PFT in diguise

[shroomwell]

I have flown in light twins with some of these 250 hour right seat wonders from other parts of the world. Yes they are a danger to the public. I was training a A300 captain from asia with 10,000 hours. He needed a FAA ATP to fly into LAX as Captain. This guy could not fly the light twin at all. No exagerating he would have died if I was not in the airplane. I sent him away and told him I could not due the training, and that he needed basic instrument training. I asked him and he said he went from a C152 to right seat in a 737. Bottom line is they are taught to fly as a button pushers, god help us if the autopilot fails.

 

[BoilerUP]

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.

I think you are taking this a little personal, bud. I have read the all of your posts on this topic, and they seem well-articulated. However, if you are not professionally involved in aviation, you lack credibility when voicing your opinion on professional aviation issues. If you have never actually flown with a 250hr commercial multi-engine pilot (or 190hr in Part 141 programs), then you have absolutely no right to comment about their skills. They might not be able to fly an ILS, or they might have hands of gold. YOU DONT KNOW. The same would be said about me if I said all young stock brokers were like the guys in "Boiler Room".

I agree that *most* 250TT pilots can't get out of their own way when flying anything larger than an Arrow...but with highly structured training, you can teach anybody to fly a transport category airplane. Mesa's MAPD program takes 300hr pilots and grooms them into the 1900 or CRJ by flying aircraft like A36s and Barons, and they tend to not have many problems during their systems and simulator training. Why? They are highly trained.

Europe has been doing ab-initio training for their national airlines for decades, and although I'm relatively young, I can't recall any accidents attributed to a low-time FO. While I agree that a 300-500 hour FO on any airframe is unnerving (and certainly would be if most passengers knew it), if Lufthansa can train young men and women ab-initio and stick them in A320 and larger aircraft with under 500hrs with never an incident to show for it, who am I to question it?

Flying a large transport category aircraft and flying a light twin are light-years apart. I had negative transfer from my 727 sim to my multi training in a Seminole, and it effected my training. My 727 ground instructor (who was a KC-135 check airman in the USAF) admits he can barely fly an ILS in the Seminole. Does that mean he is a bad pilot? No! It simply means he is not proficient in smaller aircraft. Ask any AA pilot who has "flowed back" to Eagle recently how much flying that 757 around the country made their Embraer training easier.

Now, I do not understand how "by accepting the advent of the 250 TT airline copilot, pilots implicitly accept low wages and likely endanger the flying public". If you are implying that low-time pilots tend to take low-wage jobs, I'll bite on that, but don't those at the bottom of every professional totem pole get the leftovers? And I'm not talking about "lowering the bar" here. If you think low-time pilots endanger the public, PLEASE express as much to every single regional airline Chief Pilot and HR department, as well as this board. When you do, please submit proof to back up this claim.

The FAA doesn't care if you have 300 or 3000 hours....if you can pass a 121 ground school and checkride, then you are considered to be just as qualified with the same level of responsibility and liability. Hours in your logbook are just a way of keeping score, and aren't necessarily reflective of piloting skill.


[/end thread hijack]

 

[Strikefinder]

The real problem with this argument that is being made against the pilot academy graduates is that even if it's accurate to say that their skills, experience, and attitude toward the job are poor 99.9% of the time (which I don't believe it is), there are enough people who fit into this description who are not "250 TT wonders", as you say.

I went to Purdue because I walked out of high school knowing I wanted to be a pilot, only a pilot, and nothing but a pilot. It's what I've dreamt of since I was a little kid, and I saved money from working after school to take flight lessons as often as I could. Yes, my folks helped me to pay for the illustrious school, but so did Uncle Sam: I had a National Merit Scholarship and a Robert Byrd Scholarship, and then an NBAA scholarship among a few other smaller ones. This amount alone added up to nearly $15,000. I got several subsidized loans from the Stafford program as well, and so these loans were not accumulating interest while I was in school, and the Hope and Lifetime Learning Credit helped reduce my folk's and my tax burden from accumulated educational costs. I'm still claiming a tax deduction from my student loan interest.

