Pay - Pilots need more than bread and water

[robsrich]

I was in NZ recently and looked at both aeroplane and helicopter happenings.

Seems they have the same issues there as we do in Oz.

The Australasian HAA is now getting stuck into the insurance companies who exclude low hour pilots, and there are plenty of these.

We are asking the question, why? I can find no evidence to exclude a low hour pilot who is supervised by the boss correctly.

Basic questions are:

Regulator, school and testing authority issue a licence to fly on commercial operations.

But insurance company, and in turn the boss say the new graduate ain’t good enuff!

So what is happening?

The industry rejects the regulator's licence - is the whole training system stuffed?

Meanwhile, the HAA is tackling this on two fronts:

1. Ask the insurance companies why they exclude new graduates, and
2. Help the CASA with their training reviews.

My personal dream (before I hand over the HAA to a new team), is to bring the regulator, safety authorities and the insurance industry around a table and ask why we have this historical bias?

If it is left over from WWII days, then we are making progress.

If they are right, and we are wrong, then we have to improve the training system and establish some form of assistance to low hour pilots, by mentoring, work experience, etc.

As I know this is a very emotive and topic, dear to many wallets, what are your thoughts?

Constructive comments only please, we gotta get this right!

We hope to have a working group up and running soon, and your input is very important to our work. We are all volunteers! Our target is to have the mess sorted out by September 2006, (our next major event), to bring into the open our working groups recommendations.

What do you think? How should we all handle this problem?

[John Eacott]

Rob,

QBE have always been totally supportive of our bringing on line low time pilots: c.200 hour starting, fixed and rotary, with an increased claim minimum for the first 50 hours with us. Usual undertaking to start on the easy stuff, and increase the task load with experience.

Not a problem for the past 8-10 years: thanks, QBE Aviation :ok:

[paco]

You mean you get bread and water?

I am in close contact with some underwriters and am developing something that may help (PM me for details), but I find the problem is more (particularly in Canada) low-grade aviation "consultants" who are advising aviation "buyers", who might have loads of fixed wing/military experience but very little helicopter.

One guy even advised a company that pilots need 300 hours "in the province", or 2000 hours to fly people from a normal airfield half an hour North to an oil lease that was easily big enough for a 100-hour pilot to get into - give me a break!

Many companies there have insurance that covers 100-hour pilots anyway

Phil

[rotorboy]

Bread, water and Beer.... Thats all I need

rb

[Heli-Ice]

rotorboy

You know, beer is bread in a liquid state so just skip the water (already in the beer) and the bread (same ingredients as in beer)

So I figure, beer is all you need! :ok:

[rotorrookie]

This is a global thing, I mean this insurance company's policy to exclude low time pilot's from gettin hired, Unlees the operator pay's some huge insurance fee's.
I would like too see what fact's their policy is based on if their are any. Or is this maybe the call of some office bloke working at insurance company who just found some nice figure to draw the line at? donno

Is there any difference between 200hrs pilot or +500hrs pilot as co-pilot under supervision off experienced captain? I don't think so

Is a 200hrs guy fresh out of training(giving he had a proper training) ready to fly the easier job's that are around? yes to me unless he's an total a***ole.

ps. If the beer is Guinness..... then thats all you need

[What Limits]

Here is some anecdotal evidence, but gathering support all the time.

All pilots are equally likely to have an accident at any time.

Inexperienced pilots are more likely to cancel a trip due to weather.

Inexperienced pilots are more likely to get bullied into a trip.

Experienced pilots are more likely to exceed limits because they think they can use their experience to get out of trouble.

Discuss.

[gulliBell]

Even if you get the insurance problem sorted for low hour pilots, the bigger difficulty to overcome are contract minimum hour requirements set by the customers who charter helicopters. Quite often these minimums are in the order of 2000+ hours PIC, even more. So for the employers who are prepared to take on a low hour pilot, assuming that the insurance underwriters are prepared to accept the additional risk, there is the operational and economic difficulty of having pilots on the payroll who aren't acceptable to the customers. Upsetting clients is not a good way of doing business!!

[996]

What Limits scribbled:

'Experienced pilots are more likely to exceed limits because they think they can use their experience to get out of trouble.

Discuss.'

Some may but there again you do not get to that level of experience in one piece by doing as you suggest.

The issue is not about ability but of experience. The longer hour pilot may greater experience on which to draw in the event of an un planned for event and has had a longer opportunity in which to learn.

[What Limits]

What is experience?

200 hours can be got through both good and bad experiences.

[Texdoc]

That is the insurance industry. Who can make any sense of underwriting hey? They are simply gamblers who haggle over what bets they will place on who and for how much to maximize their return. That’s OK it is a business, but sometimes there is no sense at all in it.

Here is a strange scenario, A new 300CBi used for training (by low time Instructors) and Commercial work by new pilots is cheaper to insure than an old 206 worth not much more than the new 300. The 300 gets used far more often in a riskier environment. But low hour Commercial Pilots are excluded from flying the turbine in an easier flight role, while the 50hour student is off doing confined areas, Navs and Pinnacles SOLO.

The regulators say you can fly commercially, the insurance says you can't (Customer requirements were often originally written by industry, they must have gotten there figures from somewhere.)

Hard to even get a start under 200hrs in the civilian world, (not enough experience) (insurance?) but new Military pilots are flying around at Night, NVG's, Low Level in formation with 250hrs, in helicopters worth millions more. (Bigger insurance budget? Better training?)

Who has stats on how a new Pilot is more likely to have an accident. The accidents reports in most countries do not seem to support this. What raw data are insurance companies basing the costs on, WORD from the Industry?

Even if insurance companies would insure ALL pilots to fly the aircraft they are endorsed on regardless of hours (and customers did not mind as long as you were trianed to do the specific job) imagine the turmoil when the vicarious vetting process for Jobs was taken away.

I think this topic is like Politics or Religion, best left for close friends and relatives to talk about.... then why do my fingers keep typing.....
:ouch:

[globalcolt]

texdoc, you mentioned about the experience of the military drivers going loose at 250 hours, Would i be wrong that obviously that isnt charter or RPT type work?

Would it be more aerial work therefor the risk factor can be higher?
The grunt gets paid and ordered to jump into that helicopter, the usually punter uses the aircraft much differently and is paying for a service.


come on experience does hold to its weight, I seen drivers (low houred) in civil that would kop it on the chin fly anywhere over weight etc, reason "at least they have got job". And not to put down our highly trained military drivers, but ive seen some average joes come out of that camp, which no doubt is a minority of them. But when they have trained on a helo type and cant remember how to check the oils???????? theres concern. True they might be able to fly out of sight in a dark night. So basically the military is military and the civil is civil......:* ok why cant we use military aircraft as civil aircraft for charter ops, like straight of the shelf no mods? and registered.

Gee the military drivers must get sick of the" them and us" as just as much as we do.

one more question how would you feel if an engineer who just got his licence on that aircrfat started working on your ship that had a prob, when you had the opportunity to used an enginner that you had known for years to help you out..

So as long as there are the smiling thiefs out the that under cut to try and get the work and not pay the driver a decent pay it wont change.

[Texdoc]

"Gee the military drivers must get sick of the" them and us" as just as much as we do."

No them and us from my camp, I can assure you of that, maybe I am them maybe I am us ;O) just posing the question on the comparison and what the differences are, no opinion just wondering what others thoughts were.

Yes you are right different tasks and roles but insurance is often the Hull insurance that causes the grief as opposed to Indemnity insurances.

As far as Engineers go I guess it is the same as some of the reasoning offerd up about pilots
If he is just qualified he may spend that extra time checking and rechecking, but lets say that experienced engineer was the one who signed him off , he works at the company, knows the requirements (trained in them) then why not... preferable to taking it to a long timer you do not know at all perhaps....

ah yes Politices and Religion...........:ouch:

[globalcolt]

texdoc ,too true in some of your statements...

Mate what about the black hawk guys who drilled in after a training night sortie near townsville..... talk about insurance who was the insurance? Could it have been underwriting by the australian govt?.....Poor guys give their life to the country what happens.

now what would happen if it happen in the civil world , hey they both where twin engine a/c and are capable of flying at night in a charter enviroment....(if they where registered to do so)...

Insurance companies would go through the roof!!!!!

So no doubt when the govt put out a contract or a private firm they require experienced pilots to keep there employees safe, this includes the obvious of risk management and crew resource management. And the experience of a driver to tell the base manager's that he's not going due to weather etc. Without predudice or any problem off getting the flick...

another question could be , that a pilot may have 1000's of hours but if he's not current or recent in his required skills he may as well be back driving piston bangers (47's, J's, r22 and r44's)

this should bring em out.....hehehee