PFT in diguise

[Russ]

C5 Driver
Agreed...

 

[secks]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yep!

Sounds like your bitter......

Some companies discourage nepotisim. My father has been with management at UPS for almost 20 years, but they have a strict anti-nepotisim policy. I cannot work for UPS until he retires. You don't hear me bitching.....

So, you want to get personal? Sounds like "you're" uneducated.

That aside, what is the point of your argument? "You don't hear me bitching " Hmm, so you're not complaining about the anti-nepotism policy (good). Something tells me that this isn't what you wanted to argue.

 

[Trash8Mofo]

Practice makes perfect. Practicing the wrong thing reinforces whats wrong. 5000 hrs TT of operation w/o SOP and structure makes nothing but a pilot who doesnt know nor willing to reconlize his place in a team. It doesnt matter what program from which you graduated. I am not saying you are one of those, but I have flown with many of those who do not seem to understand teamwork, CRM, SOP, and the freaking stablize app concept, and its not becasue their lack of experience.

 

[secks]

These kids(young and old alike) who are participating in these programs have some advantages that others may not have been able to avail themselves of. Get over it and get used to the fact that life is not fair!

For the mostpart, I agree. However, some of these "advantages" lead to an unsafe environment for paying passengers. I think we can agree that these situations endanger the flying public: 1) An airline pilot who isn't far from poverty 2) An airline pilot who is minimally qualified to fly the airframe. Unfortunately, many of these bridge, pay for interview, PFT, whatever programs result in 1) and/or 2). This is why I presonally oppose them.

Then you've got the issue of the pilot market. Thousands of posts have been made which explain the effects of these bridge/PFT/etc programs on the pilot market. The common consensus among anti-PFTers is that 1) they depress pilot wages 2) they displace more qualified pilots.

Thus, you've got between two and four reasons to oppose these programs, depending on whether your just a paying passenger or a pilot in the job market.

 

[chrisdahut2]

For the mostpart, I agree. However, some of these "advantages" lead to an unsafe environment for paying passengers. I think we can agree that these situations endanger the flying public: 1) An airline pilot who isn't far from poverty 2) An airline pilot who is minimally qualified to fly the airframe. Unfortunately, many of these bridge, pay for interview, PFT, whatever programs result in 1) and/or 2). This is why I presonally oppose them.

Then you've got the issue of the pilot market. Thousands of posts have been made which explain the effects of these bridge/PFT/etc programs on the pilot market. The common consensus among anti-PFTers is that 1) they depress pilot wages 2) they displace more qualified pilots.

Thus, you've got between two and four reasons to oppose these programs, depending on whether your just a paying passenger or a pilot in the job market.

And what level of hours would be considered as well qualified to fly an airframe? British Airways seems to think it's somewhere around 250 TT to sit right seat in a 737. The same applies to many other foreign carriers.

Funny how some people have short memories. 3 years ago, 1000 TT and 100 ME was the hiring minimums at the regionals, and they hired plenty at those minimums. These days certain pilots would argue that those with 1000 hours are a danger when put into the right seat of anything bigger then a 402. I guess the CRJ must have gotten that much more difficult to handle in the last few years

 

[taloft]

Re: Re: PFT in diguise

Sure, you might have 2000 hours with 500 multi, and I might have 500/50. But if I know systems better than you, fly the sim better than you, get a better grade on the written test and have a better interview than you, shouldn't I get the job and not you?

Boiler, no argument with your statement. Absolutely true. However, it contains one flaw. You will get the interview where the 2000/500 hour guy may not, because he did not graduate from your approved program. Heck, he may even be teaching your approved program or one like it.

 

[WhiteCloud]

Re: Not even close

No amount of money will BUY you a spot in a military aviation training program.

Perhaps not a direct over the table purchase but, coming from a well connected family certainly helps.

 

[starchkr]

Maybe we should all have 10000TT w/ 9000 multi turbine before we can get hired on at any airline job. Maybe that would make the above complainers about low time pilots being inexperienced feel better.

 

[DTWFO]

By the way, Delta Connection Academy (DCA) is not pay-for-training any more than your local FBO flight school and you finish there with 1200TT and 200multi. You aren't guarenteed anything and you have to interview and get hired like everyone else. Get your facts straight before you spout off about PFT.

 

[BoilerUP]

Re: Re: Re: PFT in diguise

Boiler, no argument with your statement, but it contains one flaw. You will get the interview where the 2000/500 hour guy will not, because he did not graduate from your approved program. Heck, he may even be teaching your approved program or one like it. I'm living proof.

Point very well taken. I think that instructors in the aforementioned programs should have the same opportunities as the graduates, as they are in fact teaching those graduates most of what they know.

We all have made the choices we thought would work out best for us in the end, and we are stuck with the consequences of those actions. How it will work out for any of us, in this industry, amounts to a crapshoot at best. I'd like to think the sandbox is big enough for all of us.

 

[secks]

And what level of hours would be considered as well qualified to fly an airframe? British Airways seems to think it's somewhere around 250 TT to sit right seat in a 737. The same applies to many other foreign carriers.

Funny how some people have short memories. 3 years ago, 1000 TT and 100 ME was the hiring minimums at the regionals, and they hired plenty at those minimums. These days certain pilots would argue that those with 1000 hours are a danger when put into the right seat of anything bigger then a 402. I guess the CRJ must have gotten that much more difficult to handle in the last few years

Perhaps you're right about the hours. Maybe a pilot with 250 TT does posess sufficient experience and skill to safely operate as a copilot. I won't speculate, since I'm not involved in aviation. However, there are plenty of pilots on these boards who feel that 250 TT is not sufficient. That aside, I wouldn't bank on the safety of 250 TT 747 copilots simply because it's a common practice in Australia or Europe.

If you really feel that 250 TT airline copilots are sufficient, then it stands to reason that you also believe that low-time pilots do not pose a safety threat. If this is the case, then there isn't much of a point to paying pilots/copilots high wages. It stands to reason that poorly paid pilots may perform their jobs unsatisfactorily, due to poor pay, hours, stress, etc. Would you want a surgeon operating on you while earning $30k a year? Probably not.

 

[Tug Driver]

do you really have 2000 hours? or do you have 1 hour 2000 times??

makes me ponder...

 

[BoilerUP]

I won't speculate, since I'm not involved in aviation.

Thank you for the disclaimer. I don't see what dog you would have in this fight, considering you aren't involved in aviation, other than possibly trying to ruffle a few feathers.

Please keep the pilot-wage and pilot/doctor flamebait to yourself; it has no bearing on this topic.

 

[secks]

Thank you for the disclaimer. I don't see what dog you would have in this fight, considering you aren't involved in aviation, other than possibly trying to ruffle a few feathers.

Please keep the pilot-wage and pilot/doctor flamebait to yourself; it has no bearing on this topic.

If anyone here is baiting, it's you by taking my statements out of context. That disclaimer only applies to my assesment of the skills of a 250 TT pilot.

Are you actually trying to claim that since I'm not professionally involved in aviation, I have no say in this argument? Do I not meet your standards for debate? Instead of attacking me personally, how about you debate my points? Perhaps you can't.

The fact that you consider my comments regarding pilot wage as flamebait indicates that you either didn't read my post or were aggravated to such an extent that you refuse to debate. Instead, you cry "flamebait" and leave it at that. Did you even realize that my comments were directed at a particular poster's statement regarding 250 TT pilots?

 

[secks]

BoilerUP:

Let me be clear. The reason for broaching the subject of pilot wages and safety is to argue that by accepting the advent of the 250 TT airline copilot, pilots implicitly accept low wages and likely endanger the flying public.