Your students in the right seat are ballast.
Not true. I went through the program, and in fact was in the initial group the went to FSI and flew the Diamond (no type rating back then). Even on the King Airs, the students flew the aircraft and received valuable instruction. As someone else put it - it's learning to operate turbine aircraft in the real world, not just an Arrow or a Barron in the training environment (a very big difference).
they should take the (I'd bet around 20K) $$$$$ they are going to spend on this "type rating" and by Cessna 150 time. At 75/hour rental 20K would be around 250+ hours of PIC and skills like simple VISUAL APPROACHES and judgement/decision making that you are not going to get in some less than 20 hour simulator or "gemni" program in the VLJ. Plus the type is useless at 200 hours anyway.
I don't know what the cost structure of this new format will be, but I didn't pay one cent for my FSI training, nor for the flight time in the King Airs and the Diamond. I did pay a small amount to be enrolled in the course - whatever the going rate was for (IIRC) 4 credit hours per semester. No flight fees or other gimmicks, and all of my expenses were paid when I was working. Seems like a pretty good deal to me. One method of developing judgment is through mentoring, which is exactly what the program has historically provided.
Yes, a type rating at 200 hours certainly won't get you into the left seat of a jet without adult supervision (or it shouldn't), but it does provide at least two credentials (in this case anyhow): One, you've passed a formal program of turbine aircraft systems and the oral exam associated therewith. Two - you can pass a check ride in a jet to ATP standards.
Geesus Krist - can't people do it the right way. The hard way instead of taking the short cut all the time.
I think I did do that. After I graduated, I spent the next several years flying piston singles, twins, and the occasionally right seat in a turboprop or light jet building time and experience. I had my ATP and over 1700 hours total time before I was hired into a Part 135 operation. I flew there for over four years and had over 4000 hours before I was hired at a 121 carrier. I didn't think that constituted shortcutting, but I may be biased. Also, for what it's worth, I never intended to be an airline pilot. Always wanted to fly corporate (Gulfstreams to be specific), but the current of life has carried me where it will and here I am (wondering what part of medical school or engineering seemed like such a bad idea at the time).
I actually do agree with the general premise of your post - if someone thinks this is a shortcut or way to get around building real experience they are absolutely wrong. I do believe there is no substitute for BOTH hours of flight time and years of experience. What the program has done in the past (and what it's continued goal should be) is to give students a jump-start on some of that by providing experience which they would normally not be able to get for several years and a thousand or more hours (in normal times, not the recent 300-hour wonder years). They can in turn draw on the experience they received from these mentors as they DO spend the next several years building more experience. Rather than have haphazard experiences from various questionable sources (such as shoddy 135 operators) as a basis for knowing how things should be done, they have experienced the right way, and can use that as a basis for further learning and discovery.
