KevSauce
26th Oct 2013, 12:51
Sorry if this is already an open subject line, but I cannot seem to find any reference to it.
Am I the only one who seems to be disturbed by the new Restricted ATP rules?
Specifically the need for an "aviation" degree in order to qualify for reduced minimum flight time... really?
First of all, At 1000 hours I had three airliner PIC type ratings, a seaplane rating, a helicopter rating with logging experience, 500 hours of international turbo-prop cargo-airline experience, business jet experience in Africa on a large cabin business jet. And these champions of the sky want to tell me that some pimple-faced, anti-social virgin coming straight out of Embry-Riddle as a CFI has more airsense and aeronautical experience than me and somehow deserves a right seat job in a 121 jet-airliner over me or other like me? Yea... OK...
Not to sound like I am bragging, but I also hold a four-year degree in a social science from a top-50 school and spent 3 years towing, fueling and cleaning the lavs of business jets in the snow as well as supervising ops at America's busiest international air terminal. All that before age 30. And yes, I still found time to date women!
I am not bitter, as I am very happy with my current job, I am just shocked at the arrogance of Ray Lahood and his cronies in DC. This whole thing stinks of a "favor" or even a pay-off between the 141 schools and the DOT.
Furthermore, obtaining an aviation degree could be the biggest mistake one could make when committing to a life-career as a pilot, as a minor car accident, slip & fall, or similar event can render a pilot medically unfit at least for commercial ops forever! Unless line-service or perhaps airport ops is where one wants to spend the rest of their career, focusing all your resources and intellect on learning exactly what percentage of airflow static-wicks disrupt (not to mention forsaking a proper college social experience), then rock on!
Any thoughts not from Riddle-heads would be nice! :cool:
Am I the only one who seems to be disturbed by the new Restricted ATP rules?
Specifically the need for an "aviation" degree in order to qualify for reduced minimum flight time... really?
First of all, At 1000 hours I had three airliner PIC type ratings, a seaplane rating, a helicopter rating with logging experience, 500 hours of international turbo-prop cargo-airline experience, business jet experience in Africa on a large cabin business jet. And these champions of the sky want to tell me that some pimple-faced, anti-social virgin coming straight out of Embry-Riddle as a CFI has more airsense and aeronautical experience than me and somehow deserves a right seat job in a 121 jet-airliner over me or other like me? Yea... OK...
Not to sound like I am bragging, but I also hold a four-year degree in a social science from a top-50 school and spent 3 years towing, fueling and cleaning the lavs of business jets in the snow as well as supervising ops at America's busiest international air terminal. All that before age 30. And yes, I still found time to date women!
I am not bitter, as I am very happy with my current job, I am just shocked at the arrogance of Ray Lahood and his cronies in DC. This whole thing stinks of a "favor" or even a pay-off between the 141 schools and the DOT.
Furthermore, obtaining an aviation degree could be the biggest mistake one could make when committing to a life-career as a pilot, as a minor car accident, slip & fall, or similar event can render a pilot medically unfit at least for commercial ops forever! Unless line-service or perhaps airport ops is where one wants to spend the rest of their career, focusing all your resources and intellect on learning exactly what percentage of airflow static-wicks disrupt (not to mention forsaking a proper college social experience), then rock on!
Any thoughts not from Riddle-heads would be nice! :cool: