The imminent death of US aviation
 

Since the FAA brought in the rule for a SIC to have 1500 hours and an ATP in order to sit in the right seat of a Part 121 airliner we have seen many signs that this is going to destroy the aviation industry in this country.

Many regional airlines have gone out of business, along with many regional airports, due to the reduction of pilots and therefore the inability to crew airplanes, causing the airlines to drop flights and instead to increase load factors in the remaining flights. This also causes a lot of air rage due to the full flights, and the remaining pilots are working harder, flying more hours and getting less time off, increasing fatigue.

Wages have gone up but it is not helping.

The number of pilots in the US has declined about 40 percent over the last 5 years.

Airlines no longer require a degree as a condition of employment.

Nobody fails a check ride any more because there are too few pilots to plug into the schedule if that happens, instead the check rides are modular so you might fail a part of the ride but only have to repeat that bit to pass.

The majors used to recruit youngsters with about 500 hours and train them their way, so that they could become valuable PICs after some 5 to 8 years. Those youngsters do not exist any longer because practically nobody is learning to fly with the intent of becoming an airline pilot any longer. Getting 1500 hours in order to be allowed to knock on a door for a SIC job would take 8 to 12 years, and involve a lot of expense and effort for very little return. No wonder High School graduates, who were the seed corn for the industry, are not considering aviation as a career any longer.

As you go down the industry to Part 135 and Part 91, you see that the shortage of pilots bites harder. The majors might be able to buy enough pilots but that is at the expense of the smaller operators, who cannot do this without going out of business. There is no stability in the pilot ranks any longer.

Flight training is down in all fields. Flight schools are going out of business. Flying as a CFI to gain experience is a losing prospect due to no activity, lots of sitting around waiting for a student to come in. Except for the flight schools that train foreign pilots; they are going gangbusters.

I talk to the FAA about this (I need pilots and cannot get them. My preferred pool now is retired airline pilots and they are burnt out at over 65 and do not want to fly any longer so they are an endangered breed. The last two pilots I managed to start (Part 135) were over 65 [one was 74] and one was not even a US citizen because none are available with the qualifications I need). Turnover is incredible there is such demand in the airlines for pilots.

Some of the FAA people I talk to acknowledge the problem and accept that this rule is a major driver of the pilot shortage problem but some claim the demand for pilots is due to an uptick in business or low salaries being paid, both patently false statements. Another said that the rule was written by Congress and they had no say. Could not stop it. Funny, I did not see anything at the time that indicated the FAA was not in favor of the rule nor was there much opportunity to protest (and I did protest).

There is a big demand for pilots in Asia and the Middle East, many experienced pilots from the US are taking advantage of that. The USAF does not have any spare capacity and retirements from there are not filling the gap.

The shortage is biting not only here but also in Australia and Europe, so obviously there are other factors driving this. Adding the 1500 hour rule to an industry that is already in decline was bad judgment at the least.

Foreign pilots do not have to meet the 1500 hour/ATP rule so they have a competitive edge. When they get 1500 hours they will jump ship maybe and save our industry for us. I forecast that we will see a lot of foreign pilots flying our skies soon, if we are to survive.

If the FAA backs off today, and goes back to a more reasonable rule (500 hours and a Commercial Certificate?), it would take 8 years to recover, maybe longer. A once great industry, broken by bureaucracy and idiocy.

No pilot shortage at the U.S. major/legacy/cargo carriers. Still thousands of well qualified, experienced candidates with no blemishes and college degrees out there and carriers are still being very selective.

I agree that there is not currently a pilot shortage but rather a shortage of people willing to work for slave like wages.
Long term though Though this will have a big effect on new pilots entering the industry

Booghead, so what you're really saying is your business model of getting newbies to fly for food stamps isn't working anymore?

I'd say the industry is on the up and it will stabilize and the bottom feeders will eventually be kicked out

Well, like I told you last time you went on this tiresome rant, that's absolute fact. Congress passed a law that the FAA *would* enact that. End of story. If congress passes a law, the FAA has absolutely no say on whether to comply. They may try to advise congress prior to passage that it's a bad idea, but congress is free to disregard their opinion. The bottom line is, the FAA may express an opinion, but Congress makes the laws, and they may choose to disregard any and all input they receive. Once congress passes the law, it's completely out of the FAAs hands. They no longer have any choice. This is the way it works. Maybe it works differently back in Oz, I don't know. I don't have a very good understanding of Australian lawmaking and regulation. But I think the same is painfully obvious about you and US government. You really have no functional understanding of how the US government works, otherwise you wouldn't persist with this drivel about how the FAA should have "fought" this. When congress passes a law that the FAA *will* enact such and such regulation, the fight is over.



In case anyone is tempted to think I'm being unduly harsh on you, I'll quote you from another thread in which you were ranting about this.

Aside from your refusal to grasp, despite being told many times, that the decision to pass the law was by by Congress, not the FAA, I think it's useful to have an example of the level of rationality with which you approach this issue.

