Was Kit Darby right???

[slick1]

At the risk of starting a new "Kit Darby debate", I'll pose the following analysis of statistics available from the FAA

This is a year-over-prior-year and a 2003-over-2001 analysis of test "volume" data. These are not test scores or pass/fail ratios. These are simply the number of people who took a test for a particular license or rating. They are all related to airplane tests, (not glider, helo, blimp, etc.)

......................'01v'00 ......'02v'01 .....'03v'02 ......2003 v. 2001
Commercial ..........+4% .......-11% ......-17% ............-27%
Instrument ...........+5% .......- 6% ......-18% ............-22%
Private Pilot...........+2% .......- 3% .......- 9% ............-11%

While the numbers don't show that there are fewer pilots, they do show that fewer people are taking the test to become Private Pilots, instrument rated pilots, and Commercial Pilots. I'm sure I'm in good company when I opine that I would like to see these numbers continue to decline. Eventually supply and demand for pilots would have to kick in and bolster pay rates.

A cursory review of all the stats suggests that ALL test volumes are down over year 2001. Of course some of these numbers are easy to explain. Combined 121 and 135 ATP's are down 38% and Turbojet F/E's are down a whopping 89%. Obviously, these declines are due to the lack of upgrades and movement as well as fleet evolutions throughout the industry.

So without getting into a "Kit Darby" debate, I'd welcome any additional thoughts or comments regarding these statistics.

BTW, the stats can be viewed at: http://av-info.faa.gov/srchAdvancedResults.asp?SearchFor=*&cmdSubmit=Search&SearchUsing=filename&ResultsPerPage=10&SortResults=date&SortDirection=%5Bd%5D&DateRange=-100y&DateStart=mm%2Fdd%2Fyyyy&DateEnd=mm%2Fdd%2Fyyyy&Category=teststat

 

[bart]

You open with "Was Kit Darby Right?" and then state you do not want to start a Kit Darby debate. I guess I could punch you in the face and not want to start a fight, eh?

I won't engage in the Kit Darby debate that you so desperately seek. I will keep it to a simple:

"Your logic is soiled."

Oh, and "have a nice day."

 

[slick1]

Uhhh,....Thanks? That was,.......insightful.

Anyone else care to comment on these numbers? Maybe someone with a cogent thought.

This really isn't intended to be flame bait. I simply want to know if any of you have noticed a decrease of people entering our field and when and how that will play into our future, given retirements, fleet consolidations, airline failures, etc.

 

[jergar999]

For what it's worth, let's hope the number in dwindling. I certainly don't want to offend anyone who is looking to get into this career field, but it would be nice for the number of opportunities and the number of pilots to be closer.

 

[Publishers]

There are a number of things that impact these statistics. Several years ago, I looked in a discussion with the WIA organization at womens statistics. They showed while there were in fact less women starting, more of those who did were pursuing a carrer and got higher ratings.

Besides our industry itself, we have to look at what the economic situation was in the country in post 9/11. Starts reflect that as much as anything.

A good point was made on upgrades as the whole system has slowed at it has always reflected what is going on at the majors. When they stop hiring, things tend to stop as far as upward movement. Many type rated pilots now are down a level in the work force. Their recurrent does not really show up in the numbers.

 

[mayday1]

It's not surprising to me that these numbers have shown a steady decline - it's the expected result given the amount of (negative)publicity the airline/aviation industry has seen since 9/11.

The decline in "private" numbers are less significant - I base that on the fact there will always be lots of people interested in earning their private, and not making flying a career choice.

Instrument and commercial (more so commercial) - these are ratings I would imagine most get because they are actively pursuing a professional pilot career. They have shown the most significant decline, and that has no doubt been affected by the awareness many have of the airline industry - mainly affected by high profile news stories about airline bankruptcy, revoked pensions, furloughs, etc.

 

[Vik]

I don't care if they showed a 50% drop.

Pilots > Jobs
ALWAYS!

Remember, there were two Wright bros and one airplane.

 

[mayday1]

don't you mean Jobs > Pilots (i.e. more jobs than pilots..).

 

[JetPilot500]

don't you mean Jobs > Pilots (i.e. more jobs than pilots..).

No, I think that's what Vik meant.

More Pilots than Jobs.

Unfortuantely, I agree with Vik, there will always be more pilots than (good) jobs.

 

[Goose Egg]

Who's Kit Darby?

Just kidding...

They have shown the most significant decline, and that has no doubt been affected by the awareness many have of the airline industry - mainly affected by high profile news stories about airline bankruptcy, revoked pensions, furloughs, etc.

Sort of a sad commentary that people believe that the only way to have a fulfilling flying career is to fly for a major airline. I always just wanted to fly, period. The equipment involved was more or less inconsequential.

-Goose

 

[Vik]

No, I didn't mean Jobs > Pilots.

Pilots > Jobs (READ: Pilots greater than Jobs). Pilots have never been in demand in the long term. You might see pockets here and there of demand, but there isn't demand.

Demand leads to increases in wages and that ain't happen'n.

don't you mean Jobs > Pilots (i.e. more jobs than pilots..).

 

[mayday1]

right... and when you have a greater amount of jobs (demand) than pilots (supply) - i.e. jobs greater than pilots, or read another way, more jobs than pilots - that creates higher wages, better benefits, more recruiting, etc.

maybe I'm misreading/misunderstanding your post... but I think we'd like to see supply outstrip demand at some point (more jobs available than qualified pilots), thereby leading to the things you mention. I agree.. I don't think this is a realistic scenario in the near or long term.

 

[mayday1]

Goose Egg.. I agree with you.. that's why I'm in this game.. just a commentary on what might explain/contribute to some of the declines in commercial licenses.

 

[bobbysamd]

As Buddy Young, Jr. said in "Mr. Saturday Night," "Don't get me started . . . . "

Kit Darby's "pilot shortage" is a sophistry. Always has and always will be. Kit has been preaching for seventeen years that 40-thousand pilots will be needed "during the next ten years." Kit pushed this pablum starting in 1987 by way of news releases. These news releases, with Kit as FAPA as the source, of course, found their way into newspapers. Then, Kit started advertising in mainstream pilot magazines, and sold the professional pilot dream to the masses. In so doing, Kit got rich and made his vendors rich.

Kit's pilot shortage, at first blush, appeared plausible. New airlines sprung up and pilots were retiring. There was a hiring boom. Who would fill these seats, etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum. The proof came when one started to apply for jobs, believing that companies would beat down the doors for one's services (slighty overstated, but not really; you had to be there), only to hear nary a knock or phone ring. That, alone, made Kit's claim of an impending pilot shortage a half-truth, a sophistry.

Another item to prove that Kit's pilot shortage is a non-starter. There are stories of how Mesa Airlines pilots tried to organize in the early '90s. Larry Risley, the owner, and his lackey, Grady Reed, would trot out a big stack of pilot applications, show them to the organizers, and inform them they can be replaced.

Finally, as noted above, how does Kit count hirings? Let's say the same pilot is hired to multiple jobs; does that count as multiple openings filled?

Except for very briefly in the mid-'60s, there has not been a pilot shortage in 101 years. Think about it.

 

[Publishers]

Many o fyou need to understand though, that the statistics presented are just that, numbers, and for the most part Kit does a good job of research. The problem is that he counts a large number of jobs you do not and it often has a world component you do not see.

Take an Evergreen or the cargo guys or foreign carriers, crew leasing companies, etc. There are a bunch of jobs that do not come to your mind that are a legitimate statistic.

 

[pilotyip]

Hiring boom trend

Just another thing to support the hiring boom of June 2007, it is coming

 

[bobbysamd]

Hiring "boom"?

Just another thing to support the hiring boom of June 2007, it is coming

Yep. And so is Christmas.

In all seriousness, I hope Yip is right. I really do. I mean it. But, I ..... don't ...... think ....so.

 

[jergar999]

Regardless of whether or not the number of certificates is dwindling, I am confident that the loss of jobs since 2001 is much greater than the loss of certificates issued.

 

[Goose Egg]

Well, right now, all that is needed to get a CFI job is a pulse. Unfortunately, it gets considerably more difficult to find work the further up one goes. Getting on with a major will never be easy; it is the real or perceived pinnacle of the profession, and one does not ever waltz into the top of their respective lines of work.

I can expect the fight of my life to get there... That is, of course, if I gave a rat's $#@ about airline flying.

-Goose

 

[BornAgainPagan]

Statistics schmistics!

Don't any of you geniuses know that 67% of statistics are made up on the spot?

 

[slick1]

....and 3 out of 4 Statisticians hate their job. That's nearly half of 'em!

Doing the math: 3/4 Statisticians > Pilot Jobs! .....No wait. That's < Pilot Jobs....Yea, that's it.

 

[pilotyip]

It is a sign

It is a sure sign of the coming June 2007 hiring boom, it is coming, Be prepared.

 

[VFR on Top]

It's the economy, stupid! Flight training is rather difficult when one's discretionary income is the square root of jack squat!

And I have it on good authority from Captain Darby that Gulf-war era military pilots will be retiring in DROVES sometime in the next 25 years.

 

[Checks]

lots of low, low, low, low paying, crappy schedule jobs out there. Yippie!!