Infinte Type Rated Pilots it seems!!

[Airbus Girl]

I don't know why people keep training, or think they will walk into a job at the end of it. If you do even basic research you will discover plenty of redundancies in the last 2 or 3 years, many experienced pilots went to the desert, many will be back as soon as recruitment picks up. These are experienced pilots with type ratings and plenty of hours on type. So yes, at the moment there are still plenty of type rated experience pilots out there applying for jobs, and most airlines would rather interview these first, and take their pick, before going to low experience/ non-TR pilots.
It is just a case of supply and demand.

[darkroomsource]

...many will be back as soon as recruitment picks up. These are experienced pilots with type ratings and plenty of hours on type...

I would add that "plenty of hours on type" for many of the furloughed pilots is in the range of 10-15 THOUSAND hours IN TYPE.
It will be very hard to compete with pilots with that many hours when one has only a couple years experience.

[captainsuperstorm]

Who ever said experience does not count, try this, when you go for your next job interview, tell the CP and panel interviewing you it does not matter who sits up front and what hours they have.... you will be told, dont call us, we will call you.

yes and no.
minimum experience is fixed by the insurance companies.(This is why I got jobs... it has nothing to do with my experience, I just satisfy their insurance requirement and their immigration laws, and for some other job, I am not accepted, because I don't have the hours on this or that plane or I have too many hours, Yes I have been refused because they told me I will quit for bigger plane....)

less hours has the copilot, more the airline has to pay.This is why sometimes you see airlines asking for 3000h, then 6 months later, 500h, then 300h.
It has nothing to do with the PAX, if a passenger don't want fly with an airline, it 's his choice.
Sometimes when you fly as a passenger, they ask you about your flight and you have to fill some question.I have never been asked about how I like the pilots or not, instead, they ask question about the food, service, seat comfort,connection, reservation, ....


What people look at : price, and the plane they will fly (preferably 2-4 jet airplane), then food, the ladies, magazines,....

Still, newbes will continue to be trained, pushed by parents who know nothing, they soon realize(after sending 500 CV around the world) this market is on his knee, and when you warn others, they simply laugh at you, telling it's a lie or you have a bad attitude.

[shaun ryder]

(This is why I got jobs... it has nothing to do with my experience, I just satisfy their insurance requirement

Another reason why I and countless others will always make the choice and refuse to fly on Ryanair!

[hollingworthp]

Another reason why I and countless others will always make the choice and refuse to fly on Ryanair!

But even more DO choose to fly Ryanair - and it's not for the service. So the pricepoint is key for the majority of short-haul pax.

[Brakefire]

The pricepoint is only key because the general public honestly believe that the 2 guys up front have a lot of experience and know what they are doing.

They assume it is like any other career, you dont get a position of major responsibility until you have the right experience and know how.... how little they know!!!

As Shaun Ryder said, another reason many of us will not fly Ryan Air

[darkroomsource]

I think the pricepoint is the most important thing because the public thinks all airlines are the same.
They have, however seen, in recent history, that they are not the same, and are beginning to pay attention to things like seat size, service, and yes, pilot experience.
I'd give it a year or two before airlines start advertising average experience levels of pilots. There just have been too many incidents in the past year or so where a lack of experience was, if not a factor, at least present.

[Brakefire]

The sooner the likes of people like RYR's O'Leary are out of aviation, the sooner the industry can improve.

I really hope they do bring in legislation regarding P2F and buying type ratings and scrap it. Follow the USA and bring in the 1500 hour rule before you can join an airline.

It will put many people of flying for a career due to the hard work involved, improve safety and T's and C's.

[CathayBrat]

My main issue is the 2600 hours being practically novice.

