort to get their 1000 or 1500 hours and ATP.

I expect the airlines to start applying for all kinds of waivers to these two new regs, if the FAA and DOT hold the line and the unions negotiating contracts realize that they are in a stronger position because of it, we could finally start to see some gains for a change after a losing decade for our profession.
What he said... ^^^^^^

With the low starting wage combined with the high bar of entry (taking 3-5 years again of instructing AFTER college to get 1,000 hours total time), people will avoid the profession (unless they just love to fly).

It will take YEARS for the regionals to see any effects, and the Legacies/Majors probably won't see much impact at all (too many RJ drivers out there giving supply for decades), but it's a step in the right direction.

The new rest and duty rules were meant to address fatigue (and the extra hour protected "behind the door" is the only real benefit for those who were interested in safety, and not the money for flying more during the day). The back-side-of-the-clock duty limit helps, as well, but not much help on flip-flopping circadian rhythm.

Rest and duty problems are where they should have focused their energy...
 
I expect the airlines to start applying for all kinds of waivers to these two new regs.......

Doubt it. The only companies that might try to fight this or that this will affect will be regionals. I think they'll be swimming upstream because they're exactly who this rule is targeting. These days, major airline/cargo companies hardly ever hire anyone who can't already get an ATP.
 
Whats to say airlines wont ask for scope relaxations since there is no more talent to fly the RJs. Food for thought
 
Whats to say airlines wont ask for scope relaxations since there is no more talent to fly the RJs. Food for thought

Hey I'm all for that. If there's no one to fly them, then they become a "mainline" airframe. Like it should've been from the start.
 
Not for a while yet... still a lot of pilots out there in the pipeline that meet the minimums.

It'll take the age-65 retirements kicking in for a few years to trigger movement in the Regionals and a few years of Regional hiring to dry up the pool of people that are qualified under the new rules. Best guess, 5-7 years before they have a hard time hiring at the Regional level, and THEN they'll have to lobby for it.

CAPA / ALPA contributions will be VERY important at that point to continue lobbying to keep the rules solidly in place.
 
Not for a while yet... still a lot of pilots out there in the pipeline that meet the minimums.

It'll take the age-65 retirements kicking in for a few years to trigger movement in the Regionals and a few years of Regional hiring to dry up the pool of people that are qualified under the new rules. Best guess, 5-7 years before they have a hard time hiring at the Regional level, and THEN they'll have to lobby for it.

CAPA / ALPA contributions will be VERY important at that point to continue lobbying to keep the rules solidly in place.

Agree. Lets hope RALPO, I mean ALPO doesn't screw the pooch on this one.

Has anyone ever noticed how the AMA controls the pipeline for new doctors? How much do you think docs would make if there were 50% more of them?
 
Agree. Lets hope RALPO, I mean ALPO doesn't screw the pooch on this one.

Has anyone ever noticed how the AMA controls the pipeline for new doctors? How much do you think docs would make if there were 50% more of them?

I have. You are absolutely right. Without the supply constraints on new medical students, doctors would not make anywhere near the amount of money they make today.

For this level of demand, we would need a lot higher minimums than a college degree, 1000 hours, and an ATP. I think most pilots get there first airline job with at least 1000 hours. I was lucky to get my first gig with 1600 TT and 200 multi which was considered low-time at my regional.

So, unless my situation was abnormal, which I do not think it is, this regulation will not have much effect on our pricing power. It is a step in the right direction for once though!
 
Last edited:
I don't agree with any exceptions to the new proposal. That goes for both university puppy mills and military flyers. An ATP and 1500 hours is not an unreasonable requirement regardless of background.
 
What are the current regulations on the books as it is now... dont you have to have 1500/ATP by 2013? Isnt this a done deal already?
 
I don't agree with any exceptions to the new proposal. That goes for both university puppy mills and military flyers. An ATP and 1500 hours is not an unreasonable requirement regardless of background.
I do. You gonna tell an F-15 jockey he has to go rent a Seminole for 500 hours because he doesn't have enough time to fly an RJ?
 
