There's nothing wrong with being "hired" into a B-1900 (I hold a different view for PFT) at the 250 hour level, albeit this should be "135 flying". The fact that he failed multiple checks and had to pay to get into a job speaks volumes of how incapable he was then. Though, I wouldn't want anybody to be a captain of a B1900 unless they first had significant PIC time in any small aircraft.
Cessna, Piper or whatever any other small A/C you choose the fact of the matter is that PIC time is PIC time. When you've got nobody to count on but yourself to handle the aircraft, manage your operation and keep yourself prepared you will not only build character but learn volumes about what it takes to fly any aircraft. Having significant "stick" time in aircraft which are operating at the limit and developing keen situational awareness in that environment is, to me, several fold more important than programming an FMS and flying a computer for the same amount of time. This sort of experience also develops a strong foundation for the learning of any new aircraft the pilot may find themselves in down the road.
The learning process for any aircraft should not be a matter of osmosis, as is often the case, but of applying insights developed in previous flying to the new aircraft under the watchful eye of instructors and check airmen, strong and experienced pilots will pass this process with ease while weaker ones will take a bit more time and eventually be signed off as "warm bodies" to learn on the line. The latter should not be happening, but often does.
To me, the "hours" of experience matter less than the "type" of experience (albeit a rule has to be made based on some sort of finite criteria). Furthermore, you can't get that varied type of experience necessary in aviation without having a good amount of hours, and 250 is not a "good amount".
Last edited by aviatorhi; 7th Mar 2012 at 12:23.