I see PFT like this... here are my analogies, none of them perfectly accurate, but close enough.
You have a heart condition that requires surgery. The hospital you are in needs a new heart surgeon (the old one moved on to brains). They have two applicants. Both surgeons have full medical degrees that legally allow them to do the surgery, for which both doctors paid for themselves by going to college. One of whom has performed 50 surgerys over the past 5 years. The other is a brand new graduate who offers to pay the hospital $20K to get the job. Which doctor do you want operating on you?
I am a real estate developer who needs a new skyscaper built. My company policy is that the architecht has to have built at least one 500' tall building on their resume to be considered. Two applicants submit their work history. One of them, who paid for his degree, has been designing buildings for 3 years, working his way up to larger jobs, has done 25 designs, and recently completed one over 500' tall. The other also paid for his BS in architecture, but used his trust fund to design his first and only building that was 500' tall. Which one would you prefer do your design?
While it's certainly possible for the person who paid his way to the qualifications (above and beyond the minimum degree required to even be licensed, which ALL applicants do as a minimum) to be truly the better candidate for the task at hand, the applicant who has garnered much more real life experience, who has earned the experience by being the best person for the jobs he got and not simply by meeting the financial status, is most likely the one who is better qualified.
All civilian pilots pay for their first 250 some hours of training. not all those first 250 hours are equal though. Some are done in perfect weather, at a tiny airstrip with no other traffic, in a very reliable airplane. Some others are mostly IFR or MVFR, in crowded airspace, over mountains, in ice, using crummy old planes that have broken down several times. I simply don't believe that the pilot 500 hour who buys 250 hours in a BE1900 can consistently claim to have better experience than the CFI who has 1200 hours in a 172 and 100 in a Dutchess, when that CFI has seen every possible weather condition, flown in ice, over mountains, had electrical failures, engine failures, Vaccum failures in IMC, and whatever else you can dream up. It's possible for one 500 hour PFT'r to be widely experienced and a real good pilot. It's possibly that a 1500 hour CFI has done little else but touch and goes at Podunk. But based on what I've learned so far, the CFI who has put his neck on the line training new pilots for 3 years, is the one I'd go with over the guy who paid to tag along in a Turbo Prop while someone else did all the work.
It's possible for a real good experienced pilot to PFT. But I can't see a 500 hour pilot who PFTs being worthy of any job like that, other than towing banners. Certainly nothing with passengers involved.
You have a heart condition that requires surgery. The hospital you are in needs a new heart surgeon (the old one moved on to brains). They have two applicants. Both surgeons have full medical degrees that legally allow them to do the surgery, for which both doctors paid for themselves by going to college. One of whom has performed 50 surgerys over the past 5 years. The other is a brand new graduate who offers to pay the hospital $20K to get the job. Which doctor do you want operating on you?
I am a real estate developer who needs a new skyscaper built. My company policy is that the architecht has to have built at least one 500' tall building on their resume to be considered. Two applicants submit their work history. One of them, who paid for his degree, has been designing buildings for 3 years, working his way up to larger jobs, has done 25 designs, and recently completed one over 500' tall. The other also paid for his BS in architecture, but used his trust fund to design his first and only building that was 500' tall. Which one would you prefer do your design?
While it's certainly possible for the person who paid his way to the qualifications (above and beyond the minimum degree required to even be licensed, which ALL applicants do as a minimum) to be truly the better candidate for the task at hand, the applicant who has garnered much more real life experience, who has earned the experience by being the best person for the jobs he got and not simply by meeting the financial status, is most likely the one who is better qualified.
All civilian pilots pay for their first 250 some hours of training. not all those first 250 hours are equal though. Some are done in perfect weather, at a tiny airstrip with no other traffic, in a very reliable airplane. Some others are mostly IFR or MVFR, in crowded airspace, over mountains, in ice, using crummy old planes that have broken down several times. I simply don't believe that the pilot 500 hour who buys 250 hours in a BE1900 can consistently claim to have better experience than the CFI who has 1200 hours in a 172 and 100 in a Dutchess, when that CFI has seen every possible weather condition, flown in ice, over mountains, had electrical failures, engine failures, Vaccum failures in IMC, and whatever else you can dream up. It's possible for one 500 hour PFT'r to be widely experienced and a real good pilot. It's possibly that a 1500 hour CFI has done little else but touch and goes at Podunk. But based on what I've learned so far, the CFI who has put his neck on the line training new pilots for 3 years, is the one I'd go with over the guy who paid to tag along in a Turbo Prop while someone else did all the work.
It's possible for a real good experienced pilot to PFT. But I can't see a 500 hour pilot who PFTs being worthy of any job like that, other than towing banners. Certainly nothing with passengers involved.
