American Eagle response to the 1,500 rule

They will likely Grandfather current FO's in...the airline I work for is already planning on that. As for the "pilot shortage" there will never be a shortage of pilots for good jobs...I do think this is a good rule though, except for the new rest reqs..that could scew some things up.
 
Last edited:
taters said:
They will likely Grandfather current FO's in...the airline I work for is already planning on that. As for the "pilot shortage" there will never be a shortage of pilots for good jobs...I do think this is a good rule though, except for the new rest reqs..that could scew some things up.
Click to expand...

It seems to me, and this is just my perspective not a factual statement, that there is plenty of demand for pilots with 1000s of hrs of time-in-type but not much for the get-there-from-here jobs. Besides of course, CFI. I love teaching so it doesnt bother me at all, in-fact I might not like flying jets as much as getting into small airplanes with people who do not yet know how to fly.. Still I know plenty of pilots or there that do not want to instruct and (quite frankly although good pilots would not make good teachers) get stuck trying to pay their way out-of-pocket because nobody wants a 250 hr cp. I already have the experience requirements now after instructing for a few years, but I can't afford the pay cut I would get to be an FO for a regional.

<---<^>--->
 
p1l0t said:
but I can't afford the pay cut I would get to be an FO for a regional.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that this is the inherent problem for pilots. I understand and agree with the concept of paying your dues (I certainly have been), but if I wanted to go the airline route, I'd have to take a significant pay cut with a worse schedule than what I currently have, not to mention less interesting flying. I know I'm not alone in that regard.

But it's also a double-edged sword. If I have a King Air and am looking for a pilot, I don't want to hire some 250-hour flight instructor. Even if I look at a 1500-hour pilot with an ATP, but zero turbine time and almost all instruction, that pilot is probably going to be missing a lot of key experiences to make him or her a good pick. I think that being a regional FO ends up being what provides the turbine time, pressurized time, etc. that these pilots need in a lot of cases.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I think that being a regional FO ends up being what provides the turbine time, pressurized time, etc. that these pilots need in a lot of cases.
Click to expand...

Not really. I've hired (and observed others hire) turbine pilots for a long time. Regional crews aren't high on the list.
 
what is high on the list?

a friend of mine is building time toward his atp and is trying to get as much sim IMC and night flying in as possible. In a 152
 
dell30rb said:
what is high on the list?
Click to expand...
To get a King Air job at the place where I work it would be multiengine, single-pilot PIC.

After 9/11 we had many furloughed airline pilots apply and their main problem was the lack of PIC since many of them had gone to the airlines early in their career. Even the ones from major airlines were short on PIC time.
 
Last edited:
Do they want cheese with their whine?

Seems to me there are many, many pilots who would qualify fill those jobs but simply aren't interested at the pay levels the regionals are willing to spend. Likewise, there are a lot of young folks who'd take those jobs at current pay if the airlines paid for their training (the European model). Unless the regionals are willing to pay a lot more either up front for training or later in wages for pilots (and the public is willing to pay the higher fares), the regionals have a problem that the government is clearly no longer willing to let slide.
 
wabower said:
Not really. I've hired (and observed others hire) turbine pilots for a long time. Regional crews aren't high on the list.
Click to expand...

For Major P121 operations regional crews are the list.

For P91 jobs...no...but some have former corp. experience and can stay high on the list.
 
wabower said:
Not really. I've hired (and observed others hire) turbine pilots for a long time. Regional crews aren't high on the list.
Click to expand...

I'd be less interested in hiring them, too, that said it's still hard to get this experience otherwise. For me, I've gotten my experience through a combination of know-who and being entrepreneurial. My experiences are not typical, though.

What do you look for, and where do you find the pilots get it?

Edit: I'm guessing that long-haired hippies are off the list. ;)
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
Would a Cri-Cri count?
Click to expand...

Now that's funny.

The Cri-Cri guy didn't make it to the Wings Flybq this year. I missed him, but I don't miss the nightmares I have just seeing him take off in that thing with the lawn mower engines.
 
Everskyward said:
To get a King Air job at the place where I work it would be multiengine, single-pilot PIC.
Click to expand...

When you say single-pilot PIC, I assume that is to differentiate from programs like ATP flight school that never has students solo in a twin. They are either with an instructor or paired up with another student (one as pilot, the other as safety pilot). Is that what you meant?

