Senate hearing re Regional airlines

[suupah]

ATW Daily News

document.writeln(AAMB5);​

Colgan rebuts overscheduling allegations; Senate plans June hearings

Friday May 15, 2009 var era_rc = { ERADomain: 'atwonline.firstlightera.com' };
Colgan Air attempted to push back against allegations that the pilots of the Q400 that crashed Feb. 12 near Buffalo did not get adequate rest prior to the flight because of possible overscheduling, and the US Senate announced it will hold hearings next month to examine "stunning" issues raised by National Transportation Safety Board hearings on the accident.
At the hearings this week, it was revealed that First Officer Rebecca Shaw had been up for nearly 36 hr. prior to taking the right seat of the doomed aircraft after commuting all night from her home in Seattle, while Capt. Marvin Renslow had commuted to Newark from Tampa on Feb. 9 to begin a two-day trip on Feb. 10 (ATWOnline, May 14). According to NTSB, neither Shaw nor Renslow had accommodations other than the crew room at EWR.
"We want to emphasize that if there was a fatigue issue with [the pilots], it was not due to their work schedule," Colgan said in a statement issued yesterday. "Colgan's flight crew schedule provided rest periods for each of them that were far in excess of FAA requirements."
Renslow was off duty for 22 consecutive hours before the flight and Shaw had been off for three days. "The way they manage their rest time is their own business," Colgan VP-Flight Operations Harry Mitchel told board members. "We hire professionals. They should show up fresh and ready to fly that aircraft."
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate aviation operations, safety and security subcommittee, said his panel will hold hearings next month on "gaps in the existing airline safety system." He added, "The disclosures [relating to the Colgan crash] about crew rest, compensation, training and many other issues demonstrate the urgent need for Congress and the FAA to take actions to make certain the same standards exist for

both commuter airlines and the major carriers."

 

[Andy Neill]

...the urgent need for Congress and the FAA to take actions to make certain the same standards exist for both commuter airlines and the major carriers.
What regulatory standards exist for majors that do not exist for the regionals?

 

[PilotGeek]

...the urgent need for Congress and the FAA to take actions to make certain the same standards exist for both commuter airlines and the major carriers.
What regulatory standards exist for majors that do not exist for the regionals?

the difference isn't regulatory, but something is different. For the last 3 airliners that crashed resulting in fatalities, 2 things were true:
1) they were Regional airlines (Pinnacle, Comair and now Colgan)
2) there was no reason for the crash but simple pilot incompetence taking the plane out of its performance envelope.

I will be very surprised if the end result isn't some new regulations regarding Regional Airlines pilot recruiting and training.

 

[Andy Neill]

So give me a proposed regulation that would fix this....

 

[doh]

...the urgent need for Congress and the FAA to take actions to make certain the same standards exist for both commuter airlines and the major carriers.
What regulatory standards exist for majors that do not exist for the regionals?

There are many different contractual standards at the majors that don't exist at the regionals. There are no regulatory standards that are different. It is way too much to hope for that congress will update the regulatory standards to close the duty time gap that exists between the regs and the major airline contracts.

 

[rustypigeon]

So give me a proposed regulation that would fix this....

Require an ATP for both PIC and SIC in a transport catagory aircraft. That will push the payscale up too. I doubt it will happen, but it will solve a couple of issues, and it is certainly a reasonable requirement.

 

[sweptback]

Require an ATP for both PIC and SIC in a transport catagory aircraft. That will push the payscale up too. I doubt it will happen, but it will solve a couple of issues, and it is certainly a reasonable requirement.

How would that fix anything? Instead of instructing 200-300 hours before getting the regional job, the applicant would just instruct a couple years more to get 1500, then take the checkride. A instructor busting his balls could probably do it in a year.

That applicant still hasn't seen high performance aircraft, icing, class B airport ops, or anything that would be helpful to his future career. But he has an ATP, so that must make him competent.

 

[BoilerUP]

Require an ATP for both PIC and SIC in a transport catagory aircraft. That will push the payscale up too. I doubt it will happen, but it will solve a couple of issues, and it is certainly a reasonable requirement.

While I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to propose all airline pilots have an ATP...having "Airline Transport Pilot" on your certificate won't prevent a crew from performing a Stupid Pilot Trick and mishandling an aircraft like what happened in this case, nor will it necessarily mean new airline pilots are any more experienced (especially if part 135 minimums remain at 1200 hours).