You still haven't explained why you think the 1500/ATP requirement for Part 121 would cause a 4000 hour pilot to choose a 121 carrier over your operation. A guy with 4000 multi turbine time is obviously well beyond 1500/ATP minimums, so it pretty much comes down to how does your terms of employment compare to other options.


I'll say again what I said in a past thread in which you were bemoaning how the 1500/ATP rule was destroying your business: I have your minimums. I have several times your minimums, in fact. Most of it Multi time. Most of it Alaska time. Plenty of it Turbine Time. It would be great to fly your Conquest around Alaska and be home most nights. I live about a half mile from your office, I could walk to work.

So, what's are you offering? Give me a complete run-down of the terms and conditions. Salary? Monthly Guarantee? Per flight hour? Schedule? Days off per month? How long am I on call for on a reserve day? 8 hr? 12 Hr/day? 24 hr/day? What's the company contribution to the 401K? Medical benefits? How much is the employee co-pay for the medical? What's covered? How much paid vacation per year?

Last time I asked this, you got awfully quiet and didn't answer the question. Not sure why; if you're looking to hire pilots, and you believe that your terms and conditions are competitive, there's no reason I can see to be shy about posting them.

So, how about it?????

@Boofhead, no, the 1500-hour rule is not the reason kids don't want to be professional pilots. You may be too young to remember 20 years ago, when the regionals and budget airlines weren't scooping up every kid with a license at less than minimum wage. Back then, most of the commercial flying in the U.S. was done by about seven major airlines, and they wouldn't consider an application without 3,000 hours unless it was space shuttle time. Or you knew someone high in management.

Look up "pay to fly". That was how desperate kids were to get to the majors. They flew for free or paid to fly, lived with their parents, had another job to pay bills. Most airline pilots came from the military, another tough way to get there, and the civilian route was brutal.

Insurance statistics put commercial piloting as one of the most dangerous jobs in the U.S. A lot of kids died hauling checks and night freight in barely-instrumented Cessnas at night, in weather, and working a day job to pay the bills.

Why did kids go through this? Because an airline pilot career was once fantastic. Even when it no longer was, kids still dreamed and believed, and threw themselves into the meat grinder to get to a myth. Then the internet happened. Kids read about regional pilots, past middle-age and raising kids their age, barely paying bills and living out of a suitcase in cheap hotels. Kids aren't any smarter than we were, but they are a lot better informed.

The industry changed, airlines cut pilot compensation and conditions below what can attract new pilots into the profession. Momentum kept feeding cheap pilots up the system and into your low-paying company, but there have been no pilots entering it for many years now. It is time to pay the piper.

Either raise your prices high enough to pay and attract pilots, or go out of business. That is what the major airlines and cargo-lines expected to happen, all of their low-cost competition will go out of business and they will make huge profits. They are already making record profits, the plan is working, they aren't about to change anything.

Eventually only the majors will be left, and the economy will be reeling from loss of so much aviation infrastructure. Then the remaining airlines will get pretty much any rule changes they ask for, life for pilots will continue to suck.

You are part of the problem, and don't seem to mind that you have helped destroy a profession. All you care is there aren't enough suckers still entering the system to keep your costs low.

There have been discussions by the FAA to change the 1500 rule so your statement that they have to live with it is patently untrue. Similarly the reduction in time for USAF pilots to fly for the airlines as well as the offer to allow serving USAF pilots to moonlight (not followed up yet). The rule can be changed and will be changed when enough pressure is brought to bear.

The airlines cannot find any 1500 hour pilots because they do not exist. It takes time for the previous candidates to get enough time to be eligible, at maybe 200 hours a year it would take 5 years for the previous airline SIC applicants to become qualified under the new rule therefore the airlines have had to draw from the older, higher time pilots, which are the ones my outfit uses. These pilots would normally not be considered for the airline job; would already be passed over and they would be normally making a living in the 135 world.

Now they have become fresh meat and are paid more than the 135 outfits can ever pay, plus they offer a career including jets, unions, travel and such (I have done that so I know the attraction) not available in the world I now work. I lose more pilots than I can train every year and cannot retain the experienced pilots even if the salaries were doubled.

I cannot use the low time pilots, I need experienced PICs that I can send out single pilot IFR to fly to small gravel runways that might be soft or icy and judgment is not something that can be trained. I don't know you (do I?) but not everyone can do what I need and keep the operation safe. If you infer that 135 operators are not interested in safety you are wrong. One accident will put a small outfit out of business. We will not fly if the conditions do not meet the ORM/training/experience/weather requirements and we take safety seriously. We walk the walk, and in fact I know how airlines (121) work and I believe we have higher standards. We need to.

If we doubled or even increased the pay too much we would go out of business. Our customers can do more now with email/Skype/Gotomeeting etc and do not need to visit as often as they might have done in the past so they will not charter us if we raise the costs too high. The economy is down and there is not as much work for us as there was so there is no money lying around to pay pilots. Reality.

Gas is way higher here than elsewhere in the US, runways are not maintained well and even to get a runway report after hours would cost thousands of dollars paid to the DOT for a service they are supposed to provide as part of their charter. Weather services are poor and the AWOS/Camera services provided by the Feds are down when you need them, sometimes down for months at a time. In many cases flying in Alaska is tough and only a careful and experienced pilot can do this job. If his interest in working for me is only for the money, I don't need him.

I have a lot of pilots apply, few have the hours, fewer have the right sort of hours. Just a few years ago I would not have even invited them in for an interview because their experience did not meet the requirements. Now I have no such luxury and I have an open door but very few make the cut. Unlike the majors I have no apprenticeship plan. My guys must be able to go out on day one and do the job safely. I know that some of the airlines will take a low time pilot and give him a Caravan or 207 to cut his teeth on; how is that working out?

Many only want a second part time job and seem to think they are doing me a favor by offering a few days a month (not necessarily the same days I need them) and if they only fly a couple of times a month how safe do you think they might be then? If they cannot do the job safely should I reward them by paying them more? Give them a bonus? Pension? Company car?

My point is that the rule requiring 1500 hours and an ATP is a bad rule that has unintended consequences. I know that the Regionals are hurting as we are. I can read and I listen. For example there are signing bonuses being offered to those who have the minimums or more that exceed what a 135 pilot would expect to get as a total salary for a year. How can I hold a pilot then? I have to use older pilots who have already completed an airline career and have reached retirement age. In the old days that guy would be 60+ and still have a few years left of energy and enthusiasm. Now he is 65+ and worn out (not all, but many). So if the rule was meant to improve the 121 world, it is costing us in the 135.

If you can read you must know the damage that the pilot shortage is causing. I know that flight training is down. I know this by personal observation and by talking to those in the training industry. Without new blood aviation is doomed. Doomed I say! This is the guts of the problem. If there were still pilots coming into the industry, if there was still the old level of flight training being conducted, if a youngster could see a chance of a career, there would be enough pilots to support aviation as we knew it. Without the new blood the numbers will continue to fall. Standards will continue to drop. More youngsters will turn their nose up at aviation. Drones will take over many segments of the business. Those in the industry now will work harder, get more money, but the industry will dry up and eventually go away. Maybe I am too pessimistic but that's the way I see it.

I just love the attitude of the major airline pilots. "I'm all right Jack". So long as I get mine to hell with the rest of you. Unfortunately that means to hell with the industry and to hell with the future.

No pilot shortage at Emirates. Emirates will park planes before accepting a pilot to be below their standards.

boofhead
There never was and will never be a pilot shortage. Every pilot fair I've been too in the last few years has a lot of people showing up. Long lines to talk to recruiters and recruiters being very selective on who they choose to interview and hire.

As for the checkride, you seem wrong as well. I know of people who didn't do well in the initial sim for new hire and were asked to leave. There are still sadistic examiners out there trying to pull all sorts of tricks to fail trainees. There are still instructors that can't teach, are not standardized and fail to adequately prepare their students to be successful for the checkride and IOE.

Finally, pilot pay, while finally coming up is still short of what it should be and has not risen to the levels of other quality skilled positions such as being an engineer or doctor. In fact, I know someone making $125K a year to sit in a room and fly drones. He has a stable schedule, sleeps in his own bed every night and is able to see his family.

I guess that the articles published by trade magazines and online reporting concerning the shortage are not in your reading list, nor do you actively fly as a CFI, where you will see very few applicants for the commercial certificate, much less the ATP compared to several years ago, and you will not have read the advertisements for pilots from the regional carriers offering huge salaries and bonuses, including offers of a 2 day guaranteed course to pass the ATP written, nor would you have been working or supervising at a Part 135 or 91 operation where there are few, if any, suitable applicants for the many vacant positions, nor talked to any of the small airport managers in the country who have had to shut the doors of their terminals because the number of flights -per - day has dropped below the level needed for them to pay the salaries and remain open, nor worked as a CFI and had only two students per week despite being at the school with your several buddies who also have had nothing to do.

Never mind, you are doing OK and able to take advantage of the fabulous offers of employment at huge salaries. If there are no pilots coming into the industry to replace you and the others who have moved up, what is it to you? If they shutter more airports, close more flight training schools and bankrupt more regional carriers, that is not your affair, right? Why should you care one whit so long as your salary is paid on time?

Or maybe you are right and I am just imagining it all. There are actually lots of qualified pilots out there, all experienced and great at CRM, ORM, can read a QRH and a GOM with the best of them, are able with a single bound to jump into any airplane out there and fly it well, safely and with great enthusiasm so long as the pay is fantastic so they will feel loved. I should judge applicants not on how well they will do the job I want them to do but on how much money they want and the more money the better they must be, right? After all money equals safety and besides, this industry is such low risk that nobody would be hurt if they screw it up.

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe my refusal to employ pilots who are "qualified" and merely suffering from money deprivation is in error. My judgment that they will not do the job I want them to do or are incapable of doing it because despite the paper qualifications they cannot perform it effectively or safely must be wrong too. It is amazing to me how the injection of money into one's bank account will increase ability and skill instantly.

Maybe my opinion that I will pay the going rate at first and increase the pay of a pilot who shows me that I can trust his skills and know he can do the job safely is not the way to do it. I should just pay more and that will magically overcome any reservations I might have.

Of course your opinion that only the majors are capable of making those judgements must also be true.

How about you point me to just one trade article detailing the problem is my imagination. Or show me the FAA statement refuting their previous info of the sudden and precipitous drop in pilot numbers and drop in pilot certificates issued. Or take a photo of your local flight school filled with active students all wanting to fly commercially.

The foreign airlines faced this problem years ago and have for a long time run their own flight schools, often in other countries where the weather is more suitable and private flying is encouraged (like here). Some of our own airlines are starting to do the same, but it takes years to get a youngster up to the point where he can sit in the right seat of an airliner even with their numbers. One of the Asian airlines I flew for gave me copilots on the 747 who had a grand total of 400 hours in an effort to keep up. We insist on 1500 hours just to apply and we think this is a good idea?

Ah, but you are right and I am wrong. I should read the same magazines and trade publications and watch the same TV you obviously do to assuage my concern for the once-great industry we had in this country and learn to accept second class. After all, it is not as if a lowering of standards will result in more accidents and fatalities, will it?

I hope my opinion of such short-sightedness and ignorance does not come on too strongly.

Look at this if you really want to know the facts: https://www.mba.aero/wp-content/uplo...ge_article.pdf

And this: The Coming U.S. Pilot Shortage Is Real | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week

And this: Impending Pilot Shortage, a Developing National Crisis | Military.com

And this: http://www.intervistas.com/downloads...te%20Paper.pdf

Need more? There is plenty of information if you wanted to become informed.

BUT! You guys have the answer! Why not share it with the experts? Simply pay MORE! An extra $10,000 a year is the equivalent of 10,000 hours of flight time! Want someone able to fly a twin turbo prop single pilot IFR even if he would not know a Kingair from a Kia? Pay him $20,000 a year more and his Student certificate will magically change to Commercial! Another $10,000 and he would have an ATP! Boy I wish I was as smart as you guys.


YES! The only reason for the pilot shortage in the Regionals and lower is a lack of salary! Ask an airline pilot! He knows! Who is that behind the curtain? The magical Wizard of ALPA!

Pardon the sarcasm, unless it was so subtle you did not notice it.

Oh I like that, thank you!

Made my day.

There are not pilots because the cost of training is astronomical.
When I was taking my lessons
The instructor was $18-20
C172 was $70 and C310 was $125 an hour. Now the instructor is $85 and a C172 $160. Right now if you get your CFI take you less than 2 years to get 1500 hrs. Is nothing.
Getting to the CFI the biggest problem. I know couple parents that can't send their kids to taking flying lessons. They don't have an extra $1000 a month for flying.

Well said Papi Chulo. The original poster has ulterior motives, speaks English as a second or third language and got used to having young aviators kiss his arse.

But just a few months ago, you were saying:

So which is it? The FAA is behind the law, or the FAA wants to get rid of it? You understand that you don't improve your credibility by making diametrically opposed statements on an issue, right?

That aside, what "discussions" and by who? Having your POI say he'd like to change the rule is pretty different than the top level in Washington discussing it that. I'm pretty skeptical that you're privy to the latter. Even if they'd like to change it, they can't. The rule is in place because it was mandated by Congress. For some reason you can't seem to wrap your head around that concept. I'm not sure why. It's a pretty simple concept. I'll explain it one more time (although I'm not fooling myself that you'll understand it this time either) The FAA is part of the Executive branch of the US. As such, they are required to "faithfully Execute" laws passed by Congress. This is in our Constitution. For the most part, the FAA has a lot of latitude to write regulations (different from "laws") as long as it falls within the laws passed by Congress. On occasion, Congress passes a law which says that the FAA *shall* make a regulation. This is one of those cases. Congress indeed passed a law explicitly requiring the FAA to put a regulation in place requiring an ATP for Part 121 airlines. This isn't something the FAA can disregard, nor can they go back later and say "Well, we don't like this regulation, so we're going to change it" The only way the FAA can change this is if Congress, passes *another* law, amending the first law to remove the mandate for ATPs for Airline pilots.

That's the way the system works. End of story. And every time you say "the FAA is going to do this" or "the FAA should have done this" or "It's the FAA's fault we have this" all you do is make yourself look foolish and underscore the fact that you don't understand how the government in the US works.

My company hires 70 pilots a month and has outpaced attrition for two years straight. We have grown by over 600 pilots in two years, and we are not a major airline. The pilot shortage hasn't really hit yet. There's lots of movement right now and pilots can pretty much pick the job they want. And to say that nobody fails training anymore is inaccurate.

Boofhead,

I don't know how long you've been in Alaska, do you recall the 1990's ? Back then Air taxis had all the pilots they wanted and more. As an example, back in that era Yute Air (Yes, the same Yute Air which recently went out of business ... again.) required applicants to go through a training program. They called it "Alaska Transition Training" or some such nonsense. It cost the applicant something like $2800 (or was it $3800 ? ) cash up front. Successful completion of the training didn't get you a job. No, it got you in the "Hiring pool". The "hiring pool", for a job flying single engine Cessnas.