Now thats depressing.
As i have that many hrs, mainly command of Mr Beechcrafts fine toys, flying in very challenging areas south of the Med, but i am now classed as a novice! Now have a job in the UK, still flying Mr B's fine toys. So when do i stop being a novice? A 320/737 TR? Not for me. I shall continue to fly Mr B's fine toys, hopefully for the rest of my career, as its fun flying, not just pressing the auto pilot button. There is also less sh1t in this sector of the market, and we generally dont eat our young to climb the ladder, so much less stressful. Oh, and no massive debt to service either. If, and its a big if, the 1500 rule comes into EASA land, i will look on with interest at the feeding frenzy it will cause in the industry.
Cheers
CB

[darkroomsource]

As i have that many hrs, mainly command of Mr Beechcrafts fine toys, flying in very challenging areas south of the Med, but i am now classed as a novice! Now have a job in the UK, still flying Mr B's fine toys. So when do i stop being a novice? A 320/737 TR? Not for me. I shall continue to fly Mr B's fine toys, hopefully for the rest of my career, as its fun flying, not just pressing the auto pilot button.

Don't think that I called you a novice.
What I've been trying to explain here, is that 2600 hours is not much experience. It's about 2 or 3 years of actual line flying. But when compared to the rest of the world's occupations, it's like being almost finished with a university degree.
What you fly, and even how you fly, has less to do with the "value" of experience, than what you've dealt with during that time.
I don't think some of these pilots understand, that "flying is flying", that if you pass your tests, you're fairly equally qualified to "fly". But being in charge of an expensive piece of equipment, and the lives of many people, having the patience, and "wits about you", to deal with situations - that goes beyond the flying.
I think it's possible, probable even, if one has achieved 2600 hours flying at 400-500 hours per year, one has better experience than one who'd done it at 800-900 hours per year. Someone who's a little older, maybe mid 30's is more likely to have "better" experience than someone on in their mid 20's. Even with the same hours.
This whole discussion came about because it sounded (to me) like someone was claiming that with 2600 hours, they were qualified to fly for the majors, and were complaining that there were all these "type rated" pilots who were taking all the jobs because maybe they'd done pay to fly, and when were all these type rated pilots going to be gone, so the truly qualified 2600 hour pilots could get jobs at the majors.
So, if you've got 2600 hours, you're not a novice, but your not qualified to fly 737's either. (although due to some strange blip in the supply/demand curve, many pilots with less than that found themselves flying "big iron" a few years ago - and the industry is still realing from it)

[Bealzebub]

Experience has a number of definitions, but in this context it is simply an abstract. It is like a rainbow, in that it is pretty to look at, it happens, but it is impossible to touch or define when it actually happened.

Experience, seems to occur at some hazy period, when you later realize that no matter how much of it you think you have, it will never be enough to afford you the luxury of believing you can rely on it.

[VJW]

Judging experience

Hello

First I'd like to apologise to the mods- not sure where this kind of query belongs. What I do know, is the kind of people normally stalking Terms and Endearment are the kind of people I think best suited to this topic.

I recently had a conversation with a friend of mine, and we were talking about experience gained during flying. The outcome of which had him thinking I was crazy, and had me almost convinced of the same.

He argued that experience is purely down to logbook hours, and the more you had the more experienced you were. I was of the opinion that this is necessarily the case, and that a 5000 hour Captain could be just as well suited to a non normal (or even normal) situations as a 10000 hour Captain-

I argued that a guy flying long haul for instance logging 10 hours per sector of which they are only doing one landing in every two sectors (for arguments sake) is less experience then a guy flying 4 sectors logging 10 hours and doing 2 landings (other guy doing the other two).

Am I going crazy?

[Tooloose]

No..........

[Rote_8]

The definition of 'Experience' depends on your standpoint.

Potential employers compare pilots by number of flying hours.

But isn't experience to do with variety (of routes, destinations, types, etc.) as well as hours? Quality, as well as quantity.

You could arguably include those flights where you lost half your electrics / hydraulics / a powerplant just after V1 in your own personal portfolio of 'Experience'.

[757_Driver]

I don't think its simplistic either way. Yes you argualby get more expierence flying multi sector days than the occasional long haul sector, however you also have to balance the environment.
Multi sector flying bouncing from ILS to ILS in europe in a high quality radar controlled environment, is probably not more 'experience' than a single long haul sector ending in a procedural NPA's in the arse end of the planet with all manner of weather / terrain and other issues.
All I do know is that when something goes bang and the world starts falling apart you probably cannot have enough experience!