Ryan
 
n12365 said:
When you say single-pilot PIC, I assume that is to differentiate from programs like ATP flight school that never has students solo in a twin. They are either with an instructor or paired up with another student (one as pilot, the other as safety pilot). Is that what you meant?
Click to expand...
I think he means actual for-hire flying such as Part 135 1-pilot captain in an Aztec or Navajo or the like.
 
n12365 said:
When you say single-pilot PIC, I assume that is to differentiate from programs like ATP flight school that never has students solo in a twin. They are either with an instructor or paired up with another student (one as pilot, the other as safety pilot). Is that what you meant?
Click to expand...
Truthfully I hadn't even thought about that situation.

What I was getting at was having some experience working alone without supervision (acting PIC rather than manipulating).
 
The thing that most irks me about the whole ordeal are the special exceptions that are going to be given to such places as ATP Flight school, a pilot mill that is well known to pump out inferior pilots in mass quantities...for a price of course. Either apply the rule equally to everyone, or not. Favoritism and giving shortcuts to people who can afford to pay them are another disgusting example of government regulation gone awry.
 
dmspilot said:
The thing that most irks me about the whole ordeal are the special exceptions that are going to be given to such places as ATP Flight school, a pilot mill that is well known to pump out inferior pilots in mass quantities...for a price of course. Either apply the rule equally to everyone, or not. Favoritism and giving shortcuts to people who can afford to pay them are another disgusting example of government regulation gone awry.
Click to expand...
By the same token I think they should NOT grandfather anyone. If this is such a big honking friggin safety risk they have no business letting existing pilots continue to fly with less than the "new" minimums.

And if it's not.... why bother?

For the record, I don't think it's a problem now and that this law is one of the bigger piles of crap I've seen in a long time. I think Congress should use a lot more restraint when it comes to legislating things that are already covered by existing regulation.

Just another reason I'm firing my congresspeople next election. All of them.
 
I read that the FAA is also looking into the MPL as a way to fix the expected shortage. If so I'm sure that it'll **** off all of the CFI's paying dues to fly a Dash-8 - CRJ and still waiting to get into the left seat of a regional. The ICAO MPL allows for a person off the street to become a first officer with 60-80 hours of real flight, and the rest (about 160-200hrs) is all sim. 240hrs needed. Ground school requires 700hrs if I remember correctly.

Personally I look forward to the low pay that my CFIs complain about because they have one of the best jobs ever. They fly, teach people how to fly, and are getting closer to FL350 while in the left seat of a wide body (albeit maybe 25-40yrs later) Personally I'd rather enjoy the journey than destination (isn't this why we're aviators?!?!?)
 
bigblockz8 said:
I read that the FAA is also looking into the MPL as a way to fix the expected shortage. If so I'm sure that it'll **** off all of the CFI's paying dues to fly a Dash-8 - CRJ and still waiting to get into the left seat of a regional. The ICAO MPL allows for a person off the street to become a first officer with 60-80 hours of real flight, and the rest (about 160-200hrs) is all sim. 240hrs needed. Ground school requires 700hrs if I remember correctly.

Personally I look forward to the low pay that my CFIs complain about because they have one of the best jobs ever. They fly, teach people how to fly, and are getting closer to FL350 while in the left seat of a wide body (albeit maybe 25-40yrs later) Personally I'd rather enjoy the journey than destination (isn't this why we're aviators?!?!?)
Click to expand...

CFI's pay isn't that low.. I make more than then all the other pilot jobs I qualify for, and even more (on a per hour basis) than I do as a machinist [for a small company though]. Teaching flying is the best job I have ever had, I agree with you there. This is kinda of my point though.. I got my private just to see if I had what it takes, I got my instrument rating because I live in New England, I got my commercial because I wanted to fly jets someday, I got my CFI because the demand was so bad people were breathing down my neck to get the rating, and now that I have finally made it to where I meet the standards to fly jets I don't even want to bother because it is such a downgrade from what I already have. My thoughts are, hey if they want to pay some kid $25k a year because he got 500hrs from ATP (no offense to them never trained there) be my guest. I guess I just figured the airlines would want the cream-of-the-crop [not that I'm that] but it seems like they prefer whoever they can get cheapest.

