Video of Congressional Hearings. Watch This!!!

[doh]

Okay, one guy says a college degree is necessary. All the pilots (at least the ones who get paid to fly) say experience is the thing. Aren't they both right? I know several guys without college degrees who are great, but most people would benefit from the degree. Make them both mandatory. Problem solved. Glad I could be of help.:beer:

 

[Abernathy]

Always nice to see the name Jeff Skiles pop up out of the sewer. I haven't watched the whole video yet, but I can't help but wonder how he'll blame America West pilots for causing the crash of the Colgan flight in Buffalo like he blamed them for the fact he's not a wide body Captain. What a D-Bag.

get over it.

 

[Flybywire44]

Always nice to see the name Jeff Skiles pop up out of the sewer. I haven't watched the whole video yet, but I can't help but wonder how he'll blame America West pilots for causing the crash of the Colgan flight in Buffalo like he blamed them for the fact he's not a wide body Captain. What a D-Bag.

Could you come up with a more baseless post?

 

[BRA]

I thought Skiles and Prater both did an excellent job. It can be said that both view points have agendas separate from the main point but anyone can see that Skiles and Prater make the better points.

Flight hours after 250, even if it is just in the pattern in a C172 are the same hour over and over again? I have to disagree. So much is learned in that first 1500 hours. Traffic watch, a CFII, an MEI, part 135 training, multi engine time, giving flight tests at a self examining 141 flight school? Yup, same hour over and over again.

Flight schools having trouble finding students that want to pay 100K and get the guaranteed interview? Shame.

 

[get2flyin]

Could you come up with a more baseless post?

After Sulley and his "Miracle on the Hudson", I was one of the people frustrated with the fact NOBODY knew the the Co-Pilot's name. Later, I had the opportunity to spend an afternoon in a courtroom with him and formed a much different opinion so I wouldn't consider it baseless at all. But hey, that's my opinion. Judge him for yourself.

 

[waveflyer]

Can we not turn this into an east v west thing. I'm pro-west but as an industry I respect these two for using their fame to 'raise all ships'

 

[Erlanger]

Before the House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation on the Federal Aviation Administration’s Call To Action on Airline Safety and Pilot Training
Chairman Costello, Ranking Member Petri, Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Call to Action on airline safety and pilot training. As you know, on June 15, 2009, we made this call to action to encourage the aviation industry in this country to come together to share their best practices across the board and implement actions we know can improve safety. History has shown that we are able to implement better safety improvements far more quickly and effectively when we work together on problems and their solutions. We have received a wealth of information from the Call to Action, and we are taking several steps to use that information to make the industry and traveling public safer.
To start, we had several short-term actions that we wanted to achieve in June and July of this year. These included:
Flight and Duty Time Rulemaking: As a result of the Call to Action, FAA made the creation of a new flight and rest rule based on fatigue science a high priority, with an aggressive timeline. FAA chartered an aviation rulemaking committee (ARC), which began meeting in July 2009. The ARC, which consisted of representatives from FAA, industry, and labor organizations, was charged with producing recommendations for a science-based approach to fatigue management by September 1, 2009. I am pleased to report to you that the ARC met its charge and that we are currently reviewing its recommendations. Although our review is ongoing, I would also like to share with you how pleased I am with the work that we accomplished in the ARC. While some details remain unresolved, the ARC gave us a broad philosophical framework that will form the basis for our NPRM.
Focused Inspection Initiative: Recognizing the urgency of proposals in the Call to Action, FAA required its principal operations inspectors for part 121 carriers to conduct a focused program review of air carrier flight crewmember training, qualification, and management practices.
The focused inspection initiative has two parts. The first part of the initiative required FAA inspectors to meet with the carrier’s director of operations, director of safety, and company officials responsible for flight crewmember training and qualification programs. The purpose of these meetings was to determine the carrier’s ability to identify, track, and manage low-time flight crewmembers and those who have failed evaluation events or demonstrated a repetitive need for additional training. Inspectors also looked at whether the carrier adopted the suggestions in Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) 06015 to voluntarily implement remedial training for pilots with persistent performance deficiencies. The meetings were to occur as soon as possible, but no later than July 15, 2009. I am pleased to report that all of these reviews have been completed.
As a result of these meetings, our inspectors found that about two-thirds of the carriers operating under the traditional regulatory requirements for pilot training and checking (i.e. carriers that do not participate in an Advanced Qualification Program) had systems in place to identify and manage low-time flight crewmembers and those with persistent performance problems. We strongly encouraged carriers without such systems to establish them. For those who will not commit to implementing these systems, we will increase oversight to ensure their training and qualification programs meet regulatory requirements.


