Sen Thune fighting the 1,500hr rule

James331 said:
Another aspect to colgen was the pay to play hour building the capt did before he got hired. Seems like that's still running on the US, complete with all the scum bucket companies who make a little side cash quasi padding logbooks for kids (cough, cough ameriflight)

http://www.eaglejet.net
Click to expand...

I clicked on your link and feel like I need a shower after reading that scammy garbage. Complete with the credit card logos at the bottom of the page.
 
James331 said:
Another aspect to colgen was the pay to play hour building the capt did before he got hired. Seems like that's still running on the US, complete with all the scum bucket companies who make a little side cash quasi padding logbooks for kids (cough, cough ameriflight)

http://www.eaglejet.net
Click to expand...

Wow..!!! I just clicked on that link and now I am all excited..!!! Just think, for a mere $50,000 or so I can be flying a 737..!!!!

I got my check book open now..!!!
 
James331 said:
Frankly I think of anything single pilot IFR should require more hours than dual pilot 121
Click to expand...

Fine, lets split the difference. 135 IFR passenger has a different minimum than 135 IFR cargo. Or do you think that a UPS box deserves more than 1200 hours too?
 
flyingron said:
Nobody works at Colgan any longer than they have to. I would guess that a Colgan first officer with 2200 hours probably was hired with 2100 hours.

Still by the time you have 100 hours you should know that the way out of a stall is to decrease AOA.
Click to expand...

Well, nobody works at Colgan any more at all.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Fine, lets split the difference. 135 IFR passenger has a different minimum than 135 IFR cargo. Or do you think that a UPS box deserves more than 1200 hours too?
Click to expand...
Given the number of 1200-hour pilots who are grossly unprepared for 135 cargo, I'd say that it's necessary, regardless of what's in the back.

Of course, if it's the plane with my fidget spinner from Amazon with two-day free shipping, minimums are WAY too low already. ;)
 
James331 said:
They pax are cattle, most will give up any ounce of dignity or comfort for $20, if you toss in the illusion of "security" they'll even let you feel up their grandma and kids.

I just think there is a much smaller margin for real error single pilot IFR, also lots less single pilot IFR ships and crew with auto throttles, HUDs, etc etc, so 135 mins shouldn't be touched, heck most of the good companies want over double the mins anyways.
Click to expand...
It's certainly true that pax will do anything to save $20, but my point was a bit different.
When folks get on an Airbus they don't question safety, whereas when they step on a regional CRJ they get concerned because regardless of the actual maintenance or crew quals, they feel they are on a puddle jumper. It's much better today now that regionals mostly fly jets, but it still exists. I've heard it as a passenger numerous times.

Now doubt single pilot IFR. I did it in the past, but couldn't imagine it now without all the SOPs and cross checking.
 
Velocity173 said:
Technique has nothing to do with an accidental collision either. The F-16 pilot was on an assigned vector.

Are you saying that a good pilot would somehow have a "Spider-Sense" to know that the vector was actually pointing them at the Cessna vs away? Do you think that a good pilot would have some super human eye sight and know exactly where to look for a tiny Cessna with almost a 300 MPH closure rate? Eyesight that would actually have to see through the nose of the F-16 because it was blocking it it at less than 2 miles out.

The pilot's actions in this case are nothing different than what a typical pilot would do. You can try and sharpshoot his decision making all day long but it wasn't dumb. As the NTSB put it, it was part of the "inherent limitations of the see and avoid concept." Meaning, it's understandable that this sort of thing will happen on occasion based on human limitations.
Click to expand...
I should have put "technique" in quotes so you would catch the subtle irony.

I don't see any thing in the FAR regarding "inherent limitations of the see and avoid concept". It is do or do not; there is no try.

The point is that military training is no panacea for the prevention of commercial "accidents."
 
paflyer said:
I should have put "technique" in quotes so you would catch the subtle irony.

I don't see any thing in the FAR regarding "inherent limitations of the see and avoid concept". It is do or do not; there is no try.

The point is that military training is no panacea for the prevention of commercial "accidents."
Click to expand...

