NTSB also looking at pilot compensation!

[ImbracableCrunk]

Sounds like a good campaign slogan to me. Kinda like "Pistols for Pandas."

"ATPs for ATPs!"

 

[rustypigeon]

Are you serious? $2,500 and a weekend of your time and it's all yours. The written? LMFAO. Give us $500, we'll give you all the questions and answers. Memorize, go to lunch, come back and see how quickly you can take the test. It will only mean more biz for the weekend ATP schools.
It's the same as Higher Power dishing out 737 types. Exactly what is the pass rate there?

The point is not that having an ATP makes you a super pilot, it is about raising the bar.

Allowing any 250 hour commercial pilot to fly an aircraft with 70 people onboard has flooded the industry with underqualified pilots (yet qualified by FAA standards) By requiring an ATP, you will at least require that all applicants have 1500tt, 500 xc, 100 night, 75 instrument, and 250 PIC. (I wouldn't mind seeing that 250 PIC requirement increase to 1000).

 

[Superpilot92]

I like the idea of requiring all pilots flying 121 posses an ATP. Seems reasonable. Heck you need far more experience to run canceled checks in a Cessna than you need to fly a jet full of passengers.

Remember too that most of us get our ATPs when we upgrade. This would most likely require pilots to pay a flight school to get the ATP certificate before applying. Although I could see airlines start to just require ATP minimums for applying and then awarding the ATP certificate at the new-hire check ride. Still, it would begin to limit the supply of low timers ready to jump into an RJ with 500 hours.

Everyone write their Congressmen and Senators and begin a push for this ASAP. Let's get moving people.

I agree, the effects of making an ATP a minimum requirement to fly for the airlines would be huge. It would cut down on the number of pay for training programs and weed out alot of the fodder at the bottom of the chain. Allowing people to get hired at 300 hours means any joe can be hired and the airlines can get away with low pay cause they can hire just about anyone to fill the seat and hope for the best.

 

[Andy Neill]

The point is not that having an ATP makes you a super pilot, it is about raising the bar.

Allowing any 250 hour commercial pilot to fly an aircraft with 70 people onboard has flooded the industry with underqualified pilots (yet qualified by FAA standards) By requiring an ATP, you will at least require that all applicants have 1500tt, 500 xc, 100 night, 75 instrument, and 250 PIC. (I wouldn't mind seeing that 250 PIC requirement increase to 1000).

So a more palatable regulation would be to require Part 121 SICs to be eligible for the ATP - not necessarily that they have the rating nor that they have passed the test.

 

[rustypigeon]

So a more palatable regulation would be to require Part 121 SICs to be eligible for the ATP - not necessarily that they have the rating nor that they have passed the test.

Or as NEDude suggested, as long as they meet the ATP experience requirements, the airline could issue them an ATP at the completion of newhire training.

 

[Andy Neill]

....but then we would have newhires flying at an airline to airline transport pilot standards.....hmmmmm

 

[Superpilot92]

....but then we would have newhires flying at an airline to airline transport pilot standards.....hmmmmm

Scary huh!! !

 

[blesko]

Or as NEDude suggested, as long as they meet the ATP experience requirements, the airline could issue them an ATP at the completion of newhire training.

great idea, but the airline can't do that as the ATP is a PIC evaluated checkride. As the new hire is going through an SIC eval, this does not meet the requirements of the checkride.

 

[NEDude]

Again, the point is raising the bar. You are increasing the steps and time required to go from being a guy with some money and a dream to being in the cockpit of an airliner with passengers. A lot can happen between 250 hours and 1500 hours. Not only is experienced gained, but that time will also "weed out" a lot more people who maybe don't have the aptitude for this.

No plan will be full proof. But you need to start somewhere, and requiring airline pilots to show they can fly to airline transport pilot standards and have airline transport pilot flight time, is a good place to start.

 

[NEDude]

great idea, but the airline can't do that as the ATP is a PIC evaluated checkride. As the new hire is going through an SIC eval, this does not meet the requirements of the checkride.

It could be incorporated into the new-hire training program. Or the airline could require a person have it before they come to work. Either way it doesn't matter. We are talking about raising the bar here, the point is that it will be harder to make it into the cockpit of an airliner.

 

[Cardinal]

great idea, but the airline can't do that as the ATP is a PIC evaluated checkride. As the new hire is going through an SIC eval, this does not meet the requirements of the checkride.

So throw them in whatever seat and give them a type ride. All the better. Maybe then I'd have FO's who could tell me what a pack does, and how the cabin is pressurized...just for starters.

 

[StarHustler]

Are you serious?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I'm DEAD serious.

 

[LazyLightnin']

wow! A thread on fi with productive , intelligent posts! I like.


What, does mesa not suck anymore?

 

[exagony]

that'll put Mesa outta bx though - just had to throw a Mesa jab because this thread has gone way to long with out one!!

 

[Volasl]

As a former check airman at a regional the best student I trained had less that 400 hours on day one of IOE. The worst had over 2500 hours of flight time and an ATP.

Total time is not always the best indicator. Its the quality of the flight time. I do believe a mininum should exist which would hopefully raise the bar with pay. Econ 101 fewer ATP's equal higher demand for their services. Works with oil right?