Guess what? those days are over. Things are different now in the pilot market, and if you want to hire pilots, you have to be competitive in the market. All the nostalgia about how great things used to be when pilots would pay you isn't going to make pilots take a job which pays less than other jobs.




Yeah, about what I expected, crickets. And we all know why.

Look, you can yap on all you want about how you can't make a pilot better by paying more, but you're not that stupid. You understand as well as everyone else that if you want to attract well qualified, experienced applicants, the terms and conditions you are offering have to be attractive to the applicants, compared to their other employment options. That's market economics.

Why would an experienced pilot go to work being on call 24 hours a day, with few or no scheduled days off per month, pay which is substantially lower than other pilot positions and few benefits, when he could have better pay, a better schedule, more time off and better benefits elsewhere?

Look, you can jump up and down all you want and should that your terms and conditions are "reasonable" but if pilots aren't applying, then they're not reasonable. Not in today's Job Market.


"reasonable" doesn't mean "no more than what I want to pay".

"Reasonable" means what it takes to get pilots to go to work for you, given their other options.

It's that simple.

There is no pilot shortage in Australia.

I'm not sure which source you are using but it is patently incorrect.

Vacant pilot positions at all levels in the Australian industry from GA through to Airlines are oversubscribed with many qualified yet disappointed, unsuccessful applicants.

As for the States (where I once worked)...I agree with previous posts. There is a shortage of wannabe monkeys willing to work for the peanuts offered by the Part 91 and 135 worlds.

The only real pilot shortage is for type-rated, direct entry Captains willing to work in the fast growing developing world (i.e. Asia...especially China)

I learned to fly in the mid-90's. I went to a 4 year college and then instructed afterward. It took me a year of instructing to get the 1100 hours that regionals were requiring at the time. Yes, the hiring minimums were 1100tt/100me for most all of the regionals in the late 90's. And it only took me a year of instructing to build that amount of time. So you saying that it takes 3 or 4 years of instructing is just not true.

The real reason pilot starts are down was touched on just a few posts ago. It is the extremely high cost of training. I believe it was shortly after 9/11 happened that training costs skyrocketed. I don't know if it was due to insurance requirements or just greedy flight schools. I think a little of both. But it has nothing at all to do with the ATP requirement at 121 carriers. People just can't afford to drop the kind of money that it takes to get your CFI's with the end result being a job that doesn't pay enough to pay back those student loans.

This is the power of the internet at work. People are just more informed today than they were back in the 80's and 90's.

I just reread your original post and came across this, Getting 1500 hours in order to be allowed to knock on a door for a SIC job would take 8 to 12 years, . Why would it take 8-12 years? That is only flying 125-187 hours per year. Who does that that is trying to get to an airline? NO ONE!!!

A degree is pointless; and doesn't even enter into the hiring factor in the rest of the world (except maybe Turkish Airlines for the upgrade)...

Gotta degree in Peruvian Poetry? Heh, United or Delta will snap you up for your obvious inate flying ability:p:}:rolleyes:

A degree is NOT pointless. It's only pointless if you're trying to justify not having one. No one with a degree regrets getting one or makes excuses. Only those without make excuses. Euros make ridiculous claims that the JAA is the equivalent. Nonsense. A degree teaches one time managment, hustle and life skills. Stop trying to justify your lack of qualifications. This is why pilots are not paid well in many places. Most pilots are American. Nearly all American pilots have degrees. Consider a degree a prerequisite and not an unnecessary step in your career.

I was in Alaska in the 90's and early 2000's. You needed 1500 plus back then to fly there. This is as much self preservation as it is an insurance requirement. I worked on fishing boats as I didn't have 1500 hours. This was during the summers when I was in college and shortly after graduating. I paid for college and flight training with the money I earned. I'm now a 737 Captain and have been since my late 20's. I earned my way and didn't think I was entitled to anything. I've flown with dozens of low time euros that did P2F. Half of these guys were spoiled, entitled cry babies that didn't have realistic expectations and felt they were owed something. This attitude does not translate well into adulthood and especially into a cockpit. I prefer the American system...

Thanks for your comments. I have been entertained.

It was funny to read that pilots think they are as good and as well-trained and educated as Doctors and engineers although most have not been to professional training and any degree was acceptable, even in animal husbandry or cake icing. Because of their exceptional qualifications they should be paid the same as a surgeon. But at the same time a degree is not needed, it is a waste of effort. And of course the only reason pilots don't want to work is because they don't get paid enough. Any small company would be stupid not to pay them as much as a professional engineer even though they cannot pass that cost on to the customers and would go out of business. By the way those pilots all have a professional certificate which makes them qualified beyond belief. It is incomprehensible why many aviation companies will not give them a job, along with the big dollars, even though most have never actually carried a passenger for hire or flown to a small grass airport or flown out of their own State and avoid actually going into cloud even if they have an instrument rating. But watch them fly the simulator! If only the aviation company would give them the training, including airplane training that could cost tens of thousands of dollars, line training and ground instruction/simulator etc, more thousands of dollars, they will then consider working for that company if they are paid enough, and even then they will decide if they really want to do that job after trying it out, because, you know, there are a lot more jobs out there and they really want to fly for the majors so maybe they can give up 6 months to see if it fits?

Wonder why they are not successful?

And why would it take years to get the 1500 hour requirement? Compare the olden days, when most airlines would take a pilot with around 500 hours and actually prefer that to a high-time pilot because then they could train her the way they wanted her to fly and after a suitable period would move her to the left seat as a known commodity and someone who has company loyalty. It worked, you must admit. I had to fight for every job I got under that system and it sorts out the wheat and the chaff pretty quick. Of course it is not fair, but until recently, the idea that the world owed you a living was not a concept realistic people believed.

Now it is easier for a pilot to get a job. The wheel has turned, big time. Pilots who would never have a shot under the old system are guaranteed a career. No need any longer for a degree (that was a recent change, btw). The experience requirements are scaled down to a requirement to be breathing. Yet some still cannot get a job? Maybe it is the attitude? A company has to invest big time in a pilot and needs to know that they will get a return. Someone who wants big bucks, lots of time off, short working days, guaranteed vacations, retirement plans, medical coverage and the like is not a good choice for most small operators because, you might not be aware of this, but they have to make enough money to pay their bills.

When I am talking to a wannabee I want to know what drives him/her. If it is money, or an easy life, or time off, or vacations, the door is right there. If it is an opportunity to learn real flying, get personal satisfaction for a job well done, provide the community with the benefits of their experience and skill, is not afraid to fly at night or in cloud, and looks forward to learning more about an industry they are passionate about, we can talk more. The first guy will let the company, the customers and himself down. The second might not be all that the company wants, might disappoint in some areas, but is by far the preferred candidate.

That is partly why am staggered at the responses I read about here. How can so-called professionals not be concerned for the industry itself? Are you all so self-centered that it is really only about the money? Very disappointing.

And yes, it would take years for the youngster I am talking about to get that airline job. Yes, he will need more than 1500 hours just as the under the old rules he needed more than 250 hours. If he does not need the degree any longer he can shave 4 years off the requirement but how does he get 1500 hours after he gets his CPL/IR? And what use is flight instruction as a CFI at a pilot mill? He knows nothing about aviation but he spends 1200 hours teaching it to other beginners? That is supposed to impress an employer? How does he get multi time? Instrument time? Turbine time? What companies are there that will give him that? He might start out as an intern, why not? Other professional industries expect that. Doctors do that when they start. Pilots have always done that, why does a wannabee who has a CPL and nothing else expect otherwise? Where does it say he is owed?

I figure a pilot who scrambles for any job, will do anything to get a start, will probably fly a couple of hundred hours a year, maybe less than that at first. So, yes, it will take a long time, years of time during which he will not make enough to put gas in his car, if he has a car. But now we are in the entitlement era. Who pays for that? The aviation company? The taxpayer?

Here's a hint: The military needs pilots. They will give you good training on great equipment and will let you work for a degree as well, and pay you too! What a deal!

So if you have not done what you needed to do to get a job that pays you what you want, don't bother crying to me.

And of course the 1500 hour rule can be changed. Did I not just read that the new President and Congress cancelled the ACA? Why did they do that? On a whim?

What was it supposed to do anyway? It had no bearing on the Colgan accident, in fact has made conditions worse. Both those pilots had 1500 hours and an ATP. They were maybe not trained correctly and were tired. To date the training has still not been provided and pilots are working harder than ever and are more tired. Because of the shortage.

But I forgot, you guys cannot read and are not aware of the shortage. If only the evil companies paid more the shortage would go away. Never mind that then the pay would go down again. That this is not happening is proof that there is a genuine shortage and if the industry is to survive we all should be doing what we can encourage more youngsters to follow in our footsteps and fly. If there is not a good base of private pilots, guys and girls who fly for the love of flight, the entire edifice will collapse. You might be sitting at the top, but then your fall will be greater as even the big companies go bankrupt. The skies will be filled with drones. But, hey, you can get 125K to drive them from your bedroom so it is not all bad, right?

I don't see a ton of flight schools making a lot of money. Margins are tight these days.

Besides insurance and general inflation, 100LL prices have skyrocketed. Today a student in a 172 might burn $50/hr just in gas. Back in the 90s, you can fly a nice twin for like $45/hr wet (all inclusive) and the school can still make money. It's a different world now.

My experience preceded most of those here. After leaving the armed forces(rotary wing, 771 hours-tt), I investigated going the pro route. This was in the early 80s. Let me tell you, back then trying to get into a 121 seat was murder compared to the past 8-10 years. None of the majors would even let you in the door unless you had +1000 in Air Farce, and preferably loadstar, C130, C141, C5 type. I had a lowly rotary wing ticket, which I then got transitioned to fixed wing in the front seat of a Citabria. So, I got my comm finally, and believe it or not - I thought that towing banners for peanuts up and down the coast of SoCal would prepare me for a pro pilot career. Hah!! What a noob I was. No one, and I mean not one person in a major would even let me in the door. I had tailwheel, off-airport, mountain, and some ME time, but it was worthless.

