340,000 Pilots Needed For The Next 20 Years?

[john smith]

My brother's stepson went from AFROTC to regular Air Force flight
training. He went the Tanker/Transport route, flying the Beechjet, then
C21(Lear 35) VIP transport for two years before getting a slot for
C17's. C17 training lasted three months. He spent his time in the right
seat before moving to the left. He got out after 10 years as a C17 IP.

Tony wrote:
> I think the US Navy has guys flying trapped landings in 200 hours TT.
> How many hours of specific intensive training aimed right at a
> specific type rating it would take to make a highly intellegent and
> physically qualified person to able to fly with mature ATR confidence?
> One measure would be, how long it takes the airforce to train its C17
> guys.

[Larry Dighera]

Boeing alleges that 340,000 pilots will be needed to fill the seats of
the aircraft currently on order. No wonder they want to take over our
nation's ATC system:


AUSTRALIA TESTING NEW CERTIFICATION TRACK FOR AIRLINE PILOTS

There's nothing new about ab initio training programs that start
flight students off from zero time with the goal of an airline
job. But ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization, is
now developing that track into a completely separate certification
path, with a drastic cut in the required flight time to get to the
right seat in a passenger jet. Alteon Training
(http://www.alteontraining.com/articles/articledetails.aspx?id=938),
a Boeing subsidiary, announced this week that it's launching a
"beta test" of a training program for the ICAO Multi-Crew Pilot
License in Brisbane, Australia. "The world's airlines will need
more than 17,000 pilots each year for the next 20 years to fill
the seats of the airplanes on order," said Marsha Bell, a
spokeswoman for Alteon. "The world needs a better training
solution for those pilots."
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/817-full.html#194564

http://www.alteontraining.com/articles/articledetails.aspx?id=938
According to the Boeing Current Market Outlook, the market will
require more than 27,000 new airplanes to be delivered to the
world’s airlines over the next 20 years. The Asia-Pacific region
will receive 28 percent of these aircraft deliveries through 2025.


Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
is a recipe for reduced air safety?

[Tony]

I think the US Navy has guys flying trapped landings in 200 hours TT.
How many hours of specific intensive training aimed right at a
specific type rating it would take to make a highly intellegent and
physically qualified person to able to fly with mature ATR confidence?
One measure would be, how long it takes the airforce to train its C17
guys.


On Mar 3, 1:22 pm, Larry Dighera > wrote:
> Boeing alleges that 340,000 pilots will be needed to fill the seats of
> the aircraft currently on order. No wonder they want to take over our
> nation's ATC system:
>
> AUSTRALIA TESTING NEW CERTIFICATION TRACK FOR AIRLINE PILOTS
>
> There's nothing new about ab initio training programs that start
> flight students off from zero time with the goal of an airline
> job. But ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization, is
> now developing that track into a completely separate certification
> path, with a drastic cut in the required flight time to get to the
> right seat in a passenger jet. Alteon Training
> (http://www.alteontraining.com/articles/articledetails.aspx?id=938),
> a Boeing subsidiary, announced this week that it's launching a
> "beta test" of a training program for the ICAO Multi-Crew Pilot
> License in Brisbane, Australia. "The world's airlines will need
> more than 17,000 pilots each year for the next 20 years to fill
> the seats of the airplanes on order," said Marsha Bell, a
> spokeswoman for Alteon. "The world needs a better training
> solution for those pilots."
> http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/817-full.html#194564
>
> http://www.alteontraining.com/articles/articledetails.aspx?id=938
> According to the Boeing Current Market Outlook, the market will
> require more than 27,000 new airplanes to be delivered to the
> world's airlines over the next 20 years. The Asia-Pacific region
> will receive 28 percent of these aircraft deliveries through 2025.
>
> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?

[Bob Moore]

Tony wrote
> I think the US Navy has guys flying trapped landings in 200 hours TT.

My logbook shows 115.5 hours to the first trap...1959, Solo T-28C.

Bob Moore
ATP CFI
PanAm (retired)

[Mxsmanic]

Larry Dighera writes:

> Boeing alleges that 340,000 pilots will be needed to fill the seats of
> the aircraft currently on order.

I think that fuel may run out before pilots run out.

> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?

Yes.

One can argue that increased automation can compensate for a lower skill level
among pilots, and this is true. It is possible to fly commercial airliners
mostly by just pressing buttons already. However, pilots with lower skill
levels are less likely to be able to handle exceptional situations, when the
automation fails, and unfortunately that's the whole purpose of having pilots.

There are many skills that airline pilots will probably never be called upon
to use in their jobs. Pilots who lack these skills will be just as competent
within the envelope of the job, and they'll be cheaper and faster to produce.

As I've said before, some countries are already moving in this direction,
training pilots exclusively for the actual task of flying an airliner, with
minimal instruction in anything that they aren't likely to encounter in that
task. Training pilots exclusively in simulators is also an option being
explored, although the mere fact that simulators are used doesn't necessarily
mean that the training is inferior.

