USA Today article on Regional Pilots

[rigger]

The media is barking up the wrong tree with this whole checkride issue. There are a lot of factors that figure into busted checkrides. I'm afraid that if we start putting a number on what's acceptable and what's not we're going to open a Pandora's box for future pilots.

In the military, I saw checkrides used as training tools, a way to move a person out of a position, and even just to prove a point. There were some IP courses that would bust guys two to five times before they would pass them. I knew someone that busted a crew commander ride because the aircraft wasn't properly catered.

The same can be said on the civilian side. There are some flight schools that would bust a guy with an in house examiner in order to milk some extra money out of the student. How about some of the university programs that bust students in the name of "maintaining high standards".

The same can be said for the airlines. We've all heard and seen the stories. I could go on all day with this. The point I'm trying to make is that if we pin a number on what's acceptable and what's not the emphasis will be placed on the number and not on experience or background. The initial CFI rating has a very high first time fail rate. Do we want young pilots avoiding the rating in order to avoid a potential bust? Do we want military pilots avoiding advanced training or some units because it could harm a future civilian career? Do we want civilian pilots seeking the easiest flight schools and Santa Claus examiners in order to avoid a pink slip? In order to preserve their careers pilots will seek the path of least resistance as opposed to the best training.

How bout we focus on quality and experience of the individual as opposed to a number!

Rant off

p.s.- No I haven't busted a bunch of rides.

Your last line says it all, all your ratings and all those hours and you have not busted a bunch of rides.....amazing.......no not really you are a professional and took/take your responsibility seriously. I have flown 20 years and never busted a ride (yes it could happen tomorrow) but it's not because I am great or better then anyone else it's because I bust my ass to do my job (in training and out) to the best I possibly can (as do most of us) and this ethic/professionalism shows in my checks!!! As it does in most of our industry, but folks that bust -3-4-5 rides......I don't want in my flightdeck when the S it hits the fan! that shows a total lack of professionalism!

As for kids not starting because they don't want to fail a ride GOOD I don't think that kind of uneasyness belongs in any cockpit. I want the best flying my family around (the guy or gal that says bring it on! not someone who runs away from the tough real world!!!!

 

[Lear70]

I have been a regional airline pilot for 10 years now. For the first time in my career, I have had two major airline pilots deadheading aboard my Dash 8 stop up front to "chat" or "see how it is going" in the past week. An FO for a legacy carrier stopped up front to chat because we had taken a maintenance delay and his son was onboard. The real reason for the chats was apparent after only a few words. They were worried. And I don't blame them at all.

The night that 3407 went down, we as a profession obviously did not have our best night. That event reinforced a common stereotype of us regional guys as inexperienced, unprofessional and out of our depth. We (as regional pilots) further perpetuate that image when we conduct ourselves in a manner which lacks the dignified and serious bearing our responsibilities demand. I am by no means suggesting that all, or even a majority, of regional pilots are less than professional. Furthermore I recognize that major airline pilots on occassion will act in a manner which is beneath the profession. My point is this: As regional guys and gals, we are under a microscope. We need to act and fly accordingly for our own good and for the good of those lives we are charged to protect.

I don't blame the pilots who have recently visited my flight deck for the reticence they have shown. Those of you who have concerns should do what they have done... Come on up and say hi. Hopefully the vast majority of us who ARE skilled professionals can allay your concerns and earn your respect as fellow pilots. I personally appreciated their honesty regarding their concerns and it was my pleasure to put them at ease.

Well-said.

I was a revenue passenger on a PCL flight today. Think I stopped by the flight deck and chatted? You betcha, but I've been doing the same thing ever since I started flying at PCL and knew what kind of pilots were coming through the mill.

The VAST MAJORITY are good pilots, and as long as they keep their head on straight and fly professionally, there's never an issue. But every once in a while, you get a bonehead, and I'd prefer to ask to ride up front in the jumpseat if someone looks like they're a little young and cavalier for my comfort level.

How bout we focus on quality and experience of the individual as opposed to a number!

Absolutely. Multiple failed checkrides is an automatic detractor of "quality". Hence the stigma against it.

You fail one ride, like an initial CFI which we all know is hell, or your initial upgrade training at a regional if you don't have much PIC time and you're nervous as a cat on a hot, tin roof, that's just the way life goes (no, I've never failed one, but knock on wood, I still have 28+ years in front of me and anyone can have a bad day).

You fail 2 rides, now you've got me wondering what's up. You fail 3 or more? Forget it, find a different career. That kind of "quality" doesn't pass my litmus test for "professional pilot", and I'm not alone, there's a REASON it's in almost every pilot contract I can think of.

 

[Max Powers]

Maybe Regional guys have more check-ride failure because they fly at regionals? In other words Regionals don't give nearly the amount of sim sessions as your average Major. So being younger and only having flown at a regional your chances of a check-ride bust is higher. Think of the former military guy where costs in training was never a question and then he/she moves over to a Major who has a nice AQP program and lots of nice CBT and the likes with myriad amounts of sim sessions etc etc. Also flying a T-prop on steam gauges is much more demanding than flying a nice glass jet with a G/A button.