<---<^>--->
 
p1l0t said:
CFI's pay isn't that low.. I make more than then all the other pilot jobs I qualify for, and even more (on a per hour basis) than I do as a machinist [for a small company though]. Teaching flying is the best job I have ever had, I agree with you there. This is kinda of my point though.. I got my private just to see if I had what it takes, I got my instrument rating because I live in New England, I got my commercial because I wanted to fly jets someday, I got my CFI because the demand was so bad people were breathing down my neck to get the rating, and now that I have finally made it to where I meet the standards to fly jets I don't even want to bother because it is such a downgrade from what I already have.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are a teacher, not just a pilot. Glad to hear that there are others who dont see it as drudgery to be gotten through as fast as possible on the way to some shiny jet.

Your location may have something to do with the fact that you can make a good living as a CFI. Do you you fly out of Robertson ?
 
p1l0t said:
CFI's pay isn't that low.. I make more than then all the other pilot jobs I qualify for, and even more (on a per hour basis) than I do as a machinist [for a small company though]. Teaching flying is the best job I have ever had, I agree with you there. This is kinda of my point though.. I got my private just to see if I had what it takes, I got my instrument rating because I live in New England, I got my commercial because I wanted to fly jets someday, I got my CFI because the demand was so bad people were breathing down my neck to get the rating, and now that I have finally made it to where I meet the standards to fly jets I don't even want to bother because it is such a downgrade from what I already have. My thoughts are, hey if they want to pay some kid $25k a year because he got 500hrs from ATP (no offense to them never trained there) be my guest. I guess I just figured the airlines would want the cream-of-the-crop [not that I'm that] but it seems like they prefer whoever they can get cheapest.

<---<^>--->
Click to expand...

When your "product" is constrained by regulation (X pilot certificate, X hours experience, X class medical), there's no added value in being better than "good enough". So no need to pay more than market value.
 
dmspilot said:
The thing that most irks me about the whole ordeal are the special exceptions that are going to be given to such places as ATP Flight school, a pilot mill that is well known to pump out inferior pilots in mass quantities...for a price of course. Either apply the rule equally to everyone, or not. Favoritism and giving shortcuts to people who can afford to pay them are another disgusting example of government regulation gone awry.
Click to expand...

I used my local flight school for my private, instrument, and single-engine commercial ratings, but decided to go to ATP flight school for my multi-engine. I heard a lot of bad things about ATP, but for the multi add-on, they were a better choice than my local flight school. I was able to finish in a fixed time and for a fixed price. This included unlimited simulator time and 10 hours in a 2 year old Seminole. My previous two ratings had been done with a 7,000 hour, 70+ year old instructor who has been flying for more years than I have been alive, so it was strange to have an instructor at ATP who had less total time than I had. Even though he had a limited amount of experience, it was almost all in the Seminole and since the sole purpose of my course was to get my multi rating, it worked out well.

The 1500 hour rule is a bad idea, but having exceptions for certain schools and organizations is an even worse idea. Unfortunately, I can easily imagine a scenario where part 141 schools, 4 year universities, and military pilots get exempted.

Ryan
 
n12365 said:
The 1500 hour rule is a bad idea, but having exceptions for certain schools and organizations is an even worse idea. Unfortunately, I can easily imagine a scenario where part 141 schools, 4 year universities, and military pilots get exempted.
Click to expand...

Definitely. It'll make it about impossible for someone to go the Part 61 route, which, IMO, is typically better.
 
weilke said:
Sounds like you are a teacher, not just a pilot. Glad to hear that there are others who dont see it as drudgery to be gotten through as fast as possible on the way to some shiny jet.

Your location may have something to do with the fact that you can make a good living as a CFI. Do you you fly out of Robertson ?
Click to expand...

I got my Private through Interstate Aviation at Roberston, great people. I teach out of Hartford-Brainard though.

<---<^>--->
 
n12365 said:
I heard a lot of bad things about ATP, but for the multi add-on, they were a better choice than my local flight school.
Click to expand...

Multiengine training is getting hard to come by so I'll buy that. Fortunately you already knew how to fly an airplane when you got there, I'm sure.

n12365 said:
The 1500 hour rule is a bad idea, but having exceptions for certain schools and organizations is an even worse idea. Unfortunately, I can easily imagine a scenario where part 141 schools, 4 year universities, and military pilots get exempted.
Click to expand...