I dont think we should start a pissin contest of mil vs. civilian, but I do think 1500 isn't that hard to get an ATP and should be the standard...Yes the fighter guys will have a harder time and I agree with the exception for the amount of training involved just to be qualed in a military jet...But I do NOT agree with the aviation university exception, no reason you are "that much better" by reading about it in class, the only way to get the experience is through training and flying...
 
I dont think we should start a pissin contest of mil vs. civilian, but I do think 1500 isn't that hard to get an ATP and should be the standard...Yes the fighter guys will have a harder time and I agree with the exception for the amount of training involved just to be qualed in a military jet...But I do NOT agree with the aviation university exception, no reason you are "that much better" by reading about it in class, the only way to get the experience is through training and flying...
Bingo. My understanding is the military guys don't leave with all that much flight time, but it's hard to argue managing a fighter / attack jet or transport doesn't qualify you for an airline job.

I'm not ex-military, but I've seen some of the stuff a few Navy T-34 guys were going over during a ground session in an FBO. I was impressed by how in-depth the systems knowledge required of them was.
 
I do. You gonna tell an F-15 jockey he has to go rent a Seminole for 500 hours because he doesn't have enough time to fly an RJ?

Not reading this whole thread- but I disagree- hardly any f-15 guys applying to airlines have less than that-
And still- I've always thought the exemptions they get from major airline competitive mins were crap- the low time f-teen drivers are some of the worst airline pilots we got
-
And most will admit that once they upgrade and have to fly with them-

They aren't good in crews and are doing a completely different type of flying-
The competitive min should be 1000tpic in a crew environment-
JMO
 
Not reading this whole thread- but I disagree- hardly any f-15 guys applying to airlines have less than that-
And still- I've always thought the exemptions they get from major airline competitive mins were crap- the low time f-teen drivers are some of the worst airline pilots we got
-
And most will admit that once they upgrade and have to fly with them-

They aren't good in crews and are doing a completely different type of flying-
The competitive min should be 1000tpic in a crew environment-
JMO

:confused: That's strange. Some of the best airline pilots I've ever flown with started flying fighters. Maybe your airline needs to work on their hiring criteria - sounds like you get some pretty big tools out of the RJ world too.

Blanket statements usually don't help you make your point very well.
 
Yeah- I agree, and we don't need to do this tired debate again- but stereotypes exists for a reason.
The difference is that civilian pilots know we have our tools- military guys wrap themselves in the flag and make all kinds of aggressive excuses for the stick up some of these guys arses.
I do find that funny when FedEx has such a discrepancy between civilian and military hires.
None of which has anything to do with being "qualified" for a major airline job, which was my point. Saying a pilot has potential, has nothing to do with being qualified. I have no doubt the fighter pilot is able to pass training and be a good pilot at a major-but I could have passed training at a major airline with no issues at one quarter of the experience that was required.
I doubt I will ever agree with the 1500 hour fighter pilot getting on with a major, or any lesser qualifications for military pilots.
But feel free to make your case- I also know I won't change this hookup reality- but military guys would have more credibility if y'all would police your own. Bc it really does make the good, cool mil guys look really bad-
Don't believe me, ask your peers.
 
:confused: That's strange. Some of the best airline pilots I've ever flown with started flying fighters. Maybe your airline needs to work on their hiring criteria - sounds like you get some pretty big tools out of the RJ world too.

Blanket statements usually don't help you make your point very well.


..and some of the worst. I have seen a few ex fighter types that are very weak airline pilots. Before you get all wrapped around the axel, my statement is just to support your comment that stereotypes are wrong. Very good pilots come from any number of backgrounds, it's the attitude they bring to the table that determines how good of an airline pilot they will be, not what they flew.
 
..and some of the worst. I have seen a few ex fighter types that are very weak airline pilots. Before you get all wrapped around the axel, my statement is just to support your comment that stereotypes are wrong. Very good pilots come from any number of backgrounds, it's the attitude they bring to the table that determines how good of an airline pilot they will be, not what they flew.

I have seen some old men that are bitter and should not be flying an airliner.

Before you get wrapped around an axle, I am just saying poeple should not stereotype.


Fixed as I was wrong, Dan is not the one that goes crying to the moderator about my posts.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom