Looks Like 1500 Hours May Become the New Hiring Minimum Among Other Things:

[Golden Falcon]

Yes it was...when i was getting into the civilian game (commuters they were called then) in 82 one needed at least an ATP, 2000hrs, and time on type was preferred..this is to fly a Metroliner, or a Beech 99...

 

[ofacegangsta]

he said "DC-9".

 

[ultrarunner]

Here is one part of the new bill:

Establishes comprehensive pre-employment screening of prospective pilots including an assessment of a pilot’s skills, aptitudes, airmanship and suitability for functioning in the airline’s operational environment.

I wonder if this means the end of hiring pilots without sim rides?

Assessment of pilot skills.....airmanship.....


I would say so.

 

[Draginass]

Hey draginass...you might have a little more firsthand knowledge before spouting off about something you obviously have no idea about. Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

1500 hours in 10 years averages about 144 hours per year after UPT. That's 12 hours per month, not including deployments. If you're not flying averaging at least 12 hours a month in a high performance or heavy jet, maybe you shouldn't be flying unsupervised anyway.

I agree with changing the minimum to 1500 hours for an ATP. Granted military time is more valuable than 1500 hour in a civil SE or light ME, but if it's the min, then it's the min. I believe that pilot training committements are essentially about 10 years now anyway.

As far as first hand knowledge - I think over 20 years in, including 16 in the cockpit as AC, IP, Stan-Eval, Ops Officer, + etc. fits that bill. Granted my experience is from a few years ago, but if military pilots are now flying that little currently due either to budget constraints or MC rates, then readiness must be a grave issue.

 

[pilotyip]

It is a grave issue

1500 hours in 10 years averages about 144 hours per year after UPT. That's 12 hours per month, not including deployments. If you're not flying averaging at least 12 hours a month in a high performance or heavy jet, maybe you shouldn't be flying unsupervised anyway.

The 1500 pilot had one tour EC-135's followed by staff positions. There was an accident last year with a P-3 where the PPC had 1.7 hours in last 90 days before he landed long and went of the end of the runway destroyed the airplane. With very few new airplanes coming into the military, the old ones are worn out out and the military is trying save airframe hours by not flying for training and proficiency.

 

[pilotyip]

I agree, bring it on

Pre-training screening or test, however, is completely necessary. A MD takes MCAT before entering med school, a JD takes LSAT before entering law school, and a military flight officer needs to jump through a few hoops before granted a flight slot. So why not civilian pilots? why not some sort of aptitude test before granted flight training. Flying an airliners with passengers on board is not the time or the place to weed out the weak ones.

You read me wrong, I was being somewhat sarcastic, everyone has all kinds of ideas that will limit the number of pilots to reduce supply and thereby raise wages. But many of these are convoluted controls on a free market system that would be used to their benefit. By having a very strict standardized screening test as you proposed you would limit the number by a natural selection process. I used the SAT of 1300 because it would eliminate around 80-90% of the present pilot population. BTW we gave a mini SAT type test as part of pilot screening and a high score on this test was the best single predictor of a successful pilot. It is a good tool.

Pilotyip, I am pretty sure that you think some sort of pre-training screening is an elitist idea. I surely can understand you position as a manager. Your job is to find the lowest labor and operational cost; I understand that.

Again not at all, we had the highest wages in our industry sector, in the end it was part of what made us non-competitive and caused the cut back last December.

 

[Beaver79]

Up to a year to re-write rest regs? A year is a long time; I can't help but wonder what the various airline management groups would do during that time to weaken the fatigue rules.

It's the government!!! They will have August recess, time of for the holidays, spring break...and coupled with their strong work ethic, I think a year would be a MIRACLE!

 

[Lear70]

Rebecca went to Big Bend Community College, which is a two-year program and certainly no pilot mill. She also stated on the flight recorder that she had flown in ice since she got hired and was fine with it.

Obviously, she WASN'T fine with it and, quite obviously, her experience was not up to the challenge of the situation the Captain put them in, as she missed all the signs of the approaching stall, saying only "Uuhhhh" before the shaker went off, and doing nothing when the Captain pooch-screwed the recovery...

except RETRACTING the flaps.

Incidentally, I like the idea of having a pilot skills assessment before being able to ENTER ATP training. Weed out those who have no aptitude for the profession and it will help everyone.

 

[q100]

Minor point: The a/c was nowhere near a stall, at least not until the yoke was yanked back. It was rapidly slowing to stick shaker speed, which was some 20 kts above normal as the INCR REF switch on the de-ice panel was selected on.

IMHO (5,000+ hours Dash8), the problem with their inexperience in icing conditions was not that they lost control due to icing, but this. They got so hung up on being in "so much ice" that they lost sight of job one, which is fly the dam.n airplane. The crew also did not grasp the implications of the INCR REF switch and had not been SUCCESSFULLY trained to handle an unexpected stick shaker.

In short, ICE did not cause this crash. Mostly I think it comes down to the way Colgan selected, trained, tested & treated the crew. I'm also not a big fan of their SOPS, in particular going Conditions Levers MAX as part of the gear down flow, with no verbalization.

Fact is Colgan's just about the only airline hiring, and I WILL NOT apply to them absent a change of ownership, change of management, and industry standard contract.

Rant over.

 

[rajflyboy]

Am I missing something here. Everyone is talking about how the 1500 hours will save everything and that if everyone has 1500 hours then there will never be a crash and so on. Well if we look at the pilots in question, did'nt they both have atleast 1500 hours? So how will making sure every pilot has 1500 hours change anything? It doesnt make sense the FO was a CFII, not sure on the MEI, and had over 1500hours, it just drives me crazy that everyone thinks if you have a CFII and over 1500 hours you will never make a mistake. She had little to no actual, nor had she ever seen ice to that extent, but she had over 1500 hours????? I do not think it is a matter of amount of hours but quality of hours that one needs. Where and how is the pilot supposed to gain those hours I do not have the answer but I think looking at just a ,total time, requriment will not solve the problem!

If you earn your wings so to speak. Ya know... Flight instruct.. fly some freight, maybe a little charter work, etc... When you get to 1500 hours hopefully you will have seen some Ice, Thunderstorms, etc and know how to recover from a stall.

This 250 hour to an RJ is absolute BS right now.

 

[Whataburger]

I wonder if more peole are dead from bad decisions pilots have made that had greater or less than 1500 hours at the time of the accident?

 

[pilotyip]

Using WWII data for pilot error accidents, the most dangerous pilot was at 500 hours, if you lived through that there was a good chance you would get better with time. BTW At an air carrier you need at least 1500 hours to be in position to make decisons.

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Oooh no, what is Gulfstream Academy down in Ft. Lickerdale gonna do? It's about time....

Um, sir?

That's Ft. Lickerdale/Hollyweird.

Pet peeve

 

[Nevets]

Pre-training screening or test, however, is completely necessary. A MD takes MCAT before entering med school, a JD takes LSAT before entering law school, and a military flight officer needs to jump through a few hoops before granted a flight slot. So why not civilian pilots? why not some sort of aptitude test before granted flight training. Flying an airliners with passengers on board is not the time or the place to weed out the weak ones.

But also what needs to be done is oversight of the 1500 hrs that pilots will be building. It has to be good quality flying. The ATP requirements need to be changed.
Can't be someone who has a rich dad that bought them a C172 and they're racking up hours in it.

So someone get roughly 250+ hrs for their private thru commercial work and a few hrs for their ATP training and the rest needs to be either as a flight instructor or Pt. 135 work. BFR's and other training would count to. Must be verifiable flying or atleast most of it. Not going to be 100% foolproof of course but better then what's in place now.

You read me wrong, I was being somewhat sarcastic, everyone has all kinds of ideas that will limit the number of pilots to reduce supply and thereby raise wages. But many of these are convoluted controls on a free market system that would be used to their benefit. By having a very strict standardized screening test as you proposed you would limit the number by a natural selection process. I used the SAT of 1300 because it would eliminate around 80-90% of the present pilot population. BTW we gave a mini SAT type test as part of pilot screening and a high score on this test was the best single predictor of a successful pilot. It is a good tool.
Again not at all, we had the highest wages in our industry sector, in the end it was part of what made us non-competitive and caused the cut back last December.

Incidentally, I like the idea of having a pilot skills assessment before being able to ENTER ATP training. Weed out those who have no aptitude for the profession and it will help everyone.

Here is what ALPA said about that:

Screening

Few, if any, airlines tailor their training programs based on their new hires’ past flying experience. The airline industry has seen significant changes – some of which involve pilot demographics – that have not been reflected in our training practices. For example, there are considerably fewer former military pilots in the airline ranks than in years past. The military services extensively screen their candidates, who are generally required to have a four-year college degree, before being accepted into pilot training. Once accepted, military training provides intense and rigorous classroom academic instruction as well as in-depth flight instruction that takes over one year. Additionally, pilots today coming from non-military backgrounds often do not have the challenging experience of their predecessors on which to build – e.g. flying corporate, night freight, or flight instructing - before being hired at entry-level, or regional air carriers. These demographic changes require a new focus on standardization and professionalism training and even some fundamental flying skills. The previous training programs based on the assumption of more experienced pilot candidates will not be sufficient; “one-size-fits-all” training is ill suited to the task.

The financial commitment of training and the historical time commitment to build experience to qualify to be hired by an airline through the civilian route and the considerable time and sacrifices needed to serve in the military acted as a screening process to eliminate those only marginally interested in becoming an airline pilot. However, with new pilots being hired with as little as 200 hours total flight time (much of which could have been in a simulator) and fewer military pilots seeking airline jobs, this de facto screening process that helped ensure only the highest performing people make it to the airlines is no longer effective. Today, many regional airlines do nothing to discourage their experienced pilots from quitting so as to hire lower-paid replacements.

Flight experience and pilot capabilities cannot be measured by mere flight hours. Airlines used to have an extensive screening process that included psychology tests, academic knowledge tests, simulator flying skill evaluations and medical conditioning exams. As the number of pilot applicants declines and airlines become more desperate to fill the positions, these screening processes have been reduced and some elements completely eliminated.

Airlines need to reestablish thorough screening processes, or their equivalent, to ensure that the applicants they hire will be able to maintain an equivalent or better level of safety, professionalism and performance than their predecessors. Flight schools need to implement extensive screening processes for students pursuing a professional pilot career. Regulators need to provide the oversight to ensure that these screening tools are implemented effectively by the airlines and flight training organizations, as well as modify pilot qualification regulations to include much more rigorous education and testing requirements in order to provide a screening process that begins prior to initial pilot certification and continues at the airlines.

Need for Stronger Academic Emphasis

The Joint Aviation Authority (JAA), now the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and FAA pilot licensing requirements are both ICAO-compliant. The single biggest difference between EASA and FAA is knowledge requirements. The FAA theoretical knowledge is simply not as demanding as EASA, which has 14 written exams versus one by the FAA, which is a multiple-choice exam. The EASA exams require the student to be tested for 30-40 hours. By stark contrast, the FAA publishes its exam questions with answers provided so a student can purchase them, study the questions, and pass its single exam. Examination questions are not available for EASA exams in such a manner.

The least demanding Federal Aviation Regulations which govern commercial pilot license requirements (i.e., §61.125 and §61.155) specify the aeronautical knowledge requirements for commercial and airline transport pilot ratings. These rules were written decades ago, when there was no expectation that they would be used as minimum standards to train pilots to take jobs as airline first officers. The requirements emphasize weather and navigation, including interaction with air traffic control. There is some mention of aircraft aerodynamics and human factors, including aeronautical decision making and judgment as well as crew resource management. The regulations allow self-study and many such training courses emphasize passing the test rather than learning the material. We do not feel these requirements are adequate to prepare a professional airline pilot. The ground instruction of these subjects needs to be strengthened with required formal classroom academic instruction and more extensive testing and examination.

The EASA-approved training course for a commercial airline pilot tends to be rather structured and rigorous. FAA should develop and implement a corollary ground school and testing process in FAR Part 121 for all pilots who seek commercial airline careers. Testing akin to the quality of the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) exams or bar exam for attorneys would benefit aviation by serving as a screening tool to ensure that, in the future, only the most knowledgeable and dedicated pilots join the ranks of airline pilots.

 

[CptMurf]

Incidentally, I like the idea of having a pilot skills assessment before being able to ENTER ATP training. Weed out those who have no aptitude for the profession and it will help everyone.

Don't they already have those...it's call a private, instrument, commercial, multi checkrides and writtens (for the aptitude evaluations). Maybe those should be more critical (and document deficiencies better) and more weight put on them when evaluating a newhire or a potential ATP candidate as the case maybe. Re-evaluating past problem areas to check overall understanding and abilities.

 

[CptMurf]

Ive never been impressed with military pilots transfering to civilian. Myself included.

We are very good at what we do but when we go to civilian, we may as well start from scratch.

If the ATP is the standard, then that's what it is...
If they have the time, get the rating.
If they don't, sorry, go get the time.
Just because they were prior service does not mean they should get yet another leg up over a qualified regional/135/civ 91 guy/gal.