 

[Whataburger]

I like the ATP idea. It's a tough line to draw. You have this situation, and you have situations like the two old and "experienced" dudes driving the corporate jet into the ground approaching Houston a couple of years ago. Mistakes will NEVER be taken out of the cockpit regardless of age or experience.

 

[rustypigeon]

Requiring an ATP will keep the < 1500 hour pilots out of the cockpit. Not every ATP is a competent pilot, but raising the bar to 1500 hours is reasonable and needs to be done.

How much experience can a 250 hour pilot have anyway? Do you guys actually think raising the bar to 1500 is a bad thing? I would love to hear your logic on that one.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

How would that fix anything? Instead of instructing 200-300 hours before getting the regional job, the applicant would just instruct a couple years more to get 1500, then take the checkride. A instructor busting his balls could probably do it in a year.

That applicant still hasn't seen high performance aircraft, icing, class B airport ops, or anything that would be helpful to his future career. But he has an ATP, so that must make him competent.

It would eliminate or severely hamper the "puppy mill" pilot training companies. This business has gone from hiring the most qualified pilot to hiring the best FICO score. "If you can and will, sign on the bottom line we will make you an airline pilot" vs "We only hire the best and brightest" I am sorry, I have flown with a few guys who have no business in the cockpit of anything larger than a 152 and I cringe when I think I may have to fly in the back of the plane when they are in the front.
Good luck we are all gonna need it!
PBR

 

[PilotGeek]

So give me a proposed regulation that would fix this....

They are politicians. Their new rules may not fix anything, but they feel the compelling need to do something, like in the Jessica Dubroff aftermath.

It will probably be along the lines of min number of hours experience, more training requirements and increased crew rest requirements.

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

Requiring an ATP will keep the < 1500 hour pilots out of the cockpit. Not every ATP is a competent pilot, but raising the bar to 1500 hours is reasonable and needs to be done.

How much experience can a 250 hour pilot have anyway? Do you guys actually think raising the bar to 1500 is a bad thing? I would love to hear your logic on that one.

the public wants safety improved now. two atp pilots up front will give them that. sounds like a sound improvement to me.

only problem with that is where are they going to find the atp pilots, let alone get them for 20k a year to sit in the right seat.

 

[rustypigeon]

only problem with that is where are they going to find the atp pilots, let alone get them for 20k a year to sit in the right seat.

Supply and demand. Less qualified pilots = higher pay. You start paying guys 60k their first year and I bet you won't have trouble filling the right seat with a qualified pilot.

 

[Skywest Pylot]

only problem with that is where are they going to find the atp pilots, let alone get them for 20k a year to sit in the right seat.

Supply and demand. Less qualified pilots = higher pay. You start paying guys 60k their first year and I bet you won't have trouble filling the right seat with a qualified pilot.

I would say average regional Captain should be making $100k/year and First Officer $60k/year. We've got plenty of guys/gals on the street that could fill the seats if an ATP was required but you gotta pay them a liveable wage.

 

[BoilerUP]

Supply and demand. Less qualified pilots = higher pay. You start paying guys 60k their first year and I bet you won't have trouble filling the right seat with a qualified pilot.

Yeah, a regional airline with first year pay higher than NetJets with their 2500tt minimums ain't going to happen any time soon.

A much more reasonable (and likely) figure would be the $35-40k ballpark, but even still I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

 

[Andy Neill]

Require an ATP for both PIC and SIC in a transport catagory aircraft. That will push the payscale up too. I doubt it will happen, but it will solve a couple of issues, and it is certainly a reasonable requirement.

I think that is a very reasonable idea and one which would raise the average experience level at the regionals.

Of course, it would not have prevented this accident, though. The CA was an ATP and the FO certainly had enough time to be an ATP when she was hired at Colgan. Still, I can appreciate how this would move toward reducing the liklihood of this happening again.

 

[rustypigeon]

Yeah, a regional airline with first year pay higher than NetJets with their 2500tt minimums ain't going to happen any time soon.

A much more reasonable (and likely) figure would be the $35-40k ballpark, but even still I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

I'm not going to hold my breath either. I honestly don't think the FAA is going to do anything about it. But raising the bar needs to be done. I would love to see day when a regional had no choice but to pay a decent wage to keep their front seats filled.

 

[lancair360]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/05/world-newser.html

Great exposure, guys. Keep the emails coming to ABC. I bet Phil Trenary and his circus clowns are about to sh!t right now.

