Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

Why do we not require 1500 hours for a RHS job ?

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

Why do we not require 1500 hours for a RHS job ?

Old 2nd Nov 2014, 11:27
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
It must be the time factor also.

An approved course produces a cadet in around 18 months - it's controlled and pilot recruitment can be planned.

The non-approved self improved route is uncontrolled, unplanned and unreliable as a means of vetting and employing pilots.

The market has changed and many of the traditional employment routes are no longer available - not for the number of pilots required.
FlyingOfficerKite is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 11:51
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: All over
Posts: 87
FR-A, you're not gonna be buzzing around the patch to get 1500 hours. If you do, you're probably gonna have pretty tough time passing the interview or initial training.

During those 1500 hours, you are given a chance to season, to make mistakes and scare yourself - and learn from them (called experience).

I landed my first regional airline job with over 1500 hours total time and it was to a turboprop. But prior to that, I flew skydivers, then air tours, then boxes in a larger single engine and then piston twin in all kinds of crappy weather... and then I landed in the right seat of a regional airliner.

At bare CPL, one is just dangerous enough because you know something, but you don't even realize how far behind the power curve you are because you have no depth and no real world knowledge.

Imagine your line training captain on your first flight having a stroke or heart attack or otherwise gets incapacitated... and you have 160 pax in the back, 4 cabin crew, the weather is hovering at minimums, carrying a typical minimum fuel, you have to make a decision and they're all looking at you...

... and here you are, brand new CPL with a fresh type rating, never really flew in crappy weather outside the simulator, never dealt with ATC at this level.. really, at 200 hours, what do you really know?

My point is... give new pilot time to season. You'll be doing them as well as their passengers a favor.
BeCareful is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 14:03
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 843
Originally Posted by BeCareful
Imagine your line training captain on your first flight having a stroke or heart attack or otherwise gets incapacitated... and you have 160 pax in the back, 4 cabin crew, the weather is hovering at minimums, carrying a typical minimum fuel, you have to make a decision and they're all looking at you...

... and here you are, brand new CPL with a fresh type rating, never really flew in crappy weather outside the simulator, never dealt with ATC at this level.. really, at 200 hours, what do you really know?
Most normal airlines tend to have safety pilots for FOs on their first line training - at least first couple of sectors. I also believe most people who are fresh from type rating have more trouble dealing with normal line operations (which is purpose of line training) than abnormals / emergencies, which they've practiced in simulator. If you have pilot incapacitation, most of the regular burdon for a new pilot (dealing with paperwork, different NADPs for different airports, complicated SIDs/STARs, etc. etc.) is not a concern anymore. Almost anywhere in Europe you'll get vectors to the nearest airport with a hospital close by and ambulance would be standing by...

Originally Posted by parabellum
Ideally you won't be VFR all the time. You will be a qualified CPL/IR and you will fly charter around Europe, some days you will fly property developers, some days you will fly jockeys and trainers and other you will fly nice people to their holiday villa in Menorca, some will be IFR and some will be VFR. All of it you will be the pilot in command and will have to make decisions, some operational some weather and possibly a few commercial. By the time you have done that for three years you have become a well rounded pilot ready to advance to multi crew turbo props and jets.
I don't know in which Europe do you live, but there are much more jet jobs than GA jobs (the one that actually pay you enough to be able to afford food) for a typical 200h CPL/ME/IR holder.
FlyingStone is online now  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 14:15
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: On SBY next to my phone
Posts: 287
The problem nowadays is that after a decade of political green power movement insanity, very few GA opportunities remains. Air taxi is pretty much dead since the costs have gone through the roof.

Closure of minor airfields, imposing tax on avgas, making licensing, handling permissions, buraeucracy in generally has killed the whole GA-scene in Europe. The regional operators are now under the wings of larger carriers and even middle eastern owners, the good ole days when "hangar-Joe" let you fly for food is long gone.

Together with an explosion in new license holders selling their mothers for 10hrs of SEP the scenarios wished for in this thread are not possible anymore, without going to Africa or buying hours in the USA. I'm not very fond of the idea where fresh CPL-holders starts to instruct right after obtaining a license.

Ideally pilots would start off in the military, fly 10-15 different types of aircraft, get a phd in aeronatical engineering, enroll in the space-program and do some laps around earth outside the atmosphere, earn a Nobel prize and then goto the RHS of a turbo prop in the sahara and climb the MTOW-ladder once every 5000hrs and retire in a flag carrier but the reality doesn't allow this.

Imagine your line training captain on your first flight having a stroke or heart attack or otherwise gets incapacitated... and you have 160 pax in the back, 4 cabin crew, the weather is hovering at minimums, carrying a typical minimum fuel, you have to make a decision and they're all looking at you...
This is why you have a safety pilot for several weeks on the jump seat and you practice incapacitations dozens of times and you keep a good eye on the wx on the enroute alternates.

... and here you are, brand new CPL with a fresh type rating, never really flew in crappy weather outside the simulator, never dealt with ATC at this level.. really, at 200 hours, what do you really know?
You never flew in severe icing, 35kt gusty Xwinds or 200m of visibility in the C150 either. And if you did you should definately not be flying again

I disagree with that two years of farting around in the C150 would make a world of a difference when it comes to the quality of candidates.

Training and proper selection is much more important in my opinion.
TypeIV is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 17:02
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,967
This is why you have a safety pilot for several weeks on the jump seat and you practice incapacitations dozens of times and you keep a good eye on the wx on the enroute alternates
The first few days are usually enough for correctly trained cadets, and they are only released to fly without safety after a incapacitation flight, a flight where the instructor and the safety play dead after gear up and the rest of the flight is done single hand by the cadet.

As said above, the usual MPL cadet probably has less of a problem with any non normal than with flying a normal uneventful line sector. He did nothing else for the last 200 hours in the simulator, simulating all the usual non normals and all the non normal situations that actually happened on the line up to proficiency.

Unlike the US airlines in europe have a lot of experience with low hour cadets. That is all they had for the last 60 or 70 years. Airline run cadet schemes were the norm, not the exception. At least for the legacy carriers.
Denti is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 17:53
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: The outer reaches
Posts: 36
As said above, the usual MPL cadet probably has less of a problem with any non normal than with flying a normal uneventful line sector. He did nothing else for the last 200 hours in the simulator, simulating all the usual non normals and all the non normal situations that actually happened on the line up to proficiency.
In a way that is true. Whilst hopefully well versed in the theory and limited practice of 'Threat and Error Management' they have never really had the opportunity to experience boredom in the flight deck and complacency from imaginative rostering practices.

That said my limited solo hours during the CPL/IR were of equally limited use. Not too boring and not too exciting and still too fresh to become complacent in my new surroundings. That happened around the 1000-1500 hour mark. Thought I knew sh1t. Turned out I didn't know as much as I thought. Lesson learnt.

Would 1500 hours work in Europe? Well if you want to commute (we have no interline deadheading policies as exist in the US, or incredibly few as to have the same effect) and use 'crash pads' and wait on tables for a second job then ok, bring it in. The regionals would love to start a 'B' pay scale I have no doubt at all. At the end of the day either route will still lead line Captains to assume their responsibilities to develop the First Officers under their charge. Sadly some skippers don't see that as a competency they should exhibit and demonstrate and instead bemoan training departments et al. Captains abound, but good Captains (leaders) do exist. Faith is still alive and well.

Now when does the F1 in Austin start??
Stage5 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 18:42
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,510
and they are only released to fly without safety after a incapacitation flight, a flight where the instructor and the safety play dead after gear up and the rest of the flight is done single hand by the cadet.

What a wonderful world. Dream on baby. If the XAA's imposed such an edict then bravo, but that is not the case. Now try a real scenario as imposed by some airlines. CAT 3 approach is planned & briefed. During approach the captain goes awol. F/O make G/A as per SOPs' and diverts as solo crew. Every where is socked in and not a lot of fuel due to minimum fuel + a teaspoonful policy. Divert to alternate that is CAT 1 + a bit. Interesting scenario, but was it tested? I doubt it. Winter's coming.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 19:29
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,083
I am from one of the few countries that still has a fully state sponsored airline pilot program (I am disregarding the military for the sake of argument). For long I thought it was insanity, considering the saturated market and waste of tax payers' money. Now I have changed my mind. Speaking to colleagues from all corners of Europe that weren't so fortunate and now sit with up to 200 000 worth of bank loan, I see how rotten this business is from airline level down to flight schools. In the UK the big schools (Oxford, CTC) have oligopoly and the modular route is dead. All over Europe schools are preaching about the massive growth that's awaiting us and thousands of pilots are needed. There are local shortages, but never a shortage of cadets. Poor people's dream is being exploited by banks, airlines, flight schools. If they're lucky to find a job after finishing training, declining T&C makes it ever more difficult to pay back. In the mean time they will struggle to settle down, buy a house, build a family etc.

With inflated training costs it's become a rich man's hobby. Every profession goes at a price, the equilibrium where people say "enough, i am not paying this money for the prospect of earning peanuts" is not reached yet. And hardly will it change in this deregulated aviation business? Too many kids with dreams. That's where I am coming back to my new opinion. I think it's criminal (read: morally wrong) to trick people into a dream world, which turns into a nightmare. A free-market proponent will likely disagree with me here. But with people having limited rationality I believe a regulated training market is the best option and what should be pushed for on a political level. This would hopefully result in the best candidates for the job, with a healthy infusion of cadets into the market and stop devaluation of experienced pilots already out there.
172_driver is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 21:11
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 63
Posts: 0
What exactly is the value of 1,500 hours? It is only a number. The 1,500 hour limitation applied in the US was a token and totally pointless gesture dreamt up by a muppet in the FAA following the Colgan crash. It was not balls on the part of ALPA. And the accident itself had absolutely nothing to do with a lack of experience. Training was one of the factors but the mostly likely reason was tiredness directly resulting from the dreadful rest conditions this crew was forced to endure because their pay was so dreadful.

To improve safety, you have to have properly trained and motivated crews with appropriate experience who are carefully selected and then properly paid. And experience is not a number. And what I mean by this is that an MPL student might have have a better experience level at 250 hours than someone who has spent 1,500 hours beating a path around a circuit in a Cessna 150. Speaking for myself, I'm perfectly happy flying with an F/O fresh out of flying school. They fly well, are technically good and even when things go badly, they come up to the mark.

The biggest threats we have are the 'dreamers' who will fly for nothing, the public who never ask why flying is so cheap and the regulators who never ask about an airline's Ts & Cs. But to be reasonable, why should the greedy half witted civil servants in EarseA who know nothing about aviation give a damn? As long as they get their pensions then all is well.
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 21:44
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,510
The biggest threats we have are the public who never ask why flying is so cheap and the regulators who never ask about an airline's Ts & Cs. But to be reasonable, why should the greedy half witted civil servants in EarseA who know nothing about aviation give a damn? As long as they get their pensions then all is well.

The travelling public have blind faith. They've been told for years that flying is the safest method of transport. They've been told for years that the various XAA's have only their interest & safety at heart. They have been seduced by all that. Now it is even cheaper than ever; the price of oil is % times more expensive than not so long ago; the landing fees & en-route charges are higher; inflation has been in effect for years and yet ticket prices are lower. Clothes are cheaper because they are made in China; food is cheaper. Flying is cheaper, but its costs are at EU prices. How is that possible? They never ask but climb on board with blind faith. It's time they asked the question.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2014, 23:41
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: FL370
Age: 33
Posts: 231
I fly for a US regional. Honestly, the 1,500 hour rule has done nothing but create an artificial shortage. The quality of the guys we have coming through is no better than it was when 250 hours was the minimum requirement; in many cases it's worse. We have a lot of older new hires at my airline who have come looking to start a second career in their late 40s. They have spent years flying around in their own single engine or multi engine piston aircraft, picking up awful habits and learning nothing new or of merit. Some of what I have seen in the sim is down right terrifying. Many argue with instructors over technique, trying to apply various practices used on single engine props to a 38 tonne jet. I have seen this first hand several times.

Would I like to see a 1,500 hour requirement introduced in Europe? Yes! But only because of my own selfish desire to return to the UK to fly. I find the reliance on cadets in Britain most disheartening. I've been trying to get home for 5 years now. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Virgin follow BA's lead and continue to take a variety of backgrounds, and not just cadets.
EMB-145LR is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 00:04
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West Coast Canada
Posts: 3,537
Originally Posted by microkid View Post

It has been found that flight hours alone can be of limited value,
Possibly true but one fact can't be changed. You can't simulate or train the experience you gain in the 1500 hours, experience that by definition a 250 hr wannabe won't have.....
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 03:06
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: -
Posts: 1,176
How would the 1500 hours work in Europe? Where and how could we reach this magic number in terms of flying hours?
And once again, where in Europe? Not for free, please...
RedBullGaveMeWings is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 03:35
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 70
Posts: 833
HAMBLE...BEA/BOAC
The corporations had totally different agendas with cadets in the 70s.
BEA put them straight into the RHS with a mentality that we were system operators...the accident rate was appalling and there was a recommendation in the Lane report (Papa India) re the advisability of putting a 225 hour cadet into a modern jet airliner.
BOAC required the Hamsters to take a Nav ticket...they were then qualified as a third pilot with "restrictions". Eventually (3-4 years?) they became P2 with the aircraft in part 1.
The part 1 requirement was made in the 60s after BOAC realized that accidents could have been prevented if the first officers had been "more forceful" and by having a mini command course this would help change the mentality - which it did.
The accident rates speaks for the success or otherwise of the different approaches although there were several other factors; as always one has to look at the management and the atmosphere created by them.
blind pew is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 09:11
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,742
Guys, time to accept reality for what it is. As European pilots we have been forced to fly all over the world due to our airlines having an addiction to an ever growing supply of young, unadulterated (often very cheap) labour willing to take on €150,000 debt, at the expense of hiring experienced pilots. Through this frustration we are bringing ideas to the table that incorporate the best of what we’ve seen outside Europe. However, there’s only so much that can ever be applied over here.

