ATP impact

brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,445
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
August 2014 is closing in fast new ATP requirements are about to kick in. I would have thought some thought of sanity would have prevailed by now. The 2009 Colgan Air Flight 3407 was bad but the changes in requirements for ATP seem :mad2:. Could be some light at the end of the tunnel as starting pay for airlines are going to have to go up to attract the lower number of pilots in the pool.
 
Just makes shiny jet syndrome a worse disease then it was under the old rules. Nothing else will change.
 
brien23 said:
August 2014 is closing in fast new ATP requirements are about to kick in. I would have thought some thought of sanity would have prevailed by now. The 2009 Colgan Air Flight 3407 was bad but the changes in requirements for ATP seem :mad2:. Could be some light at the end of the tunnel as starting pay for airlines are going to have to go up to attract the lower number of pilots in the pool.
Click to expand...

Really? And where is that money going to come from? Are the majors going to increase the amount of money they give the regionals? If so, where is that money coming from? Are the pilots from DAL, United and American going to take cuts in their pay? Are short route airfares that elastic that people will be willing to pay whatever is charged to get to the hubs? Or are investors willing to take it in the shorts and risk large amounts of capital for marginal returns?

Don't get me wrong. I'm the first person who will be happy to see a larger paycheck. I'm also old enough to remember ACA and COMAIR. Things did not go so well for them when they refused to buckle under to the majors and pay their pilots less.

Not a good time to be a regional airline owner as they will begin to get squeezed from both ends.
 
I guess I should get going on studying for that test...
 
Just to give some perspective from the investor's viewpoint.
In the past 20 years or so the airline industry has had an ROIC (Return On Invested Capital), of less than 4%. That's about 1/2 of what the investment market wants from the risk involved in the invested capital.
There is a reason that Warren Buffett, aside from his momentary insanity when he invested in US Airways, avoids airline investments.
 
Blackhawk said:
Just to give some perspective from the investor's viewpoint.
In the past 20 years or so the airline industry has had an ROIC (Return On Invested Capital), of less than 4%. That's about 1/2 of what the investment market wants from the risk involved in the invested capital.
There is a reason that Warren Buffett, aside from his momentary insanity when he invested in US Airways, avoids airline investments.
Click to expand...

Airlines have been plagued by inept management and corporate "pirates" who's main intent is to strip away much money as possible then move to the next airline.

Airlines are cash rich environments dealing in huge sums of money in aircraft purchase and leasing, training, maintenance, gate leases, etc., all areas that a savvy pirate can exploit for monetary gain.

Management has always used the pilots as the whipping boys when crying about reduced profits by claiming these individuals are "overpaid".

Ever wonder why Southwest Airlines doesn't resort to the same management tactics plagued by the others and the correlation of why they are so successful?
 
Then the bottom feeders will simply have to go out of business if they can't attract pilots. I know this sounds harsh, but it's the best thing that can happen. Real capitalism. The whole industry needs a complete makeover, a reset. And the best way to start is to get rid of the detritus that clogs up the system. Companies that can only compete on the basis of historical oversupply of cheap labour do not have a sustainable business form.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the survivors will even eliminate such archaic things as the current route bidding and promotion based solely on seniority . . .
 
RotorAndWing said:
Airlines have been plagued by inept management and corporate "pirates" who's main intent is to strip away much money as possible then move to the next airline.

Airlines are cash rich environments dealing in huge sums of money in aircraft purchase and leasing, training, maintenance, gate leases, etc., all areas that a savvy pirate can exploit for monetary gain.

Management has always used the pilots as the whipping boys when crying about reduced profits by claiming these individuals are "overpaid".

Ever wonder why Southwest Airlines doesn't resort to the same management tactics plagued by the others and the correlation of why they are so successful?
Click to expand...

Not just inept management, but sometimes inept unions as well that do not understand ROI. As you pointed out there are huge sums of money involved. Unfortunately when an airline does have a profit very few workers understand the concept of Return On Investment of Capital- they just see $. Those $ today often are needed to pay expenses tomorrow- flying an empty 747 is... expensive as Pan Am and UAL found out. Or in the words of the former UAL MEC Chairman, " You don't want to kill the golden goose, you just want to choke the Sh&& out of it."
There was an American Airlines CEO= I can't remember who it was but I think it was Crandall- who, when asked about the amount of cash AAL had on hand when it was a large amount said something to the effect that there is no such thing in the airlines as too much cash.
 
Hank S said:
Maybe the survivors will even eliminate such archaic things as the current route bidding and promotion based solely on seniority . . .
Click to expand...

That's not the problem. Again, savvy management has convinced everyone "it's the pilots" creating the problems.

It's not.
 
stratobee said:
Then the bottom feeders will simply have to go out of business if they can't attract pilots. I know this sounds harsh, but it's the best thing that can happen. Real capitalism. The whole industry needs a complete makeover, a reset. And the best way to start is to get rid of the detritus that clogs up the system. Companies that can only compete on the basis of historical oversupply of cheap labour do not have a sustainable business form.
Click to expand...

Yup. No matter where you go, there you are. The issue is that sometimes people do over reach. COMAIR and ACA where hardly bottom feeders, yet they are gone.
 
Hank S said:
Maybe the survivors will even eliminate such archaic things as the current route bidding and promotion based solely on seniority . . .
Click to expand...

Seniority-based bidding seems to be the only logical procedure out of the whole mess.
 
Three posts now have thrown ACA in with the lot of Comair. It is not the case. I rode ACA into the ground and it wasn't greedy management or union overreach that did it in.

9/11 pushed United (ACAs largest code partner) into chapter 11. Debate if 9/11 was the true cause if you like, but regardless UAL reorganised. The first thing they did was go after their unions. Then they went after their aircraft leases and third they went after their regional contracts.

The third phase is what affected ACA. United opened up the routes to bidding with the contracts thrown out by the BK judge. ACA bid for it's flying. I voted in favour for a pay cut if the contract was secured. That vote passed. We put in a competitive bid and united accepted it with conditions. Those conditions were not acceptable to ACA. They wanted us to give up control of OUR outstations and up to a third of our flying could be shifted annually among other things.

ACA said 'screw that' and walked away. That was the birth of Independence Air. Independence showed United by promptly going out of business in 14 months. There were mistakes made and in hindsight things could have been done much better. But with that said I don't regret the effort.

Independence was a classy outfit and I'm proud to be a part of it. I don't hold a grudge against management or the union. There is still an employee site up and running, an active Facebook page and reunions happen each year.
 
RotorAndWing said:
COMAIR and ACA were destroyed by inept and greedy management types.
Click to expand...

No. They were destroyed when they could not compete against other regionals. Both airlines had contracts that paid their employees well. DAL and United pulled their flying. Funny... while I remember DAL and United pilot cheering them on when they fought for the contracts I don't remember them doing anything when their companies pulled the flying.

"United Airlines entered bankruptcy protection in December 2002. At that time United Airlines contracted a consulting firm, Bain, to renegotiate its regional partners contracts. Atlantic Coast Airlines employees and management went though a significant cost reduction program to remain competitive as a United Express carrier. Presented with overwhelming competition from other regional airlines Atlantic Coast Airlines and United Airlines were unable to negotiate a mutual agreement. At that time Atlantic Coast Airlines continued to honor its 10 year contract with United Airlines. Expecting that United would be unable to honor that contract, Atlantic Coast Airlines developed an alternate business plan.After announcing plans to part with United Airlines, Atlantic Coast Airlines' significant cash position made it a prime target for a takeover attempt. Mesa Air Group launched an attempt at a hostile takeover in the Summer of 2003, engaging in what some allege were significant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission violations. At the same time the employees of Atlantic Coast Airlines organized a grass roots effort to avert the takeover attempt. Within a few months the stock purchase plan was removed by Mesa.

On November 19, 2003, Atlantic Coast Airlines announced that it would become a low cost carrier under the name of Independence Air. Its status as a United Express carrier ended on August 4, 2004, and its status as a Delta Connection carrier ended November 2, 2004. Operations as Independence Air began on June 16, 2004. On January 5, 2006, Independence Air ceased operations.

On March 10, 2006, Northwest Airlines purchased the DOT Operating Certificate of then-Independence Air with the intent to use that certificate to form a new regional subsidiary. The result was Compass Airlines, which began service using Embraer E175 jets in August 2007."


COMAIR was an owned subsidiary of DAL. DAL pilot just stood by and watched as they were purged.
 
Captain said:
Three posts now have thrown ACA in with the lot of Comair. It is not the case. I rode ACA into the ground and it wasn't greedy management or union overreach that did it in.

9/11 pushed United (ACAs largest code partner) into chapter 11. Debate if 9/11 was the true cause if you like, but regardless UAL reorganised. The first thing they did was go after their unions. Then they went after their aircraft leases and third they went after their regional contracts.

The third phase is what affected ACA. United opened up the routes to bidding with the contracts thrown out by the BK judge. ACA bid for it's flying. I voted in favour for a pay cut if the contract was secured. That vote passed. We put in a competitive bid and united accepted it with conditions. Those conditions were not acceptable to ACA. They wanted us to give up control of OUR outstations and up to a third of our flying could be shifted annually among other things.

ACA said 'screw that' and walked away. That was the birth of Independence Air. Independence showed United by promptly going out of business in 14 months. There were mistakes made and in hindsight things could have been done much better. But with that said I don't regret the effort.

Independence was a classy outfit and I'm proud to be a part of it. I don't hold a grudge against management or the union. There is still an employee site up and running, an active Facebook page and reunions happen each year.
Click to expand...

I agree. My point was that UAL pilots, while talking the talk about how regional pilots should hold the line on wages, had no qualms about their parent company hosing ACA. I always felt ACA was a class act.
It's all "no race to the bottom", "hold the line", no "shiny jet syndrome", but when their parent company pulls the contract and gives it to the lowest bidder... well, too bad so sad. Sucks for you bud.
 
Blackhawk said:
No. They were destroyed when they could not compete against other regionals. Both airlines had contracts that paid their employees well. DAL and United pulled their flying. Funny... while I remember DAL and United pilot cheering them on when they fought for the contracts I don't remember them doing anything when their companies pulled the flying.

"United Airlines entered bankruptcy protection in December 2002. At that time United Airlines contracted a consulting firm, Bain, to renegotiate its regional partners contracts. Atlantic Coast Airlines employees and management went though a significant cost reduction program to remain competitive as a United Express carrier. Presented with overwhelming competition from other regional airlines Atlantic Coast Airlines and United Airlines were unable to negotiate a mutual agreement. At that time Atlantic Coast Airlines continued to honor its 10 year contract with United Airlines. Expecting that United would be unable to honor that contract, Atlantic Coast Airlines developed an alternate business plan.After announcing plans to part with United Airlines, Atlantic Coast Airlines' significant cash position made it a prime target for a takeover attempt. Mesa Air Group launched an attempt at a hostile takeover in the Summer of 2003, engaging in what some allege were significant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission violations. At the same time the employees of Atlantic Coast Airlines organized a grass roots effort to avert the takeover attempt. Within a few months the stock purchase plan was removed by Mesa.

On November 19, 2003, Atlantic Coast Airlines announced that it would become a low cost carrier under the name of Independence Air. Its status as a United Express carrier ended on August 4, 2004, and its status as a Delta Connection carrier ended November 2, 2004. Operations as Independence Air began on June 16, 2004. On January 5, 2006, Independence Air ceased operations.

On March 10, 2006, Northwest Airlines purchased the DOT Operating Certificate of then-Independence Air with the intent to use that certificate to form a new regional subsidiary. The result was Compass Airlines, which began service using Embraer E175 jets in August 2007."


COMAIR was an owned subsidiary of DAL. DAL pilot just stood by and watched as they were purged.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm, I think there is a forest out there, but those damn trees keep me from seeing it............


:rolleyes2:
 
Captain said:
Three posts now have thrown ACA in with the lot of Comair. It is not the case. I rode ACA into the ground and it wasn't greedy management or union overreach that did it in.

9/11 pushed United (ACAs largest code partner) into chapter 11. Debate if 9/11 was the true cause if you like, but regardless UAL reorganised. The first thing they did was go after their unions. Then they went after their aircraft leases and third they went after their regional contracts.

The third phase is what affected ACA. United opened up the routes to bidding with the contracts thrown out by the BK judge. ACA bid for it's flying. I voted in favour for a pay cut if the contract was secured. That vote passed. We put in a competitive bid and united accepted it with conditions. Those conditions were not acceptable to ACA. They wanted us to give up control of OUR outstations and up to a third of our flying could be shifted annually among other things.

ACA said 'screw that' and walked away. That was the birth of Independence Air. Independence showed United by promptly going out of business in 14 months. There were mistakes made and in hindsight things could have been done much better. But with that said I don't regret the effort.