Before I get bombarded...I'm prior service too. Just didn't fly.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

But also what needs to be done is oversight of the 1500 hrs that pilots will be building. It has to be good quality flying. The ATP requirements need to be changed.
Can't be someone who has a rich dad that bought them a C172 and they're racking up hours in it.

I knew someone like this.

Basically didn't want to CFI (nor should he have - very poor skills). Old man bought the kid planes to fly. Kid flew the family SEL (All fair-weather with the father) and once he hit 1000+, pops bought a twin for the magical 200 MEL, then sold it. Wouldn't let anyone else touch the yoke. Kid went on several interviews btwn 07-08. Couldn't get hired with ATP hrs even with 300/50 being given classes.

 

[Lear70]

In short, ICE did not cause this crash. Mostly I think it comes down to the way Colgan selected, trained, tested & treated the crew. I'm also not a big fan of their SOPS, in particular going Conditions Levers MAX as part of the gear down flow, with no verbalization.

No argument there.

Don't they already have those...it's call a private, instrument, commercial, multi checkrides and writtens (for the aptitude evaluations). Maybe those should be more critical (and document deficiencies better) and more weight put on them when evaluating a newhire or a potential ATP candidate as the case maybe. Re-evaluating past problem areas to check overall understanding and abilities.

No, they don't have those.

What I'm talking about is a COMPREHENSIVE exam once you HAVE 1,500 hours, prior to starting your ATP training, that covers EVERY, SINGLE question on ALL the tests, private through commercial multi, the FAR's, the AIM, and THEN a CHECKRIDE that covers ALL maneuvers, judgment, and performance under pressure, prior to even STARTING the ATP training.

Similar to the MCAT or LSAT, make it a 4-6 hour marathon test covering EVERYTHING they should have learned. You can only take it twice, maybe three times in your lifetime, period. Fail, and you don't get another shot at it. Ever.

Not everyone who WANTS to be a pilot SHOULD be a pilot; I've flown with several of them: people who will never upgrade because they don't have the stick skills, basic flying instincts, or the ability to multi-task under pressure. We need to weed those people out before they get into the 121 world.

Once word gets around how tough it is to get INTO the program and, like others have said, limit the places you can obtain an ATP to 3 or 4 in the ENTIRE COUNTRY, and make it just as hard as getting your JAA license, THEN we'll be closer to ensuring safety by making sure only people who really have the aptitude to be pilots make it to the flight deck of an airliner, as well as bottle knecking the supply pipeline which will drive up wages by basic supply and demand.

Just like the medical and legal fields.

 

[tyuwerty]

The FAA ATP exam is a joke. I bought a book, read through it 2 or 3 times and scored a 98%.

The Canadian ATP in contrast actually involved study time. I did that 15 years ago, 2 exams, it took a week of straight study time (unemployed at the time) for each of the 2 exams. I think the exams themselves each took about 2 or 3 hours to write.

 

[UALjan15]

Am I missing something here. Everyone is talking about how the 1500 hours will save everything and that if everyone has 1500 hours then there will never be a crash and so on. Well if we look at the pilots in question, did'nt they both have atleast 1500 hours? So how will making sure every pilot has 1500 hours change anything? It doesnt make sense the FO was a CFII, not sure on the MEI, and had over 1500hours, it just drives me crazy that everyone thinks if you have a CFII and over 1500 hours you will never make a mistake. She had little to no actual, nor had she ever seen ice to that extent, but she had over 1500 hours????? I do not think it is a matter of amount of hours but quality of hours that one needs. Where and how is the pilot supposed to gain those hours I do not have the answer but I think looking at just a ,total time, requriment will not solve the problem!

Two things: First, much of this discussion isn't really about safety, but more about supply and demand; more specifically, how to choke off supply dramatically by eliminating the puppy mills. If my basic econ class still applies, that makes the entry level pilot worth more, helping to reverse the current death spiral.

Second, the very real safety issue. I think we can all agree that 1500 hours does not equal a qualified 121 F/O. Here's what does, however: an ATP license (which happens to require 1500 hours). So no, they're not just looking at a total time requirement, which I would agree solves nothing. But if I'm putting my family on a regional and I know BOTH pilots have an ATP (assuming they don't dilute the standards of this checkride, which should be a tough one), then I'm feeling a lot better about the risk involved.

Pass this law!