Here's the deal, and it applies to a lot of careers, but aviation careers are even more relevant. The open market will determine price and availability. A prev poster mentioned that today's kids are far more informed about the inside scoop, and so reluctant to do the work needed to move up. I think this is a key indicator. There was that aura back in the 80s, that with the right skills, and the right degree(EE from UCLA), someone could work their way to the FE seat, or the right seat at PSA, or one of the other feeder carriers, and maybe someday work up to a 7x7 at United or AA. What - a - bunch - of - BS. Now, kids know that most of the jobs are going to pay spit. And, you have to live out of a suitcase. And, worst of all, the probability of getting that big right seat job in the majors is very, very small. You have to wait for a lot of people to die, retire, and it's like credit. You can have it if you already have it, but if you need it you have to already have it.

Anyway, I had a good time, although I almost ran into a Piper one day while I was oogling some babes down in Torrey Pines. Literally, I could read the "DC" logo on his headset we got that close. So I went on to a profession in nuclear energy. It was a good time too, and paid well. But - I caution anyone that is looking for pro pilot job that no matter if it's in AK, or not - you will be rejected many times before you find a cheap seat to hold down while you burn a lot of fuel, and if you ever do make it up to the majors, you will have left a nice trail of tears along the way.

When I needed flight time I joined the CAP. A very capable organization. I still fly for them. However gas did not cost $5 or more, only $1. Flight time for the airplane (172) was $35 an hour. Very doable. Now it is beyond ridiculous and I don't see how anyone can afford it, especially at the rates the flight schools charge.

Boofhead,

I take it you are a Part 135 operator--the flight time mins there haven't changed since the the 1970s, what is the problem?

Sounds like your business has outlived (or is outliving) its usefulness. Hardly something to blame on any kind of a pilot shortage.

If you want to work for a major airline you absolutely need a degree. The regionals may not, but they never really have traditionally, so I don't know why you keep repeating it.

I'm also not sure what your point is. I've worked for $18k per year and commuted halfway across the country, spending 7 days a month in my own bed on poverty level wages. I'll tell you what, the love of flying for the sake of flying fades relatively quickly. However, I did it with a smile because they gave me shot and it was a means toward the brass ring. However, I don't think any professional pilot should be packing ravioli in their bag because they can't afford a meal in a hotel restaurant.

Oh and before that, I was a CFI making even less flying in plenty of IMC.

I'm proud to have gutted it out, but it's not an entitlement mentality to want those who come behind you to not have to earn food stamp level wages. The cost of a degree and flight training today is also much higher than it was even 10 years ago. A $100,000 dollar investment requires a return, just as any other professional job field.

These things cycle like anything else, and until recently there was a massive glut of pilots. You conveniently leave out the fact that just 7 years ago, after years of furloughs at all levels, 1,000 hours wouldn't get you hired at any regional. It took movement at the majors and the economy to create openings that were extremely competitive.

Your disdain for CFI's and lack of knowledge in the area is also telling. I know current CFI's who are getting their doors beat down, and passing interviews before they even hit 1500 hours. If they have a degree its only 1000 hours.

Spending a year to a year and a half as a CFI helps one gain critical PIC skills, and builds a well rounded pilot. Full stop.

I understand there is pressure on smaller operators, and I sympathize with that. However if your business model relies on abusing some new pilot then maybe that segment of the industry is ripe for some change.

It's also funny how you mock a degree, yet the vast majority of guys and gals I fly with have degrees in Professional Aeronautics, engineering of some sort, or business administration. The world is evolving and the major airlines today will tell you they are hiring Captains, not just someone who can fly an airplane.

I love flying and what I do, but without a career path to a top tier job, I would go do something else and fly for fun.

I don't understand you. What hasn't changed? If you want a job flying a C207 you need 500 hours. If you want to fly floats you need float time. If you want to fly multi you need a multi rating. So what?

Actually, no, you did not read that. What you read was that The House of Representatives (Only one part or our legislative branch) passed a bill which wold rescind it if the bill were also passed by the Senate (which it hasn't) The Senate is considering a different bill that has different provisions regarding the amendment or repeal of the ACA. Various factions have been trying to repeal the ACA for almost the entire 7 years it's been in effect. So far it hasn't happened. Perhaps it will this time.

To your point, Neither I nor anyone else has ever said that Congress couldn't change the ATP requirement. What I have said is that the FAA can't do it, that it requires action from Congress.

The flight time requirements in Part 135 haven't changed, why all the hate on a Part 121 rule?

]

He'd rather blame something unrelated than admit that he's just not offering competitive pay and work conditions in today's pilot market.


It's that simple.

Who's justifying anything here? In my flying career (nearly 30 years) I've known very very few pilots with degrees... Then again I've been flying all over the world rather than the USA!