A 1,500 minimum requirement is not the answer. As alluded to above, we don’t have much GA due to horrendous fuel costs and highly bureaucratic “regulators” who are from the same family as Nigerian email scamsters. You can also argue that we don’t have the same geographic and public transport challenges as they do in North/South America to make it possible for pilots to build up 1,500 hours prior to piloting a commercial airliner.

We are all frustrated because we cannot get jobs at home despite being born, raised, educated and having paid through our noses in taxes and fees (licensing) in the very lands we call home. We had the belief that by accumulating a few thousand hours abroad we’d have recruitment departments giving our applications preference. Instead they give priority to those who like debts – lots of it. There are some people out there operating within the upper echelons of pilot recruitment departments that believe pilots who trained according to their own (modular) system and were not pre-selected, are totally unemployable regardless of their abilities (some of these people frequent these forums). With such attitudes we are never going to get anywhere.

Imagine for one minute that you as a fair minded guy got into a position where you could recruit pilots according to your own principles. How long would you last in that position after airline management make the discovery that you seem to be hiring pilots in their 30s and 40s who have a genuine requirement for a reasonable and stable income whilst not being shafted at a months’ notice? It would take one bean counter to do the calculations and present them to the board. Most business men don't care about anything other than bottom line and where sustainability is concerned, airline bosses know that the pilot supply vs. demand gradient in Europe will always be in their favour. It’s the nature of the beast, capitalism at its best.
Superpilot is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 09:17
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 1,218
There is no simple solution to this dilemma. Water will find it's way to trickle downhill through any cracks and fissures it can find. By which I mean that the airlines are under pressure in this capitalist world to make profit for their shareholders. Accordingly, safety is a primary concern insofar as the avoidance of accidents is extremely important, because an accident is more expensive to an airline operation than a raft of safety measures.

Meanwhile, if a bean-counter can strip away levels of safety without effecting the accident statistics, they will. Sadly, statistics only reveal events, not close run things or accumulated danger caused by tears in the fabric of the safety nets. What the Colgan crash highlighted is that there are many bad practices in the industry - from commuting to a lack of manual flying skills - which have been allowed to imbed themselves in modern aviation because it reduces airline operating costs.

Would a 1500 minimum hours help? It's hard to say because it's an artificial restriction on recruitment that has never existed before. In the 'old days' demand for pilots was so much lower and was satisfied by corporate, GA and military sources. Those sources have all but dried up and demands are sky-high.

In order for a 1500 hours limit to work in a positive way rather than simply lead to an influx of pilots with cessna time, you would have to restructure the whole industry. That isn't going to happen. Ergo, in the real word it's far more practical to ensure that the cadets joining with 200 hours are properly vetted, trained and supervised while they earn this 1500 hours experience in the airline environment. As has been proven by those 'damned' statistics, cadets, per se, are not a safety risk if carefully and competently integrated into an airline operation.
Mikehotel152 is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 13:34
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 70
Posts: 833
superpilot

There are some people out there operating within the upper echelons of pilot recruitment departments that believe pilots who trained according to their own (modular) system and were not pre-selected, are totally unemployable regardless of their abilities (some of these people frequent these forums). With such attitudes we are never going to get anywhere.
I recently attended a presentation of one of these "stars".
An excellent speaker although somewhat along the lines of the shopping channel until he presented a slide which,IIRC, pictured a hippy, a young man in a 1950s midshipman's uniform and a bloke with his hands in his pockets - a self improver....the rhetorical question was "who would you chose to employ".
That is when he lost me.....where he was wrong and based his prejudices upon his own training...which started with an odd ball degree which had nothing to do with aviation and probably at a sponsored commercial course followed by a loco training department or two.
Having been one of these Midshipman stars...flown with those who were recruited after obtaining a degree and thought a career in aviation was better than working....and instructed many who just wanted to fly - he is 100% wrong ...those who haven't had a silver spoon, in one form or other, and have struggled to fly generally put the extra effort in throughout their career.
One only has to look at 447...and the professionals couldn't even be bother to rest before the flight let alone take the trouble to understand the aircraft systems.
blind pew is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 13:45
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
Good post blind pew
Smokie is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 15:27
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,633
Because airlines run Europe. They set the airspace like they want (like the silliness of class A to the ground etc) and they run how certification is done. There is no real GA in Europe. A new CPL can't build time anywhere, so the airlines set what suits them best - and that is underpaid apprenticeships in the form of MCL, cadets etc.

Only in Europe do you get guys time and time again that are ex-military to run the Civil Aviation Authority. They're just company men, looking out for them and the big boys only. Even the new GA department at CAA is run by an ex-mil. Is it any wonder?
AdamFrisch is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2014, 15:39
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 70
Posts: 833
Adam you forgot the old boys network...
blind pew is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.