The second part of the initiative is currently underway. Inspectors are conducting additional inspections to validate that the carrier’s training and qualification programs meet regulatory standards in accordance with FAA guidance materials, including, among other items:

• Review the entire performance history of any pilot in question;
• Provide remedial training as necessary; and
• Provide additional oversight by the certificate holder to ensure that performance deficiencies are effectively addressed and corrected.

We expect to complete the second part of the focused inspection initiative by September 30.
Training Program Review Guidance: Using results from initial elements of the focused inspection initiative, FAA will provide guidance material on conducting a comprehensive training program review. This guidance will describe the training program review in the context of a safety management system and its role in a corporate safety culture.
Although our original goal (as indicated in the Action Plan) was to develop this document by July 31, we have postponed development of the Training Program Review Guidance for two reasons. First, the Action Plan indicates that we will use the results of FAA’s focused inspection initiative in developing the material. Although FAA inspectors completed Part I by July 15, Part II (which calls for a more in-depth review of training) is not slated to be completed until September 30, as stated above. Second, we found that the initial July timeframe would not allow us to benefit from suggestions and ideas developed in the series of Call to Action safety forums held around the country in July and August.
Once FAA inspectors complete the second part of the focused inspection initiative, we will analyze this information, along with ideas gathered from the regional safety forums, and begin developing the SAFO. As we may want to provide time for industry comment, our goal is to complete it by December 31.


Obtain Air Carriers’ Commitment to Most Effective Practices: To solidify oral commitments made at FAA’s June 15 Call to Action, I sent a letter to all part 121 operators and their unions and requested written commitments to adhere to the highest professional standards, with specific commitments on the following key topics:

• Pilot Records: While Congress is working to amend the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 and the FAA amends Advisory Circular 120-68D, I asked that air carriers immediately implement a policy of asking pilot applicants for voluntary disclosure of FAA records, including notices of disapproval for evaluation events.
• FOQA and ASAP: I asked that air carriers who have not done so, establish flight operations quality assurance (FOQA) and Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) programs and develop data analysis processes to ensure effective use of this information.

I can tell you that of the responses we have examined so far, carriers have overwhelmingly indicated a willingness to make the commitments I have requested – this includes responses from those who have already done so. But not everyone has responded yet. We have reiterated to these airlines the importance of responding to my request. Our final findings and recommendations resulting from this effort will be summarized in the final report on the Call to Action that will be published by the end of the calendar year.


Labor Organizations: I asked labor organizations for their commitment in the following areas:

• Establish and support professional standards and ethics committees to develop peer audit and review procedures, and to elevate ethics and professional standards.
• Establish and publish a code of ethics that includes expectations for professional behavior, standards of conduct for professional appearance, and overall fitness to fly.
• Support periodic safety risk management meetings between FAA and mainline and regional carriers to promote the most effective practices, including periodic analysis of FOQA and ASAP data with an emphasis on identifying enhancements to the training program.

The initial responses have been informative. As with the air carrier responses, we have not heard from everyone. We will continue to track responses to this request and will include the results, findings and recommendations we will be making as we wrap up this Call to Action with a report later this year.

 

[Erlanger]

Mentoring: To address issues in the professional standards and flight discipline area, FAA developed and sought industry comments on the prospect of creating a range of mentoring programs. I am still very much in favor of mentoring, but there is no question that it is also one of the most challenging concepts to address. We found this to be true during the discussions held at Call to Action safety forums around the country. Still, these discussions have produced some interesting and potentially promising ideas. For example:

• Establishing Joint Strategic Councils within a “family” of carriers (mainline and regional partner(s)). This approach could lead to individual as well as corporate mentoring relationships.
• Using Professional Standards Committee Safety Conferences to provide opportunities for two-way mentoring – a very good reminder that good ideas are not unique to larger mainline carriers.
• Exploring mentoring possibilities between air carriers and university aviation programs.

We will be looking more closely at these ideas as we analyze data gathered from the forums and develop a mentoring guidance document for industry comment.
Regional Safety Forums: Beginning in July, FAA conducted a series of regional safety forums to discuss the Call to Action initiatives, listen to stakeholder comments, and seek ideas for and commitments to additional actions in the areas in which FAA is already taking specific action. By the end of August, FAA held 12 well-attended forums in the following locations:

Regional Safety Forums​

Date​

Location​

July 21
Washington, D.C.
July 30
Dallas / Fort Worth
July 30
Chicago
August 4
Seattle
August 6
Minneapolis / St. Paul
August 6
Atlanta
August 6
Anchorage
August 20
Miami / Fort Lauderdale
August 20
Denver
August 21
St. Louis
August 27
Las Vegas
August 27
Boston