Yep, I see their brainwashing was ineffective on you :lol:
 
I was a Captain at American Eagle for 23 years. Toward the later end of my career, the company began to hire lots of (relatively) inexperienced pilots. At the risk of sounding somewhat elitist, it's my personal belief that one doesn't belong in the cockpit of a 121 airliner without an ATP. While one - with minimal experience - can be trained to perform as a First Officer on an airliner, the Captain should be a seasoned veteran. Said seasoning can't be gotten while swinging the gear on a regional airliner.

To illustrate, one night, I captained a flight from DFW to XNA (Northwest Arkansas) in a Bombardier CRJ-700. My FO for the flight was a young lad, just off Initial Operations Experience (IOE), said he had 450hrs total time. The young man posessed the all the confidence of a Christian with 4 aces...to him, an airliner cockpit was HIS DESTINY! By comparison, I had 5,000hrs. ...in the CRJ.

Due to weather (thunderstorms) lining up from the northwest, our dispatcher filed our route up to Little Rock, then from there, a 90 degree left turn for 60nm toXNA.

I flew the leg. Once we leveled off at 270, up around Hot Springs, I started watching the weather toward XNA. I even turned that direction, and watched a couple sweeps of the radar. It didn't look too bad, so I directed my fearless right seater to ask center for direct XNA. They accomodated us, so off we went, direct XNA. Well, about 15 minutes later, the whole front of the airplane is glowing with St. elmo's fire, we're in moderate turbulence, and and watching the occasional lighting flash out the windows. So, I'm thinking to my self "Boy, I must have impressed the heck outa this FO, what with my decision-making accumen!". And feeling kind of sheepish, I look over at him.
He had a huge grin on his face, and said "KOOL!"

I't fair to say we were on a different wavelenght.
 
Ron Levy said:
Do they want cheese with their whine?

Seems to me there are many, many pilots who would qualify fill those jobs but simply aren't interested at the pay levels the regionals are willing to spend. Likewise, there are a lot of young folks who'd take those jobs at current pay if the airlines paid for their training (the European model). Unless the regionals are willing to pay a lot more either up front for training or later in wages for pilots (and the public is willing to pay the higher fares), the regionals have a problem that the government is clearly no longer willing to let slide.
Click to expand...

BINGO !!! Cap'n Ron has hit the nail squarely on the head.

Let me give you a little peek at how things are going to play out in this arena. First, in about fourteen months from right now the major airlines will be losing pilots to retirements at the rate of MORE THAN TWO PER DAY (that is a TRUE inescapable FACT people) without any corresponding reduction for demand of services (and quite probably the opposite).

Second, to meet this need the major airlines will immediately rape, pillage and burn down the ranks of any and all regional airline pilots. And it will hit those regionals like a whirlwind the likes of which they have never seen before. The military will be tapped too but it will turn out to be pretty much a dry hole as it has a TWELVE YEAR commitment after flight school and very few of those guy's are going to make the leap for what the airlines offer for first year pay. Also the military practically only makes UAV pilots anymore.

Third, the regional pilot ranks are now completely decimated and UNLIKE before they NOW have this hourly hiring requirement. The starry-eyed wonder kids of yore can raise their hands to volunteer to work for slave wages all they want but it won't matter because if they don't have the time they can't be hired.

Now, envision that you are a regional airline CEO in the above scenario, you are made aware that there exists this pool of qualified applicants but they are going to COST you. Do you close up your doors and go out of business ? You COULD open a training academy and you probably should but even that WILL NOT meet your CURRENT needs. THINK ABOUT IT.
 
Art VanDelay said:
First, in about fourteen months from right now the major airlines will be losing pilots to retirements at the rate of MORE THAN TWO PER DAY (that is a TRUE inescapable FACT people)
Click to expand...