Most pilots today lack the flight engineering skills required to deal with
complex engine and pressurization problems. However, such problems are very
rare today, so that's not much of an issue. Indeed, many modern aircraft
don't give pilots a great deal of control over these systems, and automate
most normal and exceptional procedures, so even a pilot who knows what to
adjust when something goes wrong may simply not have the controls to do so.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Kingfish]

On Mar 3, 1:22 pm, Larry Dighera > wrote:
> Boeing alleges that 340,000 pilots will be needed to fill the seats of
> the aircraft currently on order. No wonder they want to take over our
> nation's ATC system:

I'd be willing to crew a 737, if they'll cover my type rating <G>


> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?

In a word, yes.

[Robert M. Gary]

On Mar 3, 10:22 am, Larry Dighera > wrote:

> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?

As carriers take more and more judgement away from captains and put it
into ops manuals I don't think it will make as much impact.

-Robert

[Euan Kilgour]

On Mar 4, 7:22 am, Larry Dighera > wrote:

> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?

I've seen some of these "intensive" flight schools turn out ATPL
qualified first officers from ab initio in 2 years.
I know of one such graduate who still had problems landing a single
after completing the course. I can only speculate with some
trepidation how he'll cope with landing an A320 or 737.

[C J Campbell]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 11:22:17 -0800, Larry Dighera wrote
(in article >):

> Boeing alleges that 340,000 pilots will be needed to fill the seats of
> the aircraft currently on order. No wonder they want to take over our
> nation's ATC system:
>

Not a problem. There will still be more than a million pilots willing to fly
for free.

>
> Does anyone else find that lowering the bar for pilot training in the
> name of necessity to fill the cockpits of airliners currently on order
> is a recipe for reduced air safety?
>

I am not sure that this program constitutes lowering the bar.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Mxsmanic]

Euan Kilgour writes:

> I know of one such graduate who still had problems landing a single
> after completing the course. I can only speculate with some
> trepidation how he'll cope with landing an A320 or 737.

If he trained for a A320 or a 737, he'll probably land it much better than he
does a single. The aircraft are not intrinsically more difficult to land just
because they are big.

I have no problem with airline pilots who can't land a Cessna. I do have a
problem with airline pilots who have not trained sufficiently on the aircraft
they actually fly to be able to handle unusual situations.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Euan Kilgour wrote:
>
>
> I know of one such graduate who still had problems landing a single
> after completing the course. I can only speculate with some
> trepidation how he'll cope with landing an A320 or 737.


I know a guy who makes beautiful landings in airliners, yet drops my
Sundowner on the threshold like a brick. He flies his limits ever month
in the jets, and does maybe three landings a year in Spam cans.

So I ask, so what? <G>

[Kingfish]

On Mar 8, 7:37 am, B A R R Y > wrote:

> I know a guy who makes beautiful landings in airliners, yet drops my
> Sundowner on the threshold like a brick. He flies his limits ever month
> in the jets, and does maybe three landings a year in Spam cans.
>
> So I ask, so what? <G>

A friend of mine went from F/O in a 747 to Captain in the MD-11 and
flies his Navajo fairly often. I asked him how he manages to avoid
carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
ground. His answer was "I fly alone if I haven't been in the Navajo
for a while."

[Mxsmanic]

Kingfish writes:

> I asked him how he manages to avoid
> carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
> ground.

What do you mean by a carrier landing?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Euan Kilgour]

On Mar 9, 4:55 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Kingfish writes:
> > I asked him how he manages to avoid
> > carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
> > ground.
>
> What do you mean by a carrier landing?

Get your instructor to show you.... oh wait a minute, you aren't
learning to fly...

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Euan Kilgour wrote:
> On Mar 9, 4:55 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Kingfish writes:
>>> I asked him how he manages to avoid
>>> carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
>>> ground.
>>
>> What do you mean by a carrier landing?
>
> Get your instructor to show you.... oh wait a minute, you aren't
> learning to fly...

Or he could watch "Top Gun." Though it might make him airsick.

[Mxsmanic]

Euan Kilgour writes:

> Get your instructor to show you.... oh wait a minute, you aren't
> learning to fly...

If you don't know, why advertise the fact?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[C J Campbell]

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 07:13:22 -0800, Kingfish wrote
(in article om>):

> On Mar 8, 7:37 am, B A R R Y > wrote:
>
>> I know a guy who makes beautiful landings in airliners, yet drops my
>> Sundowner on the threshold like a brick. He flies his limits ever month
>> in the jets, and does maybe three landings a year in Spam cans.
>>
>> So I ask, so what? <G>
>
> A friend of mine went from F/O in a 747 to Captain in the MD-11 and
> flies his Navajo fairly often. I asked him how he manages to avoid
> carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
> ground. His answer was "I fly alone if I haven't been in the Navajo
> for a while."
>

Maybe he should put it up on floats!

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Kingfish]

On Mar 8, 11:57 pm, C J Campbell
> wrote:

> > A friend of mine went from F/O in a 747 to Captain in the MD-11 and
> > flies his Navajo fairly often. I asked him how he manages to avