I would guess they never hired them and assumed they would always be able to get the 2000hr guys.


They expected someone else to hire the 200 hire guys and give them the experience.

Folks,
Last time I looked, that was not cheating at all, if you believe it is, please post the reference from the regulations that says it has to be IMC to log IFR time.
Likewise, it can be logged with the AP engaged, if you thing not, please post the contrary regulatory requirement.
Regulatory facts please, not superstition, supposition, and " - I was told/given to understand/my company allows!!
Tootle pip!!

PS:
Have you all seen today's Australian, the article about Qantas lobbying for two year visas for (what was) 457 visa pilots to be extended to a minimum of five year

It is in the US .. cheating I mean. Different country, different rules, I know.

ASquared,
See the above for the FAA formal interpretation of the rules, re.14 CFR 61.51 - Pilot logbooks.
It is markedly different to Australia, but subject to wide legitimate interpretation. In my experience, it is not a thing FAA gets hung up about.
Tootle pip!!

This is the current state of the 457 visa abuse program, erm, or whatever it’s called now, Qantas in this instance would be using it in the spirit that it was created for (or at least that’s what their narrative is), as its ‘just until the academy’s up and running and addressing the skills shortage’...

Like almost every other business in Australia, they’ll use (abuse) this program to merely avoid wage rises that would attract retain local staff.

The unions should be out there campaigning against ANY special extensions whatsoever.

We mentioned this in another thread.

It is quietly suggested that Qantas are pursuing the same narrative for Network A320.

The union response is sub optimal to say the least. From connections at QF, the response is non-existent.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with that interpretation. Yes, there are times when it is legal to log instrument time when you're not actually inside a cloud. 84-29 names a couple of scenarios. My point was not that you must be inside clouds to log instrument time. Rather, that it is not legal in the US to log instrument time in good visual conditions ( CAVOK specifically was the term used) merely because you were on an IFR flight plan, you actually have to be in conditions which require flight by reference to instruments. That my be legal in Oz, I don't pretend to know. But for an absolute fact it is not legal to log instrument time on a clear sunny day in the US, merely because you're on an IFR flight plan. Neither the applicable regulation nor the 84-29 legal interpretation can be interpreted to allow that.

A Squared,
As I said, it is not a thing the FAA gets hung up about, unlike CASA, who treat log books as a happy hunting ground for insignificant errors of no safety significance, but criminal offenses all.
Tootle pip!!

It’s your logbook..you can write anything in it you like. Stick pictures, use white out..whatever. Just write a note on the inside cover saying ‘I payed for this book and I reserve the right to decide how I fill it in myself’

(It might not go down well in interviews but don’t compromise)

mattyj,
If you are, in fact, a pilot at all, (as opposed to a troll) and licensed in Australia, and it is an Australian log book, I am afraid that the applicable regulations do not support your position, no matter how fervently you believe otherwise, and the penalties for not complying with said regulations are quite harsh.
Tootle pip!!

It’s been over 10 years since I used my Aussie ATPL and I pray I don’t ever need it again..the Australian Regs are like Aussie Rules football: totally made up and no one else in the world is interested

The US is probably a little less particular about how logbooks are kept than Oz, but, if you pitch up at an airline interview with a logbook that has a bunch of time entered that was logged contrary to to the regs, that interview probably won't go well for you. And yes, some airlines do audit logbooks.

On the FAA side, they don't go out and audit pilot logbooks as a routine matter, but if you are involved in an incident (doesn't have to be an accident) it is common to request your logbooks to audit. I have personal acquaintances who have experienced this. If said review reveals illegally logged time, the FAA can, and will revoke your certificates for falsification. Revocation is the prescribed penalty for falsification of records.

Typical of Oz, there’s a regulation and a fine of several thou if you haven’t filled in your last flight as soon as practicable. Or your sim session.

The US is pretty different, You have no requirement to keep a logbook, as such. The only flight experience you are required to document is that time which is used to meet the qualifications for a certificate, or to show compliance with currency of experience regulations. And that doesn't have to be a logbook as such, just a "reliable record" However, that doesn't mean, as some seem to have assumed, that the FAA simply doesn't care what you put in your logbook. There are regulations, and while you're not terribly likely to get caught falsifying experience, if you do, the penalties are fairly severe.

A practical approach as (almost) always from the FAA.

Exactly!!

It happens, that somebody in the FAA gets the bit between their teeth about something, but as a proportion of "what happens" in US aviation it is pretty rare.

Can you imagine FAA "doing over" Oshkosh, or even considering it??

Here, the likelihood that you will wind up with a few thousand dollars in administrative fines, and penalty points, as result of a few log book errors, "discovered" during a ramp check, is too real.

Indeed, the CASA penchant for turning up mob handed and doing ramp checks at any advertised fly-in or airshow, or any time they find out there might be a bunch of aircraft all in the one place, has meant that many pilots will no longer fly to such gatherings.

At the last couple of Avalon airshows, Avalon East was a pretty lonely place.

Tootle pip!!

PS: I am told that the overtime and allowances system makes such "attendance" pretty lucrative for CASA pers*ns.

Why would you be carrying your logbook with you when you're flying?

Not only a shortage of crew but this also to contend with, which is very disconcerting. The Magenta Genration has colonised much of the Industry.
This excerpt is a classic and sums it up well:

Quote:

---

“...I guess he didn’t have that passion for flying that leads some aviators to never fully trust automation but to use old fashioned methods to determine their own situation regardless of what the screen says (distance, altitude, wind, speed, airport elevation, weight, configuration changes and last but not least: looking outside!). The pilot could not abandon automation. He could not figure it out!"

---

Here is the article that raised & explores the topic.

Happy Landings:ok:

Aus pilot shortage
 

One really has to question the so called shortage when I can personally confirm I know 4 pilots from Australia who applied for Jetstar back in Aus as FO's recently.

All 4 are flying jets with the lowest totaling 4500 hours with highest over 8000 and all 4 were rejected by the online assessment.

Forget the fact they fly in and out of the busiest airports in the US and the world, have degrees, over 10 - 20 years of work experience in the real world and multiple licences, multiple type ratings and multi turbine time.

Australian airlines will just reject people straight out based on a ridiculous psychometric online assessment.

Some shortage!!:ugh: