As for the concern that the best instructors are teaching because they love to teach, and not because they are targeting bigger things, I agree whole-heartedly that a love of teaching is a benefit to all involved. I’ve had both airline-oriented and non-airline-oriented CFI’s, and I learned much from both. The ones that did not want to make teaching the end game were still good instructors, even if they had made clear that teaching was not their first love. However, while this concern has some validity to it, I also believe that the severity of it on the whole is over-blown. Most CFI’s strive to do a good, honest, and fair job. If there does indeed turn out to be a glut of CFI’s, then the lousy ones will find their clients—not students, but clients—looking elsewhere on the airport, the same as happens now. The good CFI’s won’t want for work, especially if they effectively market themselves (another topic for another day).

Let’s talk about the economics of the situation. Two comments stood out. First, “I don’t see how raising the minimum requirements for an entry-level position will force airlines to pay more for that position. As long as the supply of applicants is adequate, the airlines will have no incentive to change their salary scales. Do you think the supply will dry up due to the increasing difficulty and cost?” Yes, I do. Just like anything else, supply and demand will rule the day here, especially as the age 65 rule begins to drain pilots from the major airlines in the next eighteen to twenty four months. The fact is that right now, at this point in time, many pilots and pilot wanna-bes will look at the new requirements and focus their attention elsewhere. Why? Because they get no more of a return on the investment of their time and/or their money in either the short or the long term. This goes back to what I said about the sacrifices required. Some will simply decide that the cost to learn to fly, and then to work to earn the necessary hours to earn $20,000 in their first year isn’t worth it. The airlines, specifically the regionals, will be forced to pay more to entice people to choose the career. Second,”[o]r is it possible that the pilot unions will use this to force management to increase entry-level pay?” This too is true, but for several reasons, and yes, the desire to earn more for entry level positions is one of them. But the unions also feel that this is a safety issue as well. To attract the best prospects, and thus ensure the safest operation, the pay will have to reflect that. We will ALL benefit: pilots, passengers, the flying public and the airlines.

Keep in mind that personal economics in part played a role in the Colgan accident. The pay for the crew was such that each was forced to commute to work. The FO specifically had to commute across the country. While the final report listed the single probable cause as pilot error, it also talked about fatigue. The fatigue was, in this accident, more attributable to the economic stresses placed on the crew than were the working conditions of the airline. The significance of this can not be overstated. Higher pay—or, if it can ever be made to happen, COLA adjustments—would have made it more feasible to either live near Newark or get a hotel room in a safe neighborhood the night before the trip. It would not have guaranteed they the crew would not have crashed, but perhaps in a well-rested state, they would not have made the errors they made. This sort of speculation is not really fair, but it is hard to avoid.

I’d like to point something else out about pilot staffing issues. I got into aviation in the early 1990’s. Braniff and Eastern had gone belly up, and the pilots of Continental had gone on strike. Getting a job was almost impossible. The pilots at my home field routinely talked about needing 5,000 hours total time and 500 multi just to get an interview for a commuter job. It sounded insurmountable. One of the respondents points out that the old piston twin air taxi jobs or nightly check runs are not so prevalent. That’s true. They are not nearly as prevalent…but they are out there. Pilots will have to wear out some shoes and cell phone batteries making contacts, knocking on doors, etc. The jobs, the opportunities, the “lucky breaks” are definitely hard to find. But they are there, and the creative individuals will make their own opportunities.

Last, but not least, Congress did not break down what that 1500 hours must look like, and I doubt if the FAA will either. In that respect, not much has changed, except more experience overall is required, that that alone is a good thing. Will pilots be deterred from pursuing an airline career? On the whole, I don’t think so. Keep in mind, the rule does not fully go into effect for a while, but like everything else, time will tell….

The real issue is weeding out pilots who don’t have the skills whether they be stick and rudder skills or poor decision making ability. The current certification system allows for anyone who wants a certificate bad enough to get one. Whether that be endless chances at obtaining a certificate or the certification process itself. There are those instructors that care more about their pass rate than their student’s skills. They make sure these students take their practical test with a “Santa Claus” examiner that issue marginal applicants certificates.