Learning to fly young also teaches time management, hustle and life skills:rolleyes: Really, why would you waste 3 or 4 years in university when you could be flying, gaining experience and working your way up a seniority list?

BOOFHEAD
You do seem to be avoiding the fact that your location inevitably has an impact resulting in a relatively small pool of pilots willing to apply. Having worked occasionally in Alaska it became obvious to me fairly quickly that most of those pilots who were content to live and work there indefinitely had been born and bred there. It's an extremely uncomfortable environment, difficult, expensive and a very long and expensive way from the lower 48 where family and friends are located. Taking all this into account you can hardly be surprised that pilots with many options are not beating a path to your door. Inevitably you're going to have to attract local pilots and that means competing with other operators when it comes to employment packages and ticketing prices. I think this has very little to do with the 1500 hr rule and a lot to do with what people in the outlying communities are prepared to pay for an air service, maybe they should be encouraged to campaign for more government subsidies.

I make more money than you and have more time off.

You do seem to be avoiding the fact that your location inevitably has an impact resulting in a relatively small pool of pilots willing to apply. Having worked occasionally in Alaska it became obvious to me fairly quickly that most of those pilots who were content to live and work there indefinitely had been born and bred there. It's an extremely uncomfortable environment, difficult, expensive and a very long and expensive way from the lower 48 where family and friends are located. Taking all this into account you can hardly be surprised that pilots with many options are not beating a path to your door. Inevitably you're going to have to attract local pilots and that means competing with other operators when it comes to employment packages and ticketing prices. I think this has very little to do with the 1500 hr rule and a lot to do with what people in the outlying communities are prepared to pay for an air service, maybe they should be encouraged to campaign for more government subsidies.[/quote]

I guess I am too close. I try to illustrate what I see is the real problem by personal anecdotes. I agree that I need to compete for the available pilots and I agree that an Alaskan pilot has a far better chance of working here because knowing how to fly here is the most important indication of whether the pilot will be safe. So I talk about what I know.

What really drives me in this matter is the damage being done to the US aviation industry. By cutting the supply of pilots through this stupid and unnecessary 1500 hour rule it has, most importantly, caused a shortage in the newbie ranks. Hardly anyone sees an airline pilot career as being viable any longer. New pilot starts are way down, flight schools are closing, the number of pilots as shown by FAA records are way down.

Without a strong base, the entire edifice of aviation as it is practiced in the US will collapse. If the public cannot afford to fly, they will find alternatives. telephone/computer/Skype and such already reduces the need to travel, and drones can do a lot of what airplanes flown by real pilots used to do.

If the salaries and costs go up because of a pilot shortage many companies will go out of business. Look at what the increased minimum wage is doing to the fast food and restaurant business. Even MacDonalds is starting to use robots. Have you ever been to Japan and seen the things you can buy from vending machines? No employees in sight.

As the industry accommodates to the shortage it will shrink and there will be fewer job opportunities as a result. Fewer pilots and therefore fewer jobs will be the new norm.

When the industry becomes smaller, there will be fewer jobs at the top, too. Those who are doing well right now, being paid more than they ever thought they would, could find themselves out on the street and wondering how it all went so badly wrong.

Jobs have always been cyclic. We should be more aware than most that what goes up must come down.

Well, again, I don't know when you arrived on the scene in US aviation, but I'd speculate that it was sometime well after the 1990's were past. If you had been here, you would know that the minimums to get hired at a regional/commuter were 1200 hours and 200 multi time. Many regional airlines had higher minimums, but you were pretty much wasting your time applying to any scheduled operator without 1200/200. At the time, it was pretty much an article of faith that you had to instruct, tow banners, haul skydivers, etc for a while before you had the minimum time to get an interview at an airline. I'm not sure how or why that became the magic number, but it did. That's only 300 hours less than the current regulatory 1500 minimum. That's not much difference, yet, the world still turned, airplanes flew new hire classes were filled, and people became pilots and got jobs. The 1200/200 persisted into the early 2000's before it started to fall.

The point here is that 1500 hours isn't a significantly higher barrier than 1200/200, yet the 1200/200 requirement didn't prevent people from becoming pilots. If there's a shortage of pilots now, it wasn't caused by the 1500 rules, because there were plenty of pilots back when the realistic minimum experience for an airline job was 1200 hours. It's just silly to claim that the need for 300 more hours is having a profound effect on whether people enter aviation.

Perception has a lot to do with it. A young person out of school choosing a career could see a way to get enough time to be acceptable to an airline, could maybe get the CFI job, a stint flying pipelines, maybe working with a small 135 company for a while, then finally knocking on the door of the dream job with a regional airline.

Now they arbitrarily added over 1000 hours to the dross part. How long to get that extra? Years and years. Meanwhile wanting to pay off the huge debt. No guarantee of a job either, what have those youngsters been doing? Judging by the training statistics, they have not been choosing flying as a career.

Whatever the reason, and I still say that the rule change was a major one, regional carriers cannot find pilots. Look at their ads, what they are offering for the small supply available now.

How you can deny the obvious facts I don't know. What will it take before the industry wakes up?