[darkroomsource]

I think these past few posts have all been in line with my way of thinking.To quote John and Martha King, who I know are quoting someone else, I just don't know who, experience comes from making bad decisions.I don't necessarily agree that all experience comes from making bad decisions, but I do believe that experience comes from, well, experience, not from doing X hours.However someone who has low hours is less likely to have experienced as many situations that require decisions beyond, "What's the next frequency?"So, over time a person can accumulate significant experience, both flying and life, without having achieved as many hours as someone else with the same experiences, just because they've encountered different circumstances.Someone who flies in the Pacific Northwest, for example, is more likely to have real actual IFR time than someone who flies in Southern California. And flying in the real thing is definitely not the same thing as flying in sumulated IFR. So, someone with, say 50 hours of actual IFR might be considered more experienced than someone with 200 hours simulated, but no actual, or with 200 hours where it's only flying through very thin layers, and logging point 1 IFR per flight.And that's why I've been trying to point out that we should be looking at more than how many hours, especially when it's less than about 10,000. Because at about 10,000 hours, you're looking at someone who most likely has 10 years experience, plus a few years training. Whereas someone with only 2500 hours, has not really finished "training" yet. So it's important to look at the quality of hours for lower times.

[Sciolistes]

VJW,

I argued that a guy flying long haul for instance logging 10 hours per sector of which they are only doing one landing in every two sectors (for arguments sake) is less experience then a guy flying 4 sectors logging 10 hours and doing 2 landings (other guy doing the other two).

I'm not so sure. Experiece isn't just what you have done, but also careful consideration of what you might need to do. In otherwords, experience can be expressed as decions (good and bad). Flying long haul has its challenges, ETOPS, critical points, etc. A non normal in the middle of the ocean may require a cricial decision with no opportunity to backtrack. Short haul is more intense, but the decisions are usually no brainers with plenty of fat in the system and more alternates than you can shake a stick at.

On balance I agree with your friend, hours are hours.

[Airbus Girl]

I think the poster who mentioned variety is correct. I could spend 10,000 hours flying London to Paris in one type of aircraft, doing 4 sectors a day. I am sure I would learn alot about that route and those airports. That doesn't make me experienced though. Experienced on that route yes, but give that person a Luton to Corfu 2 sector day on a typical summer's night and I wouldn't say their hours would hold them in good stead. On the other hand, a 2000 hour pilot who has been flying different routes at different times of day and night, had a few tech problems, flown plenty of non precision approaches, dealt with dodgy ATC, etc. and I think that they would handle a new route/ airport/ diversion/ emergency better than the previous pilot, despite the discrepancy in hours.

[Sciolistes]

I could spend 10,000 hours flying London to Paris in one type of aircraft, doing 4 sectors a day.

I would voluntarily jump into a jet engine rather than do that

[Golf-Sierra]

if you were working for an accounting firm, you might still be on probation with 2600 hours accounting experience. Especially since the first 250 or so were your training, which for an accountant took FOUR YEARS at university. Based on that, you're still a sophmore at school.

Come on, have you ever been to uni? Of those 4 years, most of it was spent having a good time, or if the person was unlucky - working in some kind of job to pay for the tuition and board. The work was mainly struggling not sleep through lectures amd maybe a few intensive weeks before exams. The 200hr guy also had to spend lots of time preparing for exams. I'm sure it takes a lot fo time to prepare for and pass all the PPL and ATPL exams.

Accountant - come on - the only time you ever face any challlenge is during month end (2 days), year end (1 week) and perhaps during an audit (also a week). The rest is just mundane tasks you can really master to perfection in a couple of days. So - for any given calendar year your accountant is really gaining experience for at the most 6 weeks.

I know of a few people who have set up and steered to success their own accounting firms, or have become chief accountants within less then a year of graduating. It all depends on the market.