New flight requirements for Commercial pilots

[ASA_Aviator]

Not to disagree needlessly, but what flight school isn't 'professional'? It sounds a lot like you are taking a shot at part 61 flight schools here.

It's very clear in the FOI publication from the FAA: The standards are the standards. Just because my ATP wasn't earned at a 141 school doesn't make me any less competent as a pilot or my level of certification any less.

Let's recognize this situation for what it is; the political influence and lobbying efforts of the ERAUs and Comair Academies (sic) have ensured that their existing business model will survive the next round of airline hiring.

Glen,

The data has clearly shown that pilots who train at a school that is part 141 (structured training) do better in training. By professional school, I mean those schools that are in the business of turning out professional pilots. Surely you understand that some flight schools target the professional pilot crowd, and some just are the local flight school, right?

Yes. You can get your ratings part 61 and be just as qualified, but from the airline's perspective, it is difficult to determine if you received good training part 61 or not. The quality of a part 61 training program is nearly 100% determined by the motivation of the instructor. Part 141 has FAA oversight, and programs geared toward a student who is looking for a job in aviation.

The airlines have done their internal studies on who does better in training, and those data show that structured training is better on the whole.

 

[pilotyip]

the hourly requirement is lowered from 1500 hours for those who attended "approved school," but why does everyone think it's going to be ERAU, UND, Western Mich, Perdue, etc?

It very well might be 141 flight schools...

what about my militarty pilot with 1100 MEL TJ, EC-135 AC, would his training allow for a reduction?

 

[ASA_Aviator]

what about my militarty pilot with 1100 MEL TJ, EC-135 AC, would his training allow for a reduction?

Again, the plan is for "structured" training to provide a reduced min. I'm sure that military training is structured.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

what about my militarty pilot with 1100 MEL TJ, EC-135 AC, would his training allow for a reduction?

Yes, this counts for a reduction, as does a college degree.

 

[sayrejm]

Glen,

The data has clearly shown that pilots who train at a school that is part 141 (structured training) do better in training. By professional school, I mean those schools that are in the business of turning out professional pilots. Surely you understand that some flight schools target the professional pilot crowd, and some just are the local flight school, right?

Yes. You can get your ratings part 61 and be just as qualified, but from the airline's perspective, it is difficult to determine if you received good training part 61 or not. The quality of a part 61 training program is nearly 100% determined by the motivation of the instructor. Part 141 has FAA oversight, and programs geared toward a student who is looking for a job in aviation.

The airlines have done their internal studies on who does better in training, and those data show that structured training is better on the whole.

Training and real life are two different things. For crying out loud, I did ALL my training from private pilot glider to ATP part 61 at a local airport on the weekends. I have taught at both 141 pilot schools and part 61. Training part 61 I've always used the same syllabus they use at most 141 schools anyway. However, I have seen far more pencil whipping for 141 students than I have for 61 students.

It is not the school, it is the instructor and the attitude of the student. Period.

This argument will never and can never end with an inclusive and definitive answer. We are all wasting our time.

Edit* I hit reply to the wrong post but thats not really important. Just saying this to spare myself the comments otherwise.

Oh, and sometimes those 141 schools targeting professional students still elect to place that student in the part 61 program at their school. It is a different mold for different people.

 

[CX880]

Glen,

The data has clearly shown that pilots who train at a school that is part 141 (structured training) do better in training. By professional school, I mean those schools that are in the business of turning out professional pilots. Surely you understand that some flight schools target the professional pilot crowd, and some just are the local flight school, right?

Yes. You can get your ratings part 61 and be just as qualified, but from the airline's perspective, it is difficult to determine if you received good training part 61 or not. The quality of a part 61 training program is nearly 100% determined by the motivation of the instructor. Part 141 has FAA oversight, and programs geared toward a student who is looking for a job in aviation.

The airlines have done their internal studies on who does better in training, and those data show that structured training is better on the whole.

It has nothing to do with pt 141 or pt61, It has to do with the type of training the individual gets. There is no reason why a pt141 should be "better" than pt61 your all training on the same airplane with the same procedures. As far as airlines go, they care about checklist and flow procedures. Yes you do get that at pt141 schools but there is no reason why you can't imitate that at pt61 schools as most pt61 school that are focused towards pro training do. But again there are only so many procedures you can practice on a 172. It's not exactly as complex as an airliner.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Training and real life are two different things. For crying out loud, I did ALL my training from private pilot glider to ATP part 61 at a local airport on the weekends. I have taught at both 141 pilot schools and part 61. Training part 61 I've always used the same syllabus they use at most 141 schools anyway. However, I have seen far more pencil whipping for 141 students than I have for 61 students.

It is not the school, it is the instructor and the attitude of the student. Period.

This argument will never and can never end with an inclusive and definitive answer. We are all wasting our time.

Edit* I hit reply to the wrong post but thats not really important. Just saying this to spare myself the comments otherwise.

Oh, and sometimes those 141 schools targeting professional students still elect to place that student in the part 61 program at their school. It is a different mold for different people.

Understood, but it still doesn't change the fact that if you're a company looking at two candidates, one from pt 61, and one from a flight school that offers 141, all things being equal you will choose the one from 141. The data supports that decision.

Look, I was part 61 too. It doesn't mean that YOU were a bad pilot. It just means that on the whole those from 141 do better in training. There will be stand-outs from 61, and slackers from 141.

 

[CX880]

Understood, but it still doesn't change the fact that if you're a company looking at two candidates, one from pt 61, and one from a flight school that offers 141, all things being equal you will choose the one from 141. The data supports that decision.

Look, I was part 61 too. It doesn't mean that YOU were a bad pilot. It just means that on the whole those from 141 do better in training. There will be stand-outs from 61, and slackers from 141.

I've interviewed at many places and they never asked where I got training. How would they even know?? They don't ask where you trained on an application.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

I've interviewed at many places and they never asked where I got training. How would they even know?? They don't ask where you trained on an application.

ASA does, and your logbooks should match where you said you did your training.

 

[hey]

I thought preparation H was supposed to be better on the whole...