raven11, I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse, rather I'm just trying to clarify your position in my own mind. You've previously stated that you think it's insanity to put low hours pilots in the right seat of an airliner. Now you're saying that:
After a few years of training under their belts our guys are great!
By that statement do you mean hours in a control seat as P2X or P1? If you mean P2X then by the time they upgrade they will have amassed about 2700 hours - does that meet with your assessment of a pilot being experienced? If on the other hand you mean P1, they will have only completed their initial flying training (almost 4 years earlier) along with recurrent simulator training and checking. In this instance, ab initio cadets will have anywhere between 150 and 250 hours, depending on when they underwent their initial training.
In either case, I agree that these ex-cadets will have 'experience', in that they will have spent time in an aircraft in a real environment but they won't necessarily be 'experienced' in terms of their piloting skills.
I suppose my question is: how does this fit in with your vocal support of the FAA stipulation of an hours requirement before someone can act as co-pilot in an aircraft of a Part 121 air carrier? If you count P2X as applicable experience then our current scheme fits the bill. On the other hand, if you don't include P2X hours, then we're no different from airlines that put cadets straight into the right seat, KA for example.
You say:
With the foregoing in mind, hiring cadet pilots in careful proportion to experienced pilots, is a feasible cost/risk undertaking; as long as it is managed very carefully. A 200 hour pilot needs to safely get to 5000 hours. During that journey, the more exposure that an inexperienced pilot has to pilots with experience....the better.
I agree with the first part of the above statement, and I've said as much earlier in this thread. As far as the part I've highlighted, doesn't this happen anyway? By definition, inexperienced pilots will always fly with more experienced pilots because of the time it takes to reach command. I understand that time to command differs from company to company. I accept in some airlines there might be a possibility of an ex-MPL captain flying with a brand new ex-MPL co-pilot but that doesn't mean to say that they'll be incompetent as a crew.
The bone of contention for me in this discussion has always been the supposed link between hours and experience. I think that many confuse 'experience' with ability or competence - a flawed argument in my mind. The FAA stipulation of 1500 hours was a knee-jerk reaction after the Colgan accident and, arguably, has done nothing to increase safety in our industry.
STP