FAA Proposes to Raise Airline Pilot Qualification Standards

[dooork]

If I read the article accuratly, the FAA is saying it (FAA) took over a decade, 61 accidents, 107 lives, and 28 injuries to come up with a "proposal" for better training.
The "proposal" will then have 60 days for the "public" to suggest changes!
This is what the tax payer gets for their money.

 

[Nevets]

Funny.... So the Colgan FO would have still been eligible for an ATP?? Am I mis-remembering something here?

I don't know. What were both pilots HIRED with? I think both of them were low time when hired, no?

 

[Golden Falcon]

Why dont they suggest more sleep for crews??

 

[rtmcfi]

Sure. There are always outliers, but the hiring data is very clear that on AVERAGE, the structured program guys are better.

Before you all start flaming away, I'm not saying that YOU aren't better because YOU did 61. I'm saying that there's several years worth of solid hiring data evaluating the training success of part 141 vs 61, and all things being equal, more 141 guys make it through training than 61.

That data was taken to "the hill" during the deliberations on this rule, and that's where the exemption came from.

Not saying you are wrong, but where did the data come from? I'm laying pretty heavy odds that the studies were bought and paid for by AABI.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Not saying you are wrong, but where did the data come from? I'm laying pretty heavy odds that the studies were bought and paid for by AABI.

Internal hiring data.

 

[rtmcfi]

Internal hiring data.

Did you get a chance to see the actual Data? The study you are most likely referencing was bought and paid for by AABI. You can check it out here....

http://www.aabi.aero/2010 Pilot Source Study_Results V2.pdf

Given who paid for it, and when and why the study was begun, I have a tough time finding it impartial.

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics you know......

 

[777forever]

Did you get a chance to see the actual Data? The study you are most likely referencing was bought and paid for by AABI. You can check it out here....

http://www.aabi.aero/2010 Pilot Source Study_Results V2.pdf

Given who paid for it, and when and why the study was begun, I have a tough time finding it impartial.

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics you know......

What is your insistence on this AABI? He said internal hiring data, not some paid study. And yes he has seen the hiring data.

Put facts down on the table and you guys start flaming away from left field. Tell single pilot 135 guys that statistically they have the hardest time in training the forums are ready to execute you.

 

[johnpeace]

To clarify, a guy who goes to some 141 school and gets a four-year degree in "aviation" can jump ahead of a guy who studies engineering and builds his time at a 61 school. Is this right? Seems kinda...dumb.

What else would you expect from the government?

 

[rtmcfi]

What is your insistence on this AABI? He said internal hiring data, not some paid study. And yes he has seen the hiring data.

Put facts down on the table and you guys start flaming away from left field. Tell single pilot 135 guys that statistically they have the hardest time in training the forums are ready to execute you.

This study was most certainly a paid study. It was not really internal.
This AABI is who paid for (and assisted in the production of) the "internal" study. You already know that, right? Cause you read the results of the study, right? I'm betting neither of you have seen the actual data. I know I haven't. I have seen the results that those that have a financial stake in the outcome want me to see. Follow the money. Please read this link. You didn't read the last one very carefully, if at all.

Here is more about the study:

http://www.aabi.aero/2010 04 10 Pilot Source Study Summary v02.pdf

I am not arguing that graduates of an aviation training regime from a college program don't have an easier time with training in the 121 world. They do require less retraining. So do flight instructors. Statistically, flight instructing had as big an impact in trainability as having your training done through a college program. I don't know how much more of a difficult time the people from various backgrounds have. Neither do you, unless you have access to the actual data. I am betting it is not much, or airlines would not hire anyone but AABI grads.

I find it ridiculous that the government is going to give the big schools an advantage over FBO's when it comes to being able to work for the airlines. The question the study asked was whether the pilots from AABI schools were more trainable. Not whether or not they were safer. IF the AABI schools students are so much easier to train, let that be their advantage in the hiring process. Giving them 33% off of their hourly requirements is wrong. Unless you are going to extend that courtesy to all flight instructors as well.

1500 hours should be the mins for everyone.......Military, Flight Instructor, ABBI grad or not.

I agree with everything ASA aviator wrote except that structured program guys are better. They may require less training, but that does not make them better pilots.

 

[J.Otto]

How long has 141 been around anyway? I would imagine 61 was the initial way civilians obtained certs, other than the military.