 

[jetjock6]

Maybe Regional guys have more check-ride failure because they fly at regionals? In other words Regionals don't give nearly the amount of sim sessions as your average Major. So being younger and only having flown at a regional your chances of a check-ride bust is higher. Think of the former military guy where costs in training was never a question and then he/she moves over to a Major who has a nice AQP program and lots of nice CBT and the likes with myriad amounts of sim sessions etc etc. Also flying a T-prop on steam gauges is much more demanding than flying a nice glass jet with a G/A button.

Another very good point. In the regionals it was all about saving money. At best they would give guys an extra sim or two. After that they were gone.

On a foot note to that, when I was at brand X regional. There was a big push from big brother to hire minorities. Big brand X even went as far as putting them through college and paying for a type before sending them into the real world. They sent them to the regional with around 300 hours of training and no practical experience of any kind. I think 8 to 10 got to the airline and I know of only one that made it to the line fully qualified. All got a lot of extra training that was not alloted to other pilots. I heard that one got as much as 100 hrs. of OE before being sent packing. My real problem with this, outside of putting inexperienced pilots flying passengers, is in the fact that the ones that didn't make it might have been good pilots someday if they had been given the opportunity to acquire some experience and confidence before being tossed into a EICAS jet in a fast paced regional environment. As it was they were just a pawn in a political game.

 

[koko nw]

Maybe Regional guys have more check-ride failure because they fly at regionals? In other words Regionals don't give nearly the amount of sim sessions as your average Major. So being younger and only having flown at a regional your chances of a check-ride bust is higher. Think of the former military guy where costs in training was never a question and then he/she moves over to a Major who has a nice AQP program and lots of nice CBT and the likes with myriad amounts of sim sessions etc etc. Also flying a T-prop on steam gauges is much more demanding than flying a nice glass jet with a G/A button.

Your right but most folks who move on to the joy's of a G/A button have already paid there dues flying those steam gauges. Did they bust a bunch of checkrides?

Come on 90 days?!!! with just 200 hundred hours to begin with? I feel sorry for the Captain's flying with these folks.

The folks enrolling in these puppy mills are just as guilty. These folks want the "EASY" button and there willing to sacrifice there training and in the end the safety of those folks who there entrusted with their lives. Shame on them.

 

[michael707767]

Think of the former military guy where costs in training was never a question and then he/she moves over to a Major who has a nice AQP program and lots of nice CBT and the likes with myriad amounts of sim sessions etc etc.

You obviously know nothing about military training. Do you really think cost is not a factor and therefore pilots get an unlimited amount of training?

Military pilot training is very regimented. A set number of flights in each phase, followed by check rides. The pace is very quick, and you either keep up or get eliminated. No more training because daddy has enough money to buy you more hours.

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

The folks enrolling in these puppy mills are just as guilty. These folks want the "EASY" button and there willing to sacrifice there training and in the end the safety of those folks who there entrusted with their lives. Shame on them.

With all due respect, I think you are wrong here.

Students enrolling in pilot puppy mills are just believing what they are told. Their impressions of what it takes to be successful in the industry are formed by people who want their money. Even these "creative salesmen" aren't at fault, really. They are simply filling a demand created by the airlines' thirst for young pilots who will accept Ritz crackers for pay.

The true blame lies with the airlines themselves. They know beyond a shadow of a doubt how detrimental to safety having low experience pilots on the flight deck can be. They know that the people they hire have not had a truly serious vetting of their capacity to succeed in a fast paced airline environment when the stuff is hitting the fan. Airline management has been relying on luck and technology to keep the airplanes out of the dirt, all the while singing the mantra of "a single level of safety."

The paradigm finally, and inevitabley, failed with Colgan 3407. In my mind, regional airline management and culture killed those 50 people. The negligence shown by airline management is indeed criminal.

 

[CitationLover]

Just heard from our POI, only 300 commercial licenses issued in 2008. The problem of an abundance of eager new pilots is going away. With the supply of pilots drying up things will eventually go our way.

Think so? Guess what, United and the Star Alliance are trying an experiment to combat this. They've already done it at my airline: Midwest.

If they can outsource our jobs to lower paid regional pilots, they can then turn around and outsource those jobs to foreign pilots.

 

[koko nw]

With all due respect, I think you are wrong here.

Students enrolling in pilot puppy mills are just believing what they are told. Their impressions of what it takes to be successful in the industry are formed by people who want their money. Even these "creative salesmen" aren't at fault, really. They are simply filling a demand created by the airlines' thirst for young pilots who will accept Ritz crackers for pay.

The true blame lies with the airlines themselves. They know beyond a shadow of a doubt how detrimental to safety having low experience pilots on the flight deck can be. They know that the people they hire have not had a truly serious vetting of their capacity to succeed in a fast paced airline environment when the stuff is hitting the fan. Airline management has been relying on luck and technology to keep the airplanes out of the dirt, all the while singing the mantra of "a single level of safety."

The paradigm finally, and inevitabley, failed with Colgan 3407. In my mind, regional airline management and culture killed those 50 people. The negligence shown by airline management is indeed criminal.

Lowly, your second and third paragraphs are spot on.
I just have a hard time believeing those "students" entering those types of puppy mills are that naive.

I respect your opinion, I think you have some valid points I just can't agree with your first paragraph. Let's just leave it as agreeing to disagree. Take Care

Koko

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

I respect your opinion, I think you have some valid points I just can't agree with your first paragraph. Let's just leave it as agreeing to disagree. Take Care

Koko

There is always room for respectful differences of opinion. Happy trails!