Originally Posted by
dr dre
That's funny because it's the US that threw in the arbitrary 1500 hr limit for airline F/Os (less for military pilots) without any real data backing up the 750/1500 hour rule as a positive for safety.
To say the "quality of training" allows the hour requirement to be reduced is questionable itself. To me the quality of training would only be demonstrated by military pilots achieving better standards when they are placed in the same environment as a civilian trained pilot. The most common arena where these two groups would interact is in the airline world with ex RAAF pilots joining an airline and then being assessed in the same system as civilian trained pilots. As far as I know there hasn't been any recent studies on the differences in outcomes between the two groups, and anecdotal experience and feedback from a wide variety of pilots who have flown with each group in an airline career indicates no observable evidence that military trained pilots are "better" in any respect than civilian trained ones.
So to me the 750/1500 difference is unproven (the whole 1500 hour rule is stupid to being with) and CASA just doesn't rely on arbitrary hour limits, there require competencies to be demonstrated in multiple areas in order to be granted ratings and privileges.
So you need proofs that someone who has 750 hours on F16 is more skilled and safer pilot than someone who has the same amount of hours on cessnas or LET410s
Serious airlines don't ask just hours
Usually ask for hours on aircrafts above 20 tones for example
EASA regulated that ZFTT applies only for planes above some standards. Do you also find it funny?
Not all the hours the same and that is recognized by the market and by some authorities