Boeing Forecasts Increased Global Demand for Airline Pilots
 

Air Transport News

What do you think about it?

I refer the right honourable lady or gent to this:

http://www.pprune.org/interviews-job...ast-pilot.html

and ask if anything has changed in the last 12 months.....

Personally I think it's a load of tosh from Boeing which funnily enough coincides with the FTO's schedule, to train as many people as possible. No FTO could get me training with them based solely on this. All it takes is a quick look over at the amount of people with their F ATPL with no jobs. Boeing may be correct 20 yrs down the line, but for now I dont think this is reason to start training.

It's true that the current market status and hiring in Europe is somewhat weak but that doesn't mean it's also like that elsewhere. It also depends on what airline and market sectors you look at. Boeing simply forecasts a need of half a million pilots for the coming two decades due to a predicted amount of aircraft they think will sell. This number reflects the whole world and not just Europe. You have to consider that that number is most likely the amount of pilots needed in Asia, Middle-East, South-East Asia, West Pacific and Austral-Asia, which are markets expected to exhibit large growth in the coming years.

It is true that the asian markets are expanding exponentially, and I never denied that. I don't think you would have huge difficulty in getting a job if you don't care which country you live in. But my point was that starting training now in europe in the hope that you would be one of the estimated 99,700 pilots that boeing predict will be required is very naive. Even if this does turn out to be true, it will still be a good few years until we see its results. Therefore it's ludicrous that a flight school were trying to force me to start an unsponsored ATPL course this summer by trying to push me these statistics as though they're going to get me a job right upon finishing training.

momo95, I was only referring to the matter of fact of Boeing's prediction, not flight training.

I know. I was also referring to boeing's prediction's. I also decided to add my opinion on how I feel it ties in with flight training as i'm sure that dlos87 was trying to see how it may affect training matters.

Guys,

Boeing and Airbus have been pumping out planes at a fantastic rate for the last 20 years. Still no shortage yet of entry level jet FO's. Even the Captain jobs are limited to places a lot of people don't want to go.

The countries taking delivery of these aircraft are able to supply about 98% of their own crew these days so even the "prepared to move anywhere and do anything" crowd may still find themselves in Maun for their first job and not Asia in the RHS of one of these thousands of jet being delivered in the next 10 years.

There Will NEVER be a shortgage of low houred pilots.

The problem is that there are quiet many jobs, in Asia, ME etc. But they all ask for experienced pilots with thousands of hours on type or not on typ.
There starts the problem. How do we , the guys and girls straight from school get experience when we never get the oppertunity to get experience?
So how will the school explain that to us?

Yes there is a demand for pilots, but not for low houred ones.

I mean, how can you explain that the P2F is growing all over the world like crazy? With ****ty salaries, or even no salaries. FOR WORKING YOU SHOULD GET PROPERLY PAID according to you responsibilities and duties. And airlines know it and take advantage of it.

Boeing's predictions. It is not real. It is being sponsored by the schools in order to make more pilots as sweet cakes above all in Asia. So this kind of advertisement in this date September is pure marketing. :=

The market is still :mad: so ignore Boeing! Now is not the time to train to be a Pilot.

Boeing also had a similar report out 5 years ago just before I started training to be a Pilot. Guess what, 5 years later I'm the only person out of 14 in my class to get a job with an airline so far and it wasn't on a Boeing aircraft btw.

NEWYEAR; Your post above simply looks more like the work of a conspiracy theorist than reality. If Boeing make more planes to supply airline orders than they have done before then of course there will be a growing demand for pilots. And that's not even taking into the equation the new orders for Airbus aircraft. It doesn't mean that jobs will be easy to come by, as the rate of pilot training still exceeds the demand considerably, but it will make it statistically easier.

a320; That you don't fly a Boeing doesn't negate anything that Boeing have said. They aren't saying that there is only increased demand for pilots because of their new aircraft. The reality is that the Acia Pacific market will overtake Europe as the second largest in the world, and this is where the biggest demand for new pilots will exist. Will this guarantee a job for everyone who wants one? No, it won't - but it will make it easier than it is now to find one.

When the big 2 issue forecast for pilots they never mean new entry level pilots, they mean experienced pilots. This of course trickles down the supply system.

The problem is that more and more are coming out of fight schools and I am not sure how they will slot into the industry.

If I were advising my kids to go into flying it would be through MPL as it ties you to an airline but it also guarantees you 1500 hours as long as the airline does not go bust.

my 2 pence:ok:

There will be more pilots, they will also be drummed down and the role akin to a train driver - just look at current t&cs.

Equally, I await the 1 pilot airliner. next 20 years easily.

People told me there'd always be a need for a flight engineer, especially long haul...

I don't agree. Two appears to be the optimal number in my opinion. Technology replaced the flight engineer, but technology can't replace an incapacitated lone pilot. Look at the situation in that recent US flight where the captain had a heart attack, for instance. Imagine the problem if there wasn't another trained pilot on board.

If your argument is that technology will itself fly the plane under such circumstances, I believe we are considerably more than 20 years away from that. The technology may well exist at the moment, but the psychologically-prepared passengers don't. And even if they did, the argument for having even a single pilot under those circumstances would therefore be questionable. So in other words, we are more likely to move from two pilots to zero pilots than from two pilots to one.

Incidentally, pilot wages are miniscule by comparison to the cost of fuel on a given flight anyway. So airlines would save far more by improving their fuel efficiency than by cutting pilot numbers.