 

[habubuaza]

Foreign Carriers for decades have used 300 hour pilots in the right seat of their heavy jets who have gone on to have stellar careers without as much as a scratch, so obviously it's not just time, or holding an ATP.

 

[701EV]

It's all smoke and mirrors boys.

I'll bet nothing is going to change.

701EV

 

[BrickTop]

So give me a proposed regulation that would fix this....

Pay pilots wages that afford them to live in their domiciles discouraging the need to commute from places where their wages afford them a livable standard. Congress should force wages upon the airlines much the same as they do a general minimum wage.

 

[goodgig]

It's all smoke and mirrors boys.

I'll bet nothing is going to change.

701EV

Correctomundo.

 

[jonjuan]

Pay pilots wages that afford them to live in their domiciles discouraging the need to commute from places where their wages afford them a livable standard. Congress should force wages upon the airlines much the same as they do a general minimum wage.

People from the Northwest will not live in the NY or Atlanta area not matter how much you pay them. Many pilots want to work from a large city hub, but live in Mayberry where their wife grew up.

 

[DXR-Beavis]

So give me a proposed regulation that would fix this....

I'll try to make it sound FARish...

"No person shall make human mistakes while acting as a required flight crew member of a transport category aircraft."

I agree with the idea of raising the bar where hiring standards go, but the human element will always be there no matter what the experience level. I'm sure the geniuses in the Congress will find a way to regulate human error and forever remove it from aviation. Well, or at least they'll hold some hearings, do a little grand-standing, and just enjoy listening to themselves babble.

Come to think of it....maybe a "sin tax" on low-time airmen would fix it. Whether it's on the airline or the employee is for someone smarter than me to decide.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Yeesh. Some of those postings on ABC's blog have the potential to be quotable, but man, couldn't you have sent them to one of FI's grammar Nazis first?

"I iz a pylut. Dey dont pay me reel gud. I fell sad."

ALPA has media spokesmen for a reason, but I love the fact that we can shoot off emails to the media while the topic is hot.

 

[ASApuppy]

I know there are many hurdles to overcome with my ideas, but here goes anyway.

1. change the rest to "behind the door" rest.

2. eliminate all discipline for "sick calls".

3. requirements for crew meals or time off to get them ourselves regardless of how late we are.

4. make continous duty overnights illegal. I have no problem with red-eyes, but most I know do stand-ups so they can perform another job during the day.

5. Virtual basing. Or even a step better, national seniority. Rebecca Shaw should not have to fly to EWR from SEA on the red-eye to go to work. She should have hopped on her Q-400 in Horizon paint, right there in Sea-Tac. Eliminating or reducing commuting would help both company and pilots (F/A's too).

As for the pay. I think most would agree that it starts and stops with the level of pay on the wide bodies. Kinda hard to justify paying a Saab 340 capt the same as B-747 capt. The Saab guy is working harder, but the media attention will be the same for an incident in each. First year pay has almost been an institution in this industry. Age 65 has only prolonged a looming crisis coming in retirements. There just aren't that many willing to shell out almost $250,000 to Embry-Riddle for an education and training to get a job at a 121 carrier making less than $20,000 per year. It use to be justified when you knew that there was a light at the end of the tunnel with a few years at a major that paid really well. I do like how the media as finally decided to focus on what first year pay is rather than 777 capt pay and making us assume that all pilots made that. I flew with a kid last year that was making $1100 per month payments on his student loans with 15 years to pay it off. In 10 years, where are the "Regionals" going to recruit from? I know Kit Darby was a too optimistic for his own reasons, but I agreed with him on this. As for the military, who is going to get out early these days? I'd stay in and get my pension for sure before ever looking at the airlines.

 

[deadstick]

This is a hot topic today, so the Congress is all hot to hold hearings and make the voters think they are earning their pay raises. Two or three years from now, this crash will be a distant memory (aside from those of us in the industry and those who lost friends/relatives) and nothing will have changed.

 

[NEDude]

I support the ATP thing for both pilots. But if you are talking to people outside of aviation, make sure you put into lay mans terms. For example: You need nearly five times the experience to fly boxes around in a Cessna than you do to fly passengers in a jet. That will get a lot of attention.

 

[B52GUNNER]

If you are going to be an AIRLINE PILOT, you need to have an AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT License. Sorry to the low time guys, but you can build time pass the checkride, then get your Airline job.

Also I agree that if there were higher pay available, more qualified pilots might come back. I left aviation for years because I could make better money elsewhere, and not be gone as much. I was stupid enough to come back at a bad time.