UAL/CAL alone will be losing 1 pilot every 18 hours, so it has been said.
 
j1b3h0 said:
I was a Captain at American Eagle for 23 years. Toward the later end of my career, the company began to hire lots of (relatively) inexperienced pilots. At the risk of sounding somewhat elitist, it's my personal belief that one doesn't belong in the cockpit of a 121 airliner without an ATP. While one - with minimal experience - can be trained to perform as a First Officer on an airliner, the Captain should be a seasoned veteran. Said seasoning can't be gotten while swinging the gear on a regional airliner.......
.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. You can't teach ADM experience. I would rather have the pilot who instructed, flew checks, small freight, or charter for 1500 hours and has scared himself a few times than a 700 hour one out of the pilot mills that have never had to make a tough call. I've observed a lot of regional and major crews over the years, and I can tell you that having a 350 hour F/O and a captain that was hired at 350 hours then upgraded with min time is NOT who you want flying your family around in an RJ. After a string of less than stellar observations and one particularly bad flight, I vowed to never let my family fly on a certain regional airline. Luckily, their experience level has gone up over the last several years due to their lack of hiring and furloughs.

I've talked with numerous friends who have been captains at regionals for a number of years and they all confirmed my assesment. They said they spent so much time instructing their low time F/Os, that they felt they were "less than single pilot IFR". The regionals and even the majors have enjoyed a 4 year repreive from reality due to the age 65 rule and almost zero retirements. That is going to go away with in the next year with a vengence. They might actually have to start paying a decent wage to attract qualified applicants.

I don't think the 1500 hour rule for 121 ops is going to be that big a hardship for people wanting to fly for the airlines. People found ways to do it in years past. In 2001, the average pilot hired to fly at the regional airlines had 2000 hours!! The 3-600 hour RJ F/O is a fairly recent development caused by the expansion of the regional airlines and they have pretty much maxed out their viable market share. A 1500 hour requirement doesn't seem so burdensome taken in that context.

The biggest burden (as it should be) will be on the regional carriers trying to hire qualified people at fastfood wages once the turnover increases due to the retirements at the majors.
 
In short. The regionals pay crap, and in turn hire crap because the quality people are not going to work for free.

Congress passes rule saying they need to have people with more experiance.

Airlines know 1,500 ATP's are not going to work for 21k a year.

Airlines *****. Want loopholes.
 
Hmmm, I suspect that I meet the PIC and multi time requirement...
And after more than a half century of banging around in airplanes, much of it in the Great Lakes Ice Machine, I expect I have the real world weather experience they want...
And the law says you cannot discriminate based on age...
So, at 72 I finally meet the new requirements?

denny-o
 
Dr. O said:
Hmmm, I suspect that I meet the PIC and multi time requirement...
And after more than a half century of banging around in airplanes, much of it in the Great Lakes Ice Machine, I expect I have the real world weather experience they want...
And the law says you cannot discriminate based on age...
So, at 72 I finally meet the new requirements?

denny-o
Click to expand...
Sorry, in the case of pilots, you CAN discriminate on the basis of age. There is a maximum age, and you're past it, I'm afraid.
 
They just want a warm body that can fog a mirror. It used to be that there was good quality experience to be gained at the regionals. The PIC's learned old school methods and had years of training, experience and quality mentoring time beat into them. Now what you have is a generation of pilots that only care about upgrade times and living like a pilot rather than being a pilot.

Low time captains upgrading and then mentoring low time first officers is a recipe for disaster. Just look at the Buffalo accident.

I would rather have a new hire first officer that has CFI time and multi recip time in their log book over regional airline crj time. A twin cessna will kill you much quicker than a jet. A pilot that has spent 500 hours in that twin cessna is going to have a great skill set that will easily transition to a jet.
 
I must admit that I am a bit confused....I thought that I heard the 1500 hr rule had already been defeated. Is this still a pending issue?
 
It's a LAW. Congress told the FAA "Thou shalt change part 121" and the FAA is still working out the details (read: exemptions/grandfathering) on how to do this. I suspect they may hope that dragging their feet might work as well for them as it has for DHS when it comes to justifying the SFRA/FRZ.

I don't think the law had a required date for the change. The congresscritters (reminder - fire them) can say they "did something" in response to Buffalo because they passed the law, and until/unless something reminds the general public that the law is not yet reflected in the regulations, they may let the implementation take a long time.

I think that at least this part of the law (requiring ATP for 121 ops) is a solution looking for a problem, and isn't justified by the safety record or the Buffalo accident, though it may be nice under the "more is better" logic. Other parts related to recordkeeping and crew rest may have more merit but I am not familiar enough with them or the airline environment to comment.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top