The Call to Action also included several intermediate term actions, intended for completion in the August-December 2009 timeframe. These include:
Crew Training Requirements: At the time we initiated the Call to Action, the FAA already had an NPRM open for comment, intended to enhance traditional training programs for crewmembers and dispatchers by requiring the use of flight simulation training devices for flight crewmembers, and including additional training requirements in areas critical to safety. The public comment period closed on August 10 with over 3000 pages of comments. FAA is reviewing these comments and is committed to applying the resources necessary to complete a final rule on an aggressive timeline. The final rule will be consistent with the philosophy of enhancing the quality and effectiveness of training rather than focusing on traditional quantitative measures such as total flight time.
One of the things that the Call Action has also shown a light on is the issue of varying operational experience. We do not believe that simply raising quantity – the total number of hours of flying time or experience – without regard to the quality and nature of that time and experience – is an appropriate method by which to improve a pilot’s proficiency in commercial operations. For example, a newly-certificated commercial pilot with the minimum number of hours might be limited to certain activities until he or she could accumulate the type of experience deemed potentially necessary to serve as a first officer for an air carrier. Such experience would need to include training and operational experience in the multi-pilot environment, as well as training and exposure to icing, high altitude operations and other areas common to commercial air carrier operations.


Guidance to Inspectors on Safety Oversight: Consistent with the report of the Independent Review Team on Managing Risks in Civil Aviation, on which I served, FAA’s Aviation Safety organization included scenario-based training in safety oversight as part of the August All-Managers Conference. This training was intended to address issues raised in the report, including:

• Management of varying regulatory interpretation styles within the inspection workforce;
• Methods for harmonizing extremes in regulatory application; and,
• Methods for optimizing the regulatory effectiveness and coherence across a diverse team of inspectors.

Final Report: By December 31, FAA will finalize a report summarizing our findings and recommending additional action items based on the Call to Action meeting, regional safety forums, results of the focused inspection initiative, and other actions. The report will include performance metrics for auditing and assessing progress.
While these are the steps we have and will be taking, I want to point out the biggest factor affecting safety: professionalism in the workplace. Safety begins at the top, but whether one has a wrench in his or her hand, sits at a yoke or carries a clipboard, wears a headset or works in the galley, safety is everyone’s responsibility. In spite of this, we have not seen the required level of professionalism consistently from the aviation industry across the board. Although professionalism prevails in the vast majority of the aviation workforce, it is not uniform throughout the industry. The standards are the same, the training is the same, but the mentality is not the same, and this is what we have to change.
One aspect of professionalism that needs further review is the professional responsibility of pilots to report for duty ready to fly. This can be a challenge for those who commute from one city to their work domicile in another. One of the things that requires further analysis is the effect commuting has on fatigue for crew members. As I have alluded to in the past in front of this Committee, one of the challenges with commuting is that it is virtually impossible to regulate fatigue as it relates to commuting. Who can say that someone who commutes for an hour on the shuttle from DC to NY (or a two-hour flight from Chicago, for that matter) arrives to work less rested than someone who lives in the greater NY metropolitan area, but drives three hours through a snowstorm from Connecticut to arrive at JFK? Who can mandate that no pilot’s child ever gets sick and needs an emergency room visit in the middle of the night, just hours before that pilot is supposed to go on duty? This is where professionalism – taking responsibility for showing up fit for duty – has to govern.
Those who have captured the essence of the professionalism need to have opportunities in and out of the cockpit to pass it on. Experience is a wonderful teacher, and there is no substitute for learning at the hands of someone who has already been there. The inexperienced people in the system need to meet the ones who have been around the block. They need to seek them out and mine whatever golden nuggets they have. That is one of the main reasons I think we need to see more mentoring throughout the industry.
I also think that we need to see greater use of the tools at hand like safety management systems across the board. It is often difficult to spot a trend with a slope that has only three data points on it. Safety management systems can help us plot more points and produce better information to help us make the right safety decisions.
When people know that they can raise their hand and say, “Hey, I think there’s a problem here,” it is then, and only then, that we are able to move forward in safety. If you have a situation where someone raises a hand and then is punished for doing so, all you have done is encourage silence. When you make silence the rule, when sweeping issues under the rug becomes the status quo, you have a recipe for disaster.
Unfortunately, we also need to recognize a basic truth here: we cannot regulate professionalism. No matter how many rules, regulations, advisories, mandatory training sessions, voluntary training sessions, it still comes down to the individual – the individual pilot, mechanic, technician, or controller.

 

[meatloaf]

Does anybody really think 1500 hours for an FO to get hired is going to make things safer for anyone?

I don't see how a few hundred hours of extra instructing time or however the pilot is time building makes a bit of difference.

What REALLY needs to be addressed are UPGRADE times not initial hire times.

I don't have a ton of experience, but I've seen a lot of guys upgrade way too quickly including moving from captain on one type to captain on another type without ever flying as an FO on the new airplane, that's nuts.... that in my opinion is what needs to change, not entry level times! Upgrade times need to increase, and FO pay has to increase to allow a longer learning periods at the regionals.

 

[nimtz]

Dr Brady, lick my sack. :angryfire