The current DPE program rewards designated pilot examiners that pass nearly every applicant they meet. Examiners that administer a “true” practical suffer because instructors don’t send their students to them. Santa Claus examiners schedules are booked and they make plenty of money. Examiners who value holding the “keys to the kingdom” suffer for lack of work. This entire system is flawed and should be fixed.

The FAA doesn’t correlate the part 91 world with the part 121 world. Part 121 gets most of the focus because when they crash, a lot of people sadly get injured or lose their lives. When the small GA aircraft goes down, the loss of life isn’t nearly as great and it isn’t a national story. In my opinion, the bulk of the money and time of the FAA should be spent on pilot certification and training. Ensuring that only those truly qualified hold a pilot certificate.

I worked for eight years as an instructor at a large aviation university and saw plenty of VERY low time pilots get regional airline jobs. Some were up the the challenge and others were not. I took a job with a regional airline and held an ATP certificate when I took a first officer position. Listening to the captains complain about all the low time pilots and hear the stories of the things they would do was shocking to say the least. If the passengers only had a clue!

We were all low time pilots once so I’m not saying that being new and learning is a bad thing. However I don’t think the time to be learning basic skills is when you have 50, 70 or more passengers sitting behind you.

Having an ATP certificate won’t ensure that only the best get airline jobs. Hopefully it will help to make sure those new hire pilots have had time to learn basic skills and had time to make important ‘go/no go” decisions on their own.

The current system of a multi-pilot crew works because you have a 50/50 chance that at least one pilot knows what they are doing. The danger doesn’t come only from the new hire, low time FO. A first officer that slipped through the cracks that was able to keep on “slipping” their way to captain is.

I firmly believe these new requirements will have little if any net positive effect on the airline industry because the notion is based entirely on a narrow, academic view of some Utopian ideal. At Utopian Air, overhead is low, profits are high, competition is friendly, customers are always happy and cooperative, flights are always on schedule, and there is an endless stack of resumes from 1500-hour Chuck Yeager clones that are happy to work endlessly for peanuts. At Utopian Air, everything is so great that literally the only thing they need worry about is safety.

But, in the real world, overhead is painfully high, competition is fierce, and profit margins are razor thin. And, now the government has, once again, arbitrarily inflated the overhead that airlines must overcome. Aside from any gains (real or perceived) in the quality of candidate pilots, increasing the minimum hours required will result in two things. First, the number of ATP hopefuls that will actually make it to eligibility will drop simply because they cannot justify the tremendous investment of time and money. Second, those who do make the cut will be arriving at the starting gate not simply as young, brash pilots desperate for a job that gets them in the cockpit, but as older, more seasoned aviators with debts to pay, and (in many cases) families to support. They will demand higher salaries because they have no choice and airlines will have no choice but to pay them because they will have to compete with other carriers in a smaller applicant pool and because pilot unions will insist on it because it will make their younger members happy and their older members will then be in a position to demand a raise for themselves. And, meanwhile, real-world passengers will continue to lament the cost of flying and will either seek more ways to force airlines to compete or they will simply seek other modes of travel. (Remember, the security line at the train station is already shorter.)

Since when do one or two (or even three) cases an epidemic make? The last time I checked, flying by commercial airliner was still (statistically speaking) far and away the safest form of travel. Has this changed? Did I miss a memo? Absolutely *nothing* that mixes human beings, complex man-made machines, and dodging the will of Mother Nature at high speeds and high altitudes can *ever* be 100% guaranteed safe at all times. So, what are we hoping to achieve here?

More importantly, what was the last commercial sector that actually thrived (rather than merely evolved and survived) under arbitrary government restriction and regulation? Do we really think that (particularly given the rather fragile state of GA) encouraging further government intervention in aviation is really the way to “improve” things?

Pay rates aside, there simply wont be enough students to go around. A private pilots can get his license in 60 hours. (Yes I know regs allow for less but in the real world where some stuff takes longer than the Jeppessen syllabus Ive seen an average of 60ish hours.) Only 50ish of that is with the instructor when you count solos, solo cross countries, stage checks etc. So if an instructor is only going to get 50 hours per student then he’ll need about 25 students to get him up to 1500 hours (obviously he wont have student paying for the time he needs to get his own ratings…usually 300ish) Other students give less time than that. Every single multi student I had we done in less than 10 hours. By the time a student gets to a multi rating they are typically beyond the point of quitting, they will get their CFI’s (I got my CFI before my multi-rating actually) and need students of their own to get them to 1500ish hours.

Soon you’ll reach a point where there are too few students for too many instructors (because a high precentage all the students will gone on to be instructors) and soon youll have a bunch of airline wannabes who are gonna get stuck trying to have to pay for even more flight time (or worse a great majority will just falsify their logbooks)

The jobs that used to be in between CFI and airline pilot just arent there anymore. The internet has gotten rid of check carrying, 135 cargo jobs are rare enough now that theres not even enough of those for all the airline wannabes.

Airline wannabee are gonna get stuck taking out medical school sized loans for a job that starts at 30k (at a good regional)and wont break 50k for a long time until you sit in the left seat. That doesnt make much economic sense. Airline wannabes are going to all but disappear.

Some say “well…the starting pay will go up”. I say in the age of travel websites where the majority of customers still click the lowest fare regardless of number of connections, regardless of number of connections or amenities offered on the flight, a regional operation unfortunately cant pay guys enough to take out a student loan like a medical student would. Oh by the way, who would lend a guy several hundred thousand dollars when hes going to be making regional airline pay for at least a decade.

I understand the need for safety, I understand the need for well trained pilots, I would love for my pay at my regional to go up. Unfortunately the current economics of the airline industry do not support it. The economics of the industry need to change and then the ability to pay regional FOs enough to make 300k in student loans worthwhile enough for people to want to enter this industry.

As a final note…when was the last crash that was directly caused by an inexperienced FO? I cant think of one either. Yes the FO at Colgan was hired with few hours but didnt she have 1000+ at the time of the crash? Wasnt it much more the fact they werent paying attention and stalled the aircraft..? If I remember stall are more or less fight lesson 2 or 3. Its a stall is not something you learn about only with lots of experience, its on of the things that is taught first.

For instance, I have my Comm, Instrument, CFI, & CFII and some 2200 hours in singles, with roughly 3/4 of that in Cessnas, and that’s further divided down into all of the Cessna single line with more in 172s and 182s than in the others. The other 1/4 is divided among several other singles. I’ve been told that I’m a good pilot, by both passengers and instructors, and some have questioned why I haven’t gone for my ATP, since I generally fly to ATP standards. I’ve also instructed in 172s and 182s, so I’ve learned how to avoid being killed by students.

So let’s assume that I decided to get my multi, and I then amassed some 300 hours in a Seneca. Then I would be a 2500 hour pilot with SE & ME, CFI, & CFII. Then I get type rated in a regional turboprop at some school of the ATP sort. That makes me a qualified left-seater for a regional, right?

I don’t think so. Because in reality, while I have lots of experience in all sorts of weather in light singles, my multi and my regional turboprop experience would be pretty minimal–I would still be just a 300 hour pilot in ME and a rank newbie in the turboprop. No matter how well I could handle that airplane, I would still be a newbie.

Obviously, moving from newbie to experienced Captain takes time (both calendar and hours) and maturity–and all of that is hard to judge in terms of readiness to do the job safely. So just adding total hour times and ratings isn’t the total answer, by a long shot. Careful examination, judging not only skill but maturity and judgment, needs to be the goal, not just hour accumulation.

Cary

WRT the impact on student pilots, I have seen both sides of the coin but think the overall impact will be negative. The instructor for my primary training was a young guy who aspired to flying for the airlines, but he was also a good, enthusiastic teacher. I can’t say the same about the several other airline pilot hopefuls I have seen instruct. Like Ryan, the best instructors I have seen want to be great instructors, not great airline pilots. In addition to thousands of flying hours, they have thousands of hours as an instructor. That gives them a wealth of knowledge upon which to draw when deciding how to best get a student past a particular problem.

Without a managed process to develop experience with simply become comfortable with our poor habits.

Wyatt.