Independence was a classy outfit and I'm proud to be a part of it. I don't hold a grudge against management or the union. There is still an employee site up and running, an active Facebook page and reunions happen each year.
Click to expand...

Oh, ACA was my first choice regional and also my first interview. It went very poorly. I was devastated but learned from it.
Years later my wife was in the middle of medical school when ACA went under. I was thanking my lucky stars for unanswered prayers and the fact that I was at a different regional where I was payed well, had a good schedule, and a one leg commute to work. I've used it as an example for others in aviation and life in general about how bad things in your life can be for the best. I'm not sure what we would have done if I'd been at ACA with a house payment and medical school.
 
Oops, I answered the wrong question...disregard.
 
Blackhawk said:
I agree. My point was that UAL pilots, while talking the talk about how regional pilots should hold the line on wages, had no qualms about their parent company hosing ACA. I always felt ACA was a class act.
It's all "no race to the bottom", "hold the line", no "shiny jet syndrome", but when their parent company pulls the contract and gives it to the lowest bidder... well, too bad so sad. Sucks for you bud.
Click to expand...

Exacty what should/could have the UAL pilots done to stop their company from "Hosing" ACA?
 
maddog52 said:
Exacty what should/could have the UAL pilots done to stop their company from "Hosing" ACA?
Click to expand...

They, along with all other Majors, should/could have held onto scope.
 
Captain said:
They, along with all other Majors, should/could have held onto scope.
Click to expand...

Easy to say. Hard to do when your are faced with bankruptcy and trying to salvage as much of your career as you can. Holding on to scope would have been preferable, but it would just have meant even tougher times sooner for the regionals and probablly accelerated the demise of ACA. As it was, they lasted 2 months longer than I thought they would.
 
maddog52 said:
Exacty what should/could have the UAL pilots done to stop their company from "Hosing" ACA?
Click to expand...

Nothing. Each pilot group must do what is in their best interest. Each pilot within a group must do what is in his/her best interest. As a 51 year old pilot I have a different outlook from a 25 year old pilot. It's tough for me to start over, to give up my entire salary and start over at the bottom of a seniority list when I have two kids facing college verses the 25 year old with no responsibilities. Does that make the 25 year old wrong? No. Just a different perspective on life.

I just get irritated at the hypocrisy of pilot groups that insist on regional pilots "holding the line" then stand back as their company plays one regional group off against another.
 
Blackhawk said:
As a 51 year old pilot I have a different outlook from a 25 year old pilot. It's tough for me to start over, to give up my entire salary and start over at the bottom of a seniority list when I have two kids facing college
Click to expand...

This is probably the number one problem with the seniority system. You're only as senior as your airline is solvent. In any other industry, someone with 25 years of experience with a particular skillset would be qualified for a comparable paying position at another company whether that person left on their own, or their employer went out of businesss. Would they make exactly what they made? Not necessarily. Would they get the same vacation/holiday schedule? Maybe not. Would they start at an entry level pay scale as if they just came out of college? Highly unlikely. But not so at airlines.

It makes zero sense that a pilots with years of experience would have to "start over" at the bottom of the ladder in both pay and route bidding.

But the other side of the equation is...why would an airline want to hire a 51 year old pilot at the top of their payscale when there is a pool of 25 year old candidates who will be paid 20% of what the senior guy would have to be paid. That young pool may not be around much longer, though, once ATP requirement kicks in.

What does a CFI tell a prospective student pilot who wants an airline career now? A few years ago you would tell them that they can earn their commercial, multi and CFI and begin flying for hire as an instructor, charter, check flyer(if those still exist), aerial photography pilot, etc. After a few hundred hours, you promise them that they will have the time and ratings that qualify them for a First Officer position at a regional like Mesa, Piedmont, etc. A year or two later, off they go to embark on a career in shiney new jets. Maybe they invested as little as $20-$30K, after accounting for the meager income they made building hours exercising the commercial and/or CFI certificate.

Now, the story is far more grim to that prospective student. How creative can we be in telling them ways to achieve 1500 hours before they can qualify for an ATP checkride and subsequent regional airline interview? Are they prepared to spend years flying charters? Will NetJets and the fractionals even consider fresh pilots with a few hundred hours and no jet time?

The supply of qualified pilots for airline jobs is going to dry up fast. The flying public has little idea what kind of shortage is coming in the next 5 years as the 65 year olds face mandatory retirement and there aren't enough pilots to fill the seats to replace them.
 
stratobee said:
Then the bottom feeders will simply have to go out of business if they can't attract pilots. I know this sounds harsh, but it's the best thing that can happen. Real capitalism. The whole industry needs a complete makeover, a reset. And the best way to start is to get rid of the detritus that clogs up the system. Companies that can only compete on the basis of historical oversupply of cheap labour do not have a sustainable business form.
Click to expand...

Not all the baby turtles make it to the ocean, and that's OK.
 
airguy said:
Not all the baby turtles make it to the ocean, and that's OK.
Click to expand...

I agree. Unfortunately in the airline business, at least on the regional side, the bad ones often succeed.
I was familiar with Colgan well before the Buffalo crash. If I saw them on a leg my family did not travel with them.
I did not realize how bad they were until after the crash. I had no idea that stick shaker/pusher training was not required as part of the sim. But it was not, and they did not do it since it was not required saving some money in the short term.
 
Sometime back around 2006-2007 on another now defunct pilot chat board a fellow member walked us through his interview and subsequent training process at Colgan. He then related stories to us when he began flying his routes. A few times he eluded to "if you knew the things that go on behind the scenes, you'd never want to fly us".

I never did get him to expound on that, though.
 
Now, the story is far more grim to that prospective student. How creative can we be in telling them ways to achieve 1500 hours before they can qualify for an ATP checkride and subsequent regional airline interview? Are they prepared to spend years flying charters? Will NetJets and the fractionals even consider fresh pilots with a few hundred hours and no jet time?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the path is these days.

CFI for 5-7 years? And that's if your school is busy. Hope to find another poverty wages gig that'll give you 200-300 hours a year and do that for half a decade? That was ok in the past when you'd only have to tough it out a year or two, but now you'll be lucky to have the hours you need by the time you turn 30.

And gone are the days of treating pilot training like college. No parent in their right mind is going to finance $200k+ of school and hour building so their kid can hopefully work in a volatile, low paying sector until their mid-life crisis, where they might be at a senior enough level to live well. Much less those kids who have to pay for their own college.

Oh yeah, and that's after you spent 100k or so getting your four year degree all majors require.

The requirement makes no sense. Both pilots on that Colgan flight had training deficiencies but it was a result of bad training, not a lack of generic hours and experience. Not to mention both had their ATP anyway.

I don't think we are going to see a shortage now, but what happens in 20 years? It's incredibly prohibitive now for 20 year olds to pursue a career from 0 hours when the financial investment is higher then some doctoral fields with a tiny fraction of the return. The pool may be stocked enough today, but it won't be eventually without a steady stream of new pilots entering the field.
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
CFI for 5-7 years? And that's if your school is busy. Hope to find another poverty wages gig that'll give you 200-300 hours a year and do that for half a decade? That was ok in the past when you'd only have to tough it out a year or two, but now you'll be lucky to have the hours you need by the time you turn 30.
Click to expand...

Not to disagree with your main point, but I instruct for fun part-time 3 days a week and it's been about 200 or so hours per year. A full timer dedicated to time-building should be able to build double that. Don't forget also that aviation college graduates only need 1000 hours, not 1500 (although I do not agree with that either).

Whether they should be "dedicated to time-building" is another matter. I am concerned that the industry is soon going to again have a large influx of sucky, apathetic CFIs.

It's been said that it's the quality of hours that count, not quantity. If the average new first officer was not qualified for their job, evaluation standards should have been raised instead of coming up with meaningless numbers. Even with a "1500 hour rule" it is still too easy for a poor pilot to brute-force their way through...in fact, due to having a smaller pool of candidates, the quality of applicants may actually go down--that would be the law of unintended consequences at work.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
Not to disagree with your main point, but I instruct for fun part-time 3 days a week and it's been about 200 or so hours per year. A full timer dedicated to time-building should be able to build double that. Don't forget also that aviation college graduates only need 1000 hours, not 1500 (although I do not agree with that either).

Whether they should be "dedicated to time-building" is another matter. I am concerned that the industry is soon going to again have a large influx of sucky, apathetic CFIs.

It's been said that it's the quality of hours that count, not quantity. If the average new first officer was not qualified for their job, evaluation standards should have been raised instead of coming up with meaningless numbers. Even with a "1500 hour rule" it is still too easy for a poor pilot to brute-force their way through...in fact, due to having a smaller pool of candidates, the quality of applicants may actually go down--that would be the law of unintended consequences at work.
Click to expand...

Great points.
 
Or get a Cri-Cri, log all as multi time and be done in a year or two. Cri-Cri burns less than 2gal/hr, which should make it possible to fly for about $15/hr. :D;):yes:

In_Flight_July2010_172.JPG
 
Last edited:
Captain said:
National seniority list. It's a pipe dream but that's the answer that always comes back.
Click to expand...

National seniority sounds nice but it would never work. Let's say you have an 8 year 737 Captain making X dollars an hour and a 4 year 737 Captain making Y dollars an hour. On a national seniority scale whenever they need a 737 Captain guess which one they will advertise openings for ? It sounds good but would never work as we intend it.
 
Blackhawk said:
Nothing. Each pilot group must do what is in their best interest. Each pilot within a group must do what is in his/her best interest. As a 51 year old pilot I have a different outlook from a 25 year old pilot. It's tough for me to start over, to give up my entire salary and start over at the bottom of a seniority list when I have two kids facing college verses the 25 year old with no responsibilities. Does that make the 25 year old wrong? No. Just a different perspective on life.

I just get irritated at the hypocrisy of pilot groups that insist on regional pilots "holding the line" then stand back as their company plays one regional group off against another.
Click to expand...

Probably one of the biggest problems is ALPA trying to serve two different pilot groups. As cruel as it may sound what really needs to happen is ALPA needs to divest itself of ALL regional representation and let the regionals create their own version - call it RALPA if you want but having ALPA doing both is really working at cross purposes.
 
Bonchie said:
The requirement makes no sense. Both pilots on that Colgan flight had training deficiencies but it was a result of bad training, not a lack of generic hours and experience. Not to mention both had their ATP anyway.
Click to expand...

The requirement actually makes all the sense in the world to me. While both pilots had more time than 1500 hours neither of them had EVER or were ever MADE to have a strong FOUNDATION. They were both very quickly advanced thru pilot mills from one rating to the other. Each given just enough gouge to make it thru the checkride by their respective pilot mill instructors. I very seriously doubt either of them could have passed a checkride or oral to become a CFI.

What this new law effectively does (and it is a law and not a reg) is FORCE prospective airline pilots to become either CFI's or work in a non-pax hauling capacity until they've accumulated the required hours. And in so doing gain something VERY valuable - experience.

What is actually more hollow is the requirements to earn a Commercial Airman Certificate. The way it's currently laid out is really quite meaningless. You may think you know a lot after earning it but really you're just like my 16 year old that thinks it's unfair that his insurance is more expensive than mine. You don't know what you don't know and you're just gonna have trust me on that. You shouldn't being seeing airframe icing for the FIRST time as a "fully qualified" (?) line pilot flying peoples loved ones around !!!

If you take a lawyer right out of law school you wouldn't expect him to be truly qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice even though they he may legally be qualified to do so. Why ? Because they lack a true foundation and experience. Just like the pilots of Colgan.
 
Art VanDelay said:
The requirement actually makes all the sense in the world to me. While both pilots had more time than 1500 hours neither of them had EVER or were ever MADE to have a strong FOUNDATION. They were both very quickly advanced thru pilot mills from one rating to the other. Each given just enough gouge to make it thru the checkride by their respective pilot mill instructors. I very seriously doubt either of them could have passed a checkride or oral to become a CFI.
Click to expand...

Ummm... The FO had a flight instructor certificate which was valid at the time of the accident.

Also, I'm not sure how banging around the pattern in a 152 for 1500 hours is going to provide them with a strong foundation. Yeah, they'd have to see more stalls, but IMO the reason they stalled was because they'd been yakking about icing. They reacted to the stick shaker as if they were experiencing tailplane icing. That, combined with the lack of stick shaker training on Colgan's part, led to confusion that lasted long enough that they were unable to recover.

The other problem was a simple lack of basic airmanship and instrument skills on the part of the captain (PF). He should have noticed the airspeed decay long before the stick shaker as well. Again, not something I think would have been helped by 1500 hours banging around the pattern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top