Apparently there is a pilot shortage in Civil & Military....

Non-military aviation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post17 Mar 2016, 04:36

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dgG2rZl5Es

So how do we solve this shortage in pilots in Civil & Military Aviation?
Offline
User avatar

durahawk

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 20:35

Unread post17 Mar 2016, 05:32

KamenRiderBlade wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dgG2rZl5Es

So how do we solve this shortage in pilots in Civil & Military Aviation?


Rolling back the congress massive knee jerk overkill regulation requiring an ATP and 1500 flying hours to fly right seat for a regional would be a good start.
http://airfactsjournal.com/2014/03/double-tragedy-colgan-air-flight-3407/

In many ways the problem is linked, the vacuum on the commercial side for experienced aviators is drawing in Military pilots who may be attracted by one of several reasons... such as the opportunity for better pay, not having to deploy constantly, less BS to deal with, etc.
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post17 Mar 2016, 07:14

I doubt there will ever be a shortage of new military pilots. The issue is experienced guys, at or around the 10 year mark, deciding to stay or leave (which is about our earliest opportunity to make that decision). I don't think there is really a fix for that, aside from massive changes in operational tempo and retention bonuses…….and even that is more than likely a crapshoot. It also isn't anything that taking more new Lt's can fix, since by the time, many years later, that they are in this demographic, you now actually overpopulate the O-4 or at least prospective O-4 crowd.
Offline

guy@rdaf.dk

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2005, 04:08

Unread post17 Mar 2016, 11:33

Completely disagree with you on that one durahawk.

I wish that lawmakers in Europe and the rest of the world would do the same. The article you linked to says that the public wants dirt-cheap, 100-percent safe air transportation. They can have 100% safe or dirt-cheap tickets, but they cant have both and they need to understand it. The low fare airlines that have been extremely successful for the last 10-15 years have started a race to the bottom!

Why, because they are run by bean counters. Bean counters that play a game called risk management. How much will a crash cost us versus what are the odds that it will happen if we put shitty pilots, that work almost for free, in the front seats?

Air France 447, Air Asia 8501, Colagan Air and many more incidents have shown that many pilots today are unable to perform the most basic tasks of hand flying their aircraft with the use of stick (yoke), rudder and throttle. Why? Because they where never thought how to fly manually, they never got the feel for it and they never train it once in the front seat of passenger aircraft.

When you lose something simple as your airspeed indication (like AF447 did), and the autopilot drops offline, the only thing that would save the day, and it is a thing that I will take for granted, is that the pilot is able to hand fly the aircraft to a safe landing. But he will only be able to do so if he is proficient and if he has practiced it once in a while. How do society forces him to practice manual flying skills when the company that employs him only cares about providing the cheapest tickets? We let him (force him to) fly 1500 hour before we let him loose in the cockpit of an aircraft with passengers. That way we ensure that hand flying becomes an instinct.

Who is going to pay? The article states that it will be the poor pilot who has to pay for the extra hours. BS. If the airlines want to attract qualified pilots, they will have to raise the salaries or even pay for the pilots training themselves like in the good old days. The young pilot might have to spend some money on his initial qualification, but one he gets a real job he will also get paid well.

So durahawk, you can still have dirt-cheap fares or 100% safe air transportation. You just need to figure out which one of the two you pick.

PS. Civilian flying is not drawing to many pilots from the military in Europe these days, as the amount of BS in the civilian business is much greater then in the military. Salaries suck, you are more away from home (no sh*t), and you don’t even get to stay at cool hotels.
Greetings to you all at the NSA and everybody else who is reading this on ECHELON.
Offline

huggy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 588
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2004, 07:39

Unread post16 Aug 2016, 04:55

A shortage of commercial pilots? Not yet.
There's just a shortage of pilots willing to work for substandard pay that is common to many of the small Regional airlines.

Raising the ATP requirements was a positive, and long overdue.

The fighter pilot problem is getting worse. http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/07 ... an/129907/
Fighter pilots want to be fighter pilots... But that's not what the AF wants them to do anymore.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 686
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post16 Apr 2017, 01:10

FO is not the PIC, so 1500hr. rule really is just another burden. Why would anyone spend over 100K to get an Aviation degree and come out of university with crushing bills while only making around 25K for the first few years? Ever see first year FO pay at Great Lakes? How can one survive on that and pay back your college bills? Additionally, the 1500hr. rule would not have done anything to prevent the Buffalo crash.

Ever see most CFI pay, it's a joke. And in order to get to 1500hrs. you need to build time. Most do that by a CFI job. Depending on where you live (weather permitting) it may take up to 2 years to build 1500hrs. So have fun living back in Mom and Dad's basement after graduating university while working as a CFI/II.

I fly for leisure (I have my Commercial and enough hours for my ATP). But the ATP is of no use for me. I love aviation, but never considered the terrible regional pay (and living in a crash pad with a bunch of dudes) for the first few years.

During my training I flew with great instructors and terrible ones (people who generally lacked CTS and common logic). 1500hrs or more is not going to rectify those who display an illogical thought process (and crumble under pressure).

Additionally, the very low pay is forcing some (who are otherwise excellent pilots) to quit aviation because they cannot make ends meet. How can you afford a house or a family on that pay let alone pay back your loan?
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post16 Apr 2017, 01:33

And along those lines, I think the US majors really do need military aviators to fill the gap that all the Vietnam era senior CA's are leaving now that they are hitting the 65 year age limit and retiring in droves. I personally don't think the USAF or the DoD will have much success trying to lobby the airlines to not hire their guys, at least for the next few years as this hiring boom plays out. Granted, the regionals are getting a little better QOL/pay wise compared to 10 years ago, which might allow more pure civilian background guys to get the hours and ultimately progress to the majors without sacrificing their families and sanity in the process. But I think the industry has relied on a pretty even mix, historically, between mil and civilian backgrounds. I think the ease of jumping from fighters directly to the majors with the FAA minimum hours in the last year or so has exacerbated the problem the USAF is experiencing…….I don't disagree with their sentiments on that. But the proposed agreements with the airlines (whatever those would theoretically look like) or the "stop loss" would only worsen their situation I think. They might win the short term battle by forcing people to stay against their wishes, but they will lose the war in the long run. I also question what quality of "service" they believe they will get out of a bunch of already disgruntled Majors, who would most likely be shoved in to fill gaps in staff billets. As I understand it from my AF buddies, wing staffs are the places where the hurt is the most severe. Kind of talking out of my lane here, being neither an airline or AF guy, so those who are, please feel free to chime in, but that is what I have gathered as a Navy guy, watching from the cheap seats, and we have a similar shortfall in progress, it just hasn't made the news because the Bureau of Personnel won't yet admit it is happening.

Return to Civil and General Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest