Career-Patterns in the USA

[Flyingphil]

Dear Everyone, reading some Accident_Reports from the NTSB I was pretty irritated about the Pilots involved.
Here are some examples:

AAL1420, MD80 - Little Rock 1999
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 48 10.250 05.550 05.550 07.400
F/O 35 04.300 00.200 N/A N/A

AAL0587, A300 – New York 2001
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 42 08.050 01.700 01.700 03.450
F/O 34 07.620 01.900 N/A N/A

ASA2061, MD80 - Los Angeles 2000
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 53 17.750 04.150 04.150 10.500
F/O 57 08.150 08.050 N/A N/A

DAL1279, MD80 – Pensacola 1996
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 40 12.000 02.300 02.300 N/A
F/O 37 06.500 00.500 N/A N/A

FDX014, MD11 – Newark 1997
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 46 11.000 01.300 00.350 N/A
F/O 39 03.700 00.100 N/A N/A

VLJ0592, DC-9 - Miami 1996
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 35 09.000 02.150 01.800 N/A
F/O 52 06.500 02.150 00.400 N/A

VLJ0558, DC-9 - Nashville 1996
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 43 04.400 01.100 00.030 N/A
F/O 42 07.700 00.200 N/A N/A

USA0427, B737 - Pittsburgh 1994
Rank Age Total Hrs On Type PIC on Type Total PIC
CPT 45 12.000 04.000 03.300 N/A
F/O 38 09.100 03.650 N/A N/A




(Figures rounded up to the next even digit)

In many reports in the Career-Section of the Pilots it is stated that the person in question had “an ATPL with Ratings for B727, DC9, B737…” or similar remarks, as well as very often it is stated that the particular pilot also had a license as Flight Engineer and had accumulated several Thousand Fhrs in that position.

So my questions are:
->Is it possible in the US to have more than one rating at the same time for quite different planes like DC9/MD80 and B737 e.g.

->Is there no clear Career-pattern?
In all European Countries according to Fhrs, Age and/or Company-Seniority the F/O’s involved would have been CPT for quite a while.

->Is there any policy to make pilots a F/O before grading them up to the CPT-Ranking?
Quite a while ago I was reading the Report of TWA800 and saw that the Pilots (The PIC of that Flight had a Line-Check so the F/O was also a CPT) have flown the 747 as F/O for some years although they have been with TWA since the 1960s and have been CPT on other Types for several years!

Thanx for any answer!

[westhawk]

I'm not quite sure what you are looking for, but I will attempt to answer your questions as asked.



->Is it possible in the US to have more than one rating at the same time for quite different planes like DC9/MD80 and B737 e.g.

Yes. In the USA, pilot certificates, once issued, are valid until suspended, revoked or surrendered. Ratings printed on the certificate remain in effect in perpetuity. Regulations define currency and qualification requirements for operating privileges to remain in effect. Rather than re-issue the certificate each time qualifications are re-established, logbook or training records are the proof of qualification for operating privileges. These records need not be carried on one's person. (except student pilots operating under a CFI's authorization.) It is important to note that the checkride administered to a PIC for operating a jet in air transport service is type specific and contains all the elements of an original issuance ATP/type rating/PIC check. The only real difference is who may administer the check. Only an FAA inspector, designated examiner or training center evaluator may issue original certificates. Approved company or training center check airmen may administer recurrent checks. Just because one has a type rating on their certificate does not mean they are current to act as PIC. It does reflect that they are qualified if all other requirements are met.

->Is there no clear Career-pattern?

No. Career patterns are determined by individual air carrier hiring and promotion policies. This can be affected by complex market forces like supply and demand or by any other rationale relied upon at the individual carrier. Union labor agreements usually set the policy if in effect. Not by national policy! Company seniority is the most common factor used by US airlines for consideration for upgrade. Smaller carriers and startups tend to appoint Captains according to thier own agenda. This may or may not include consideration of seniority. When you get hired at most major airlines, you are now the most junior (and lowest paid) co-pilot or FE in the company, regardless of your qualifications or experience. In other operations, the value of your experience may be of more immediate benefit to your bank account. This issue is one where you can find very strongly held opinions about which is right on both sides. Times have certainly changed in this regard in that there is less belief that an investment of time and work for low pay now will pay off later.

Is there any policy to make pilots a F/O before grading them up to the CPT-Ranking?

Yes, please see above. Direct-entry captains are hired by many carriers, sometimes causing resentment among the FOs who feel they should have gotten the nod. It's a sensitive subject in some companies. Most major US carriers have operated under the senority-based system since the early days of airlines. Startups are obviously exempt.

I'm not sure what relation your inclusion of accident references has to the issue of command appointment policy. Is there some correlation there that I failed to see?

Best regards,

Westhawk

[Flyingphil]

Hello Westhawk,

thanks for the answer. That was exacly what I was looking for.
I am considering to go for my ATPL in the US.

Just 4 Interest I read through some reports on the NTSB-Homepage and there I got aware of the (For a European Guy) pretty unusual fact of F/O in their 50s having accumulated in some cases by far more Hours than the CPT of that particular flight etc. (Pls see examples) or at least as Much Fhrs to be CPT (According to European Standards)

So when thinking about going to the US this means -for me- to join a Newcomer Airline so that I can pretty fast get an upgrade instead of joining the Queque at a big shot;)

BTW: In a german Forum there was a similar thread about a Delta-Crew which consisted of two Guys of about 35-45 Years of Age having 4 Stripes and a by far older Guy (about 55) having just 3 Stripes on his Uniform.

So you see, Europeans are used to other Career-Patterns and Seniotity-Evaluations.


Thanx for your help

[bafanguy]

Flyingphil,

Delta has hired some retired military pilots which may account for seeing a 55 y/o FO mentioned. It's possible an FO that age is flying that position by choice, but I rather doubt it.

I worked with many FOs my age and older and rather preferred flying with someone of that "vintage".

[Dockjock]

A couple of other factors to consider along with the above points.

1. No cadet programmes in USA. By and large there are 2 ways of getting a job with a major or national airline- a) civilian experience through GA and thence commuter airlines, b) military. The civilian pilot will typically start as a flight instructor or rhs in a small twin, the military pilot will have far less hours but will probably have time in a large transport or fast jet. Either way it is extremely rare to even be considered by an airline in the US (market forces permitting as well) with any less than about 2500 hrs. This is sometimes for a position as FE or SO.

2. Very large GA industry in USA. Training is cheaper, and therefore attracts more students. More students, more instructors. Corporate flying, small charter companies, cropdusting, police work, sightseeing etc. GA is HUGE in US compared to Europe, and therefore when large airlines are out selecting new hires, they have a larger pool of experienced pilots to choose from thus negating the need to hire 200-hr cadets.

3. Low popution density. Compared to europe and even more so asia the population density dictates that there are fewer large jets per capita in US than in europe. There are far greater RJ's, turboprops, piston twins and so forth. You are probably used to seeing an MD80 or B737 as an "entry level" type of aircraft to get a job on. Due to the above factors crews on those types in the USA have typically flown a C172/Navajo/Caravan/B1900/ Metro/Dash 8/ATR/RJ etc beforehand.

4. Defined career path. Most likely a function of the numerous aviation cycles a person has been through. A 55 year old MD-80 F/O at one airline may have previously spent 25 yrs as Captain on a B737 only to see his airline fold or be bought out by the new one, thus forcing him to the bottom of the new companie's seniority list or out on the street to look for work as a "new hire" once again. Only the very lucky few pick the "right" company and are able to enjoy consistent career progression until retirement.

Hope that helps.

[wondering]

Me thinks age limitation (or should we say age discrimination) many airlines in Europe practice is a factor as well. Once over 30-35y many airlines will not look at you. Therefore, its´s unlikely to find a co-pilot over the age of 50. Unless, I reckon that person was unable to upgrade.

By the way, has anyone challenged that practice in court yet?