72 hours in a simulator... great, that's advanced training
. It would sure replace 1500h in a real aircraft in real conditions, real icing, real ATC radio, noise interference, aircraft vibrations, night IMC, CB's, unexpected headwinds, unreliable fuel gauges, etc...
And since when does 1500 hours guarantee you that? If you're a CFI you will not have gained much actual night IMC, you will not have ever seen icing conditions, all you'll have done is local practice in fair weather. I can go rent a C-152 for 1500 hours and fly only in day VMC in the pattern and be ready for the airlines, right?
Again, my point isn't that higher standards aren't needed - it's that this rule doesn't fix the problem we encountered with the Colgan pilots.
@
BTDTB4
I think we're on the same page. My point is that this 1500 hour rule doesn't help anyone - it just makes politicians feel good about themselves. All the actual problems that led to this Colgan flight are a direct result of inadequate airline training, not pilot experience. The training history of the Colgan captain indicates that he would repeatedly fail checkrides and training events, but the fact is in aviation persistence trumps skill every time.
With an overhaul of airline training and checking procedures we could "weed out" the weak pilots so we don't wind up pairing two individuals with below average skills. AQP is not the be-all, end-all of this but it's a step in the right direction.
You can't rate a pilot by numbers in their logbook, the true gauge of their ability is assessed during training and proven during checking. That's where improvements need to be made.