Well no argument there.
 
denverpilot said:
Considering that both pilots had more than 1500 hours and Congress came up with the idea, I wouldn't call it something created by a "great mind".

A great mind would actually think up a solution to the problems.
Click to expand...

I'm not really aware that there IS a problem. If you're Great Lakes, Mesa, or Colgan than I guess you're gonna need to re-think your business model.

If you're a whiny 250 hour pilot with shiny-jet-syndrome and think you're TOO COOL to be a CFI than you're in for a little awakening too.

The majors have already identified this slack and started picking it up by handling some of these routes themselves with A319s and 737-700s.
 
Art VanDelay said:
If you're a whiny 250 hour pilot with shiny-jet-syndrome and think you're TOO COOL to be a CFI than you're in for a little awakening too.
Click to expand...

"But it's not faaaaaiiiiiirrrrr that I have to get to 1,500. I don't liiiiiiiiiiike flight instructing because they all suck and I'm waaaaay too good for this" - ATP kid with 251 hours, 51 dual given and has never seen a cloud.


I don't know of any career that you finish your schooling and you immediately jump into the big time. Police Chiefs start as officers, university departmet heads start as teachers or professors, the GM at your favorite hotel probably started as a front desk person.. Why do pilots think they deserve instant gratification? If people would stop thinking of it as a road block to their dream career and start thinking of it as a pathway to it and an experience for later things would be much better.
 
denverpilot said:
Aviation. Those 250 hour pilots are teaching.

Know of any industries that do that?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately as we all know instructing isn't seen or treated as "the big time". I do not agree with instructing being a "first job" type thing. Shoot I have 30 hours of multi time and I'm not ready to get my MEI because I don't want to be a cruddy MEI with no experience.
 
Z06_Mir said:
Unfortunately as we all know instructing isn't seen or treated as "the big time". I do not agree with instructing being a "first job" type thing. Shoot I have 30 hours of multi time and I'm not ready to get my MEI because I don't want to be a cruddy MEI with no experience.
Click to expand...

Exactly the problem.

You said it yourself. No other industry expects newbies to teach. Or anyone to teach for that matter, without getting paid better than those who just do the non-teaching job.

Plus once the classroom and initial teaching is done, the older professionals are usually mandated to mentor. Forever. It's in their job description and not optional.

Docs, Lawyers, Engineers... if they have a "senior" title, and they're in any large organIzation, they're teaching/mentoring. If they don't do it, they won't be listed as Senior. Or get that pay bump.

Aviation's model as an industry still resembles the conscripted military training system in WWII. Toss meat into the grinder and see who survives. Every other industry figured out better peacetime training and mentoring models from bottom to top.
 
denverpilot said:
Aviation. Those 250 hour pilots are teaching.

Know of any industries that do that?
Click to expand...

I don't know exactly how much flight time I have anymore. I'm pretty sure it's somewhere north of 17k hours, heck it may even be 20k by now. Seven type ratings all but one of them jet. And a proud Marine Corps graduate of the Pensacola charm school. Yet with all that experience behind me still to this day the HARDEST most DIFFICULT check ride oral exam I have ever endured was for my initial CFI airplane. The old style 757 check ride came close.

Point is - if those kids can survive that oral - largely done with an FAA examiner and not a Santa Claus D. E. then they can teach. The difference between a 300 hour commercial/instrument guy and a 300 hour commercial/instrument/CFI is ENORMOUS.

Don't believe me ? Go get your initial CFI and report back.
 
denverpilot said:
Exactly the problem.

You said it yourself. No other industry expects newbies to teach.
Click to expand...

Not so fast - ask an Air Force guy what a "Plowback" is - it's a recently graduated 2nd lieutenant turned right around after flight school graduation and put through an instructor course then sent into the training command to instruct.
 
denverpilot said:
Aviation. Those 250 hour pilots are teaching.

Know of any industries that do that?
Click to expand...
Z06_Mir said:
Unfortunately as we all know instructing isn't seen or treated as "the big time". I do not agree with instructing being a "first job" type thing. Shoot I have 30 hours of multi time and I'm not ready to get my MEI because I don't want to be a cruddy MEI with no experience.
Click to expand...

Simply because most experienced pilots don't want to fly a single engine Cessna for $20 an hour. Pay $300/hr and you *might* get some airline retirees.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Don't believe me ? Go get your initial CFI and report back.
Click to expand...

Already done.

But you've wandered off of your initial assertion that there's no problems in the industry. You've even highlighted one of them in this response.

You said Sully was right about things and "great minds think alike", and then complained that some CFIs come by the rating too easily.

So which is it?

Everything is peachy? Or there's problems, and Sully didn't address them, at all?

Nearly every new Private pilot on this board says they've had more than one instructor because theirs left to go make real money somewhere else. That shows something very broken in the industry.

I can teach because I have a real job, outside of aviation, that pays the bills. As do most of the longer term instructors here. They either have real jobs and teach part time, or they're retired or semi-retired from one and have residual income.

The one instructor I knew who was a true full-timer, gave up and went to Alaska after doing it for almost a decade, even though he wanted to teach his whole life. Because he needed a real paycheck and bennies. The instructor ranks lost a very good instructor to needing a paycheck.

Yes, this industry has real problems. That guy wouldn't send your airline unprepared candidates. But he's gone now. The training part of the industry drove him off. That's a real problem the industry hasn't addressed. It probably never will.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Not so fast - ask an Air Force guy what a "Plowback" is - it's a recently graduated 2nd lieutenant turned right around after flight school graduation and put through an instructor course then sent into the training command to instruct.
Click to expand...

I already mentioned that civilian flight training is modeled after the military conscripted model. Difference is, that butter bar has his housing and food paid for and bennies. He can even turn teaching in the military into a real career.
 
I ran into a CFI friend a couple of days ago. He's a very experienced instructor, and a good one, but he told me that he had to give up full-time instructing during the last recession so that he could take a job outside of aviation. He hates it, but it pays the bills. He told me a joke that you've probably heard:

Q: What's the difference between a flight instructor and a large pizza?

A: A pizza can feed a family of four.
 
denverpilot said:
Already done.

But you've wandered off of your initial assertion that there's no problems in the industry. You've even highlighted one of them in this response.

You said Sully was right about things and "great minds think alike", and then complained that some CFIs come by the rating too easily.

So which is it?

Everything is peachy? Or there's problems, and Sully didn't address them, at all?

Nearly every new Private pilot on this board says they've had more than one instructor because theirs left to go make real money somewhere else. That shows something very broken in the industry.

I can teach because I have a real job, outside of aviation, that pays the bills. As do most of the longer term instructors here. They either have real jobs and teach part time, or they're retired or semi-retired from one and have residual income.

The one instructor I knew who was a true full-timer, gave up and went to Alaska after doing it for almost a decade, even though he wanted to teach his whole life. Because he needed a real paycheck and bennies. The instructor ranks lost a very good instructor to needing a paycheck.

Yes, this industry has real problems. That guy wouldn't send your airline unprepared candidates. But he's gone now. The training part of the industry drove him off. That's a real problem the industry hasn't addressed. It probably never will.
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about ????
1. There is NO problem

2. I NEVER said CFI's come by the rating too easy. I said regional F/Os that did NOT get their CFI came by their position too easy.

3.Sully and I both agree - the 1500 hour rule should remain and not be watered down.

4.Having a different instructor is actually beneficial. You learn so many different things from different individuals - I don't see a problem there at all.
 
Art VanDelay said:
What are you even talking about ????
1. There is NO problem

2. I NEVER said CFI's come by the rating too easy. I said regional F/Os that did NOT get their CFI came by their position too easy.

3.Sully and I both agree - the 1500 hour rule should remain and not be watered down.

4.Having a different instructor is actually beneficial. You learn so many different things from different individuals - I don't see a problem there at all.
Click to expand...

LOL. An industry who relies upon not paying enough for its instructors to make a living worthy of a career in it, isn't ever going to see the benefits of what having professional instructors teaching would accomplish.

Not to mention it's just plain pitiful. Seriously.

I can teach a weekend class in data networking and earn quadruple what a flight instructor in charge of teaching life or death skills makes in those same two days. And that's bottom feeder instructional level in my industry. Top tier instructors make more than many line engineers who can't teach.

Yeah, aviation doesn't have a problem. Right.

The 1500 hour rule is fine. It's the pay scale during the earning of that 1500 that's the problem. And the turnover it causes.

The low end of my industry can afford to pay someone to a pay scale where they can afford a house. It'd be unheard of to pay a professional instructor in my business anything less than about $30K above the entry level, and usually a whole lot more than that if they're any good.

You'd get better candidates at ANY number of hours, if the industry actually paid instructors well enough to attract and retain the best ones. Imagine if airlines had to fight to pull instructors away from good paying jobs.

The assertion stands. Neither you nor Sully is any sort of "great mind" solving these industry problems. 1500 hours only fixes one problem, that largely doesn't exist. Part 121 isn't hiring at 1500 historically, and isn't really today either.

You could have all sorts of good candidates who weren't instructors if the industry were actually paying enough for professional instructors to make a living truly prepping people for your right seats from day one. Clearly.
 
denverpilot said:
Aviation. Those 250 hour pilots are teaching.

Know of any industries that do that?
Click to expand...

Living in a college town, many who get PHDs in quasi useless fields go a similar path, they spend most of their early years in school, graduate and get a job.... teaching the next round. Self-licking icecream cone.
 
denverpilot said:
LOL. An industry who relies upon not paying enough for its instructors to make a living worthy of a career in it, isn't ever going to see the benefits of what having professional instructors teaching would accomplish.

Not to mention it's just plain pitiful. Seriously.

I can teach a weekend class in data networking and earn quadruple what a flight instructor in charge of teaching life or death skills makes in those same two days. And that's bottom feeder instructional level in my industry. Top tier instructors make more than many line engineers who can't teach.

Yeah, aviation doesn't have a problem. Right.

The 1500 hour rule is fine. It's the pay scale during the earning of that 1500 that's the problem. And the turnover it causes.

The low end of my industry can afford to pay someone to a pay scale where they can afford a house. It'd be unheard of to pay a professional instructor in my business anything less than about $30K above the entry level, and usually a whole lot more than that if they're any good.

You'd get better candidates at ANY number of hours, if the industry actually paid instructors well enough to attract and retain the best ones. Imagine if airlines had to fight to pull instructors away from good paying jobs.

The assertion stands. Neither you nor Sully is any sort of "great mind" solving these industry problems. 1500 hours only fixes one problem, that largely doesn't exist. Part 121 isn't hiring at 1500 historically, and isn't really today either.

You could have all sorts of good candidates who weren't instructors if the industry were actually paying enough for professional instructors to make a living truly prepping people for your right seats from day one. Clearly.
Click to expand...


Again Nate it's not an industry problem. I have met the enemy and he is us ! Employers want to pay the LEAST amount possible - you get that - right ? Well for as long as there are CFI's willing to work for what's being offered they are creating THEIR OWN PROBLEM.

Perhaps NAFI should take a few pages from the ALPA playbook ? Boy, that last sentence outta get a few anti union folks riled ! But seriously, without some kind of collective effort it ain't ever gonna get fixed. Congress isn't going to do it because there's just no immediately apparent safety angle. The only way I see is for CFI's to unite and take a stand. And yes - that will make GA more expensive.

Perhaps we might go to an airline training academy type model as other countries do. That could help but there's no real incentive as long as the majors have the regionals to do it for them and the regionals have part 61 CFI's at mom and pop FBOs doing it for them now.

BTW part 121 is quite happily hiring at 1500 hours. I think what you meant to say is the "Majors" are not hiring at 1500. Just about every regional worth their salt is operating under 121 now.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Again Nate it's not an industry problem. I have met the enemy and he is us ! Employers want to pay the LEAST amount possible - you get that - right ? Well for as long as there are CFI's willing to work for what's being offered they are creating THEIR OWN PROBLEM.

Perhaps NAFI should take a few pages from the ALPA playbook ? Boy, that last sentence outta get a few anti union folks riled ! But seriously, without some kind of collective effort it ain't ever gonna get fixed. Congress isn't going to do it because there's just no immediately apparent safety angle. The only way I see is for CFI's to unite and take a stand. And yes - that will make GA more expensive.

Perhaps we might go to an airline training academy type model as other countries do. That could help but there's no real incentive as long as the majors have the regionals to do it for them and the regionals have part 61 CFI's at mom and pop FBOs doing it for them now.

BTW part 121 is quite happily hiring at 1500 hours. I think what you meant to say is the "Majors" are not hiring at 1500. Just about every regional worth their salt is operating under 121 now.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And all pilots as well.
 
What's the problem with CFI pay? The ones around me charge $60/hr, assume 20 chargeable hours per week, that's $57600/year. It's not a bad pay for a part-time job.
The problem are the CFIs who are willing to work at ATP etc making $20/hr. The only reason they work there is that they have wet dreams of an RJ.
Be a good CFI, and there is money to be made. Be an average hour builder CFI, and you're stuck at a "school" getting paid peanuts.
 
mtuomi said:
What's the problem with CFI pay? The ones around me charge $60/hr, assume 20 chargeable hours per week, that's $57600/year. It's not a bad pay for a part-time job.
The problem are the CFIs who are willing to work at ATP etc making $20/hr. The only reason they work there is that they have wet dreams of an RJ.
Be a good CFI, and there is money to be made. Be an average hour builder CFI, and you're stuck at a "school" getting paid peanuts.
Click to expand...

Around here, most CFIs charge that and schools take half of it for overhead. Or so I've heard. Not really too surprising considering the cost of commercial insurance, real estate, and the like.

You sure you're stating their Net income or just what they charge?
 
denverpilot said:
Around here, most CFIs charge that and schools take half of it for overhead. Or so I've heard. Not really too surprising considering the cost of commercial insurance, real estate, and the like.

You sure you're stating their Net income or just what they charge?
Click to expand...

Just what they charge - I don't deal with schools. I think most good CFIs work with customers planes and they skip the school ripoff.
 
ARFlyer said:
I had one flying around in the lower 200s in the flight levels. I said I'm a uncomfortable flying this slow up here. He looked at me and said "you against me trying to make money over your comfort level??".
Click to expand...

did you back that up with the 1.5G speed book ?

i was quite surprised at how low some of the speeds were, having made a similar remark and speed book perusal the other day...
 
jaybee said:
did you back that up with the 1.5G speed book ?

i was quite surprised at how low some of the speeds were, having made a similar remark and speed book perusal the other day...
Click to expand...

Yeah. We had a buffer but the stall bar kept slapping us in the ass. Plus the almost 10° pitch up was getting annoying.
 
Z06_Mir said:
"But it's not faaaaaiiiiiirrrrr that I have to get to 1,500. I don't liiiiiiiiiiike flight instructing because they all suck and I'm waaaaay too good for this" - ATP kid with 251 hours, 51 dual given and has never seen a cloud.

I don't know of any career that you finish your schooling and you immediately jump into the big time. Police Chiefs start as officers, university departmet heads start as teachers or professors, the GM at your favorite hotel probably started as a front desk person.. Why do pilots think they deserve instant gratification? If people would stop thinking of it as a road block to their dream career and start thinking of it as a pathway to it and an experience for later things would be much better.
Click to expand...

Big time? They aren't starting as Chief Pilot or even Captain. They start as FO, and when they start on smaller planes. Then they move up to bigger planes, then they move up to Captain. By then they have more experience. In a similar manner to other jobs. Start them off small, work them up as they are ready.

Heck, I'm sure there are plenty of CFII's out in the desert southwest that have been in little to no IMC. You've been in far more weather from your postings.
 
wayne said:
Big time? They aren't starting as Chief Pilot or even Captain. They start as FO, and when they start on smaller planes. Then they move up to bigger planes, then they move up to Captain. By then they have more experience. In a similar manner to other jobs. Start them off small, work them up as they are ready.

Heck, I'm sure there are plenty of CFII's out in the desert southwest that have been in little to no IMC. You've been in far more weather from your postings.
Click to expand...

Regional FO or major captain, either way you're flying around 50-400 paying passengers. I do consider that the big time because of the big responsibly. Regional guys and gals work every bit as hard, if not harder, than their major counter parts and should be as safe as their major counter parts. More Han a few of my friends had never flown in real IMC until they got their 121 jobs because they weren't instructing in the southwest and a lot of the pilot mills and even regular schoools don't even allow actual IMC. Yes I have been in my share of weather even considering geography. Unfortunate these Riddle and ATP kids don't have the opportunity to go out in their own and make their own mistakes so all of their real world learning comes with dozens of paying passengers behind them.
 
wayne said:
Heck, I'm sure there are plenty of CFII's out in the desert southwest that have been in little to no IMC. You've been in far more weather from your postings.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is hard to stay current with ceilings of 12,000 AGL here in NM. On the other hand, when it is IFR then it is a ceiling of 100 AGL with blowing snow. Or 1000 AGL Heavy thunderstorm.
 
Z06_Mir said:
Regional FO or major captain, either way you're flying around 50-400 paying passengers. I do consider that the big time because of the big responsibly. Regional guys and gals work every bit as hard, if not harder, than their major counter parts and should be as safe as their major counter parts. More Han a few of my friends had never flown in real IMC until they got their 121 jobs because they weren't instructing in the southwest and a lot of the pilot mills and even regular schoools don't even allow actual IMC. Yes I have been in my share of weather even considering geography. Unfortunate these Riddle and ATP kids don't have the opportunity to go out in their own and make their own mistakes so all of their real world learning comes with dozens of paying passengers behind them.
Click to expand...

The Captain had to have 1,500+ and an ATP before the change, right? Someone at the controls had experience.

What those Riddle / ATP kids can't rent a plane and go play in the soup? At a local flight club if nothing else. That's my second favorite way to stay current, with my most favorite is doing it in IMC during trips. If those don't work out then I'll do it in VMC with a safety pilot.

Sad if they can't get training in IMC. I got a few flights in IMC during my training.
 
Two FFD pilots back-and-forthing over money as justification to bounce off Min Mach all over kingdom come, with other people's loved ones on board. Is that a fair approximation of the scenario or am I being unfair?

This is why we can't have nice things....
 
wayne said:
What those Riddle / ATP kids can't rent a plane and go play in the soup? At a local flight club if nothing else. That's my second favorite way to stay current, with my most favorite is doing it in IMC during trips. If those don't work out then I'll do it in VMC with a safety pilot.

Sad if they can't get training in IMC. I got a few flights in IMC during my training.
Click to expand...

A great many of the training mills, including "prestigious" ones that give expensive four year "aviation" degrees, have a list of weather things a mile long that they won't let their fully rated instructors and their advanced students (let alone primary ones) go fly in. The "dispatch" desk checks their flight plan and if any high winds, weather, yadda yadda exist, the "dispatcher" won't hand them the keys.

Supposedly this game is to teach them to work with a dispatcher and company and be a "team player" and all that... which is downright sad and hilarious at the same time, considering it leaves them ill-prepared for the real-world.
 
denverpilot said:
Supposedly this game is to teach them to work with a dispatcher and company and be a "team player" and all that... which is downright sad and hilarious at the same time, considering it leaves them ill-prepared for the real-world.
Click to expand...

Is that their official position? If true, I can't believe they can say that with a straight face.

My guess is they privately understand the relative level of inexperience they have within their own flight training rank n file staff (since it's a revolving door of graduating students acting as mentors the day after commencement), coupled with a highly risk-averse approach to flight training ops in order to not tarnish the overall expectation of safety parents of these kids have when they sent them off to that 4 year extension of high school. Having young kids morting themselves while enrolled in the school is not good PR for the school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top