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

Low Time FO's

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
If I were king for a day.......

I still say that anyone operating in the Part 121 world needs an ATP.

Don't see it changing, but it should be this way. If it does change then it would effect all personal that would be hired after the effective date. So, the current FOs working within the 121 community would not need to have one. But if someone had the requirements met then they could test for an ATP. Of course, I would want to see the requirements stay as is and not see a decrease in the hour requirement just to have more ATPs running around.

Airline pilots (regardless of seat) should have an ATP, period!! To practice law a lawyer must have taken and passed the bar. A doctor must have a license to treat. We all know that other professions require a license reflecting a high standard and completion of said standard. So why not our profession since we claim to be professionals and waited to be treated as such? We should be fighting to make high standards for ourselves and presenting a positive image of our profession. If we don't expect set the bar higher then who will?
 
Me too. But the "silver lining" is that after the Colgan crash, the days of hiring "unqualified" pilots for 121 ops is long gone. No more applicants getting hired with 188 total time, 14 hours multi, and a heart beat. Thank God that the changes are being made as we speak. The ONLY place for a pilot with 188 hours is flight instructing, banner towing, traffic watch, or gaining experience in the right seat of an aircraft that DOES NOT require 2 pilots. (except for insurance req.)

You mean the guy with anti Obama propoganda is calling for government regulation? I thought the free market would decide everything.

Your STILL an idiot.
 
Last edited:
I still say that anyone operating in the Part 121 world needs an ATP.

Don't see it changing, but it should be this way. If it does change then it would effect all personal that would be hired after the effective date. So, the current FOs working within the 121 community would not need to have one. But if someone had the requirements met then they could test for an ATP. Of course, I would want to see the requirements stay as is and not see a decrease in the hour requirement just to have more ATPs running around.

Airline pilots (regardless of seat) should have an ATP, period!! To practice law a lawyer must have taken and passed the bar. A doctor must have a license to treat. We all know that other professions require a license reflecting a high standard and completion of said standard. So why not our profession since we claim to be professionals and waited to be treated as such? We should be fighting to make high standards for ourselves and presenting a positive image of our profession. If we don't expect set the bar higher then who will?

If that passes, it will put airlines out of business when the next hiring boom comes along. When mainline starts hiring, people are going to leave. If we can't replace them fast enough, we have to drop flying/cancel flights, and before long, mainline gets pissed.

If is passes, there will be amendments and exceptions made 2 months after the next hiring boom gets rolling, and airlines start feeling a squeeze.

We are in for a big surprise, even without this law. There will be a shortage. The enrollments are way way down at flight schools, and things will turn around eventually.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top