I examined the idea of going the "traditional route", getting my ratings at a local FBO while earning a degree in something else, or not earning a degree at all. There were a variety of problems with that approach, I felt. First of all, none of my flight training would be eligible for scholarship or federal financial aid, and none of the tuition, fees, or loan interest would be tax deductable. That's a hefty pile of money right there. I also realized that immersing myself in aviation would lead to greater gains within the field, better networking opportunities, and a broader level of flight experience than just having a few thousand hours of dual given in my logbook. Why waste my time studying engineering, or history, or God only knows what else when I could be working toward a degree and flying at the same time? I thought about the possibility of losing my medical or becoming otherwise ineligible for flying and how "worthless" the degree could be, but I decided that the potential gains outweighed the risks.

And so I lived happily ever after graduating with 250 hours and jumped into the right seat of the RJ, right? Well, not exactly. I left Purdue with over 1200 hours, CFI-AIM, a BE400 type rating (which Purdue paid for), a bunch of simulator experience, and a lot of systems knowledge I doubt I could have gotten from the local FBO, or at least as easily. I didn't find myself in an RJ, though, as some nutheads decided to go and ram aircraft into buildings, so I ended up (after much job hunting) getting picked up by a freight operator flying checks Part 135. I did that for nearly a year. When I showed up at Chautauqua for class, I had nearly 2200 hours, 500 multi, almost 200 turbine, 100 hours of actual, 800 dual given, and several emergencies under my belt. Of the 14 in class with me, one had more flight experience. I'd flown all over the country, to large airports like O'Hare, San Francisco, and Cleveland, and lived in five states in a period of two years. I'd even observed flights to Russia and Europe while interning (and being paid very well to do so). I'd also had a pretty well rounded college experience, made a lot of friends, and had a heck of a good time. I got a Master CFI designation. I'm a glider pilot. I'm a published aviation writer.

Did I steal a job from more capable pilots simply because I'm from Purdue? No, not simply because, but in part. But so did many of the people in my class who were not from Purdue, ERAU, ComAir Academy, or any one of a variety of places where you can learn how to fly. And I know a lot of people with less flight experience than me who got hired before I did without any "bridge program" to help them out. Where's the angst for them? You can hold out hope that one day you'll just type numbers into a matrix and a computer will put you in class in descending order of "experience," but it won't happen. That's not how the game is played. There are a lot of factors that go into a hiring decision, and hours are only one of them. I made a great degree of effort to build the maximum portfolio of qualifications I could in the timeframe I did, and once you factored in my scholarships and financial aid, I think I did it more cheaply and efficiently than I could have any other way, though that may not have applied to other people in other circumstances. And though that doesn't entitle me to a job any more than anybody else, it doesn't any more mean I deserve to be here any less than anybody else.

So if there's any moral to the story, it's to disapprove of people like I do: without prejudice on an individual basis. There are a lot of pilots I've flown with that couldn't fly their way out of a shoe box, and they've come from every walk of life. Yes, some of them are from Purdue, but some of them are from some no-name flight school, and some of them are from the military. They have flight time numbers across the board.

 

[shroomwell]

This had been a good discussion except for the occasional person who takes thing personally.

I think I developed a new understanding of the situation. While I may not agree with the hiring practices of some airlines I cannot blame the pilots who attend the training. They are getting their certificates and everybody had to pay for that. If I had known better I would have gone to one of theses schools years ago and been sitting as captain somewhere now. They made a better choice then me. So if someday I am in a position to allow one of them to jumpseat I would not have a problem with them.

However true PFT'ers like GIA truly degrade the profession and suppress wages. So you know where they can all go. Aircraft need pilots just like hospitals need doctors, and last I checked no doctors where crawling over each other to pay to work at a hospital. We all spent alot of money earning our certificates so we could get paid to fly someday. PFT'ers are taking that away.

 

[Trash8Mofo]

QUOTE:
However true PFT'ers like GIA truly degrade the profession and suppress wages. So you know where they can all go. Aircraft need pilots just like hospitals need doctors, and last I checked no doctors where crawling over each other to pay to work at a hospital. We all spent alot of money earning our certificates so we could get paid to fly someday. PFT'ers are taking that away. [/B][/QUOTE]

Respectfully, I cannot disagree more. I happen to think that if we limit the amount of people who can become pilots by limiting the number of training facilities, we can shift the supply and demand curve of avb pilots to a more favorable condition; hence, higher wages. Doctors and lawyers have to take the MCAT and the LSAT, then wait and fight to get into limited slots in med schools and law schools. Why not us? Perhaps we should do away with some of these mom-and-pop flight schools and only limit the supply of civilian pilots through highly structured programs, PFT if you will. You dont see the medicine man in the ER, do you?

 

[Sniper@YourFeet]

Perhaps we should do away with some of these mom-and-pop flight schools and only limit the supply of civilian pilots through highly structured programs, PFT if you will.

We should deprive all of those citizens who want to learn to fly the ability to so that the wage of an RJ FO might rise 10%?

Please don't be so short-sighted as to think all pilots aspire to fly professionally (passengers log more miles in GA aircraft than in commerical aircraft according to the AOPA), or that a pilot's total time is a direct reflection on their flying abilites or tendency to accept a lower starting compensation.

 

[Trash8Mofo]

Please don't be so short-sighted as to think all pilots aspire to fly professionally (passengers log more miles in GA aircraft than in commerical aircraft according to the AOPA), or that a pilot's total time is a direct reflection on their flying abilites or tendency to accept a lower starting compensation. [/B]

I agree. As a recreation, people should be able to learn how to fly if they want to, and mom-and-pop flight schools should do it. But limiting the supply of PROFESSIONAL pilots through a difficult selection process, and only through highly structured and proven programs (e.g. PFT), not only can we rise the RJ FO wages by 10%, by also the RJ 700/900 captain's wages. This brings the larger RJ rates closer, if not in a continuous progression, to the 737/A318/717 rates. Thats job security for all of us.

 

[bobbysamd]

P-F-T

Two similar discussions are raging on the other board, so I thought I'd see how it's going here.

My compliments to BoilerUp and Strikefinder for their extremely articulate comments, especially the points made about the upsides of attending recognized programs and the points about MAPD. I instructed in that program ten-and-a-half years ago. Everything said about primary training being conducted in A36 Bonanzas and B58 Barons is true. Students are trained using the LOFT philosophy of instruction from the first day. When I was there they flew 1900s for ten hours as part of the course; now, I understand they take RJ sim training. In either case, they graduate well-prepared for Mesa Airlines.

In that light, I appreciated BoilerUp's comments about heavy jet iron pilots trying to fly little planes. Very often they cannot at first, and it's because they simply don't have lightplane experience. It doesn't mean they are bad pilots; they were trained ab initio to fly the aircraft they fly.

Good discussion.

 

[Sniper@YourFeet]

Cut me some slack

I appreciated BoilerUp's comments about heavy jet iron pilots trying to fly little planes. Very often they cannot at first, and it's because they simply don't have lightplane experience. It doesn't mean they are bad pilots; they were trained ab initio to fly the aircraft they fly.

I recently went for a ride in a small piston aircraft and, of course, wanted to get some stick time and a landing.

Whew, those buggers are really sensitive, and apparently my instinct is to flare around 30', much too high for the aircraft. Let me tell ya', I trained in what is now a Cessna 150 - it isn't just 'ab intio' airline drivers who can't land those things easily. I missed my point of intended landing by over 1000', floating down the runway for what seemed like miles.

I was once told a 747 cockpit is about the same height as a 7 story building when the mains touch. If you guys cut me some slack when I try to grease on a 172, I'll cut you some slack the first time you try to grease on a 747. You don't even wanna' try to taxi it though!

So the next time you see a small aircraft struggling to land, don't assue the pilot is new to flying - it might be me, re-learning where to flare. You never stop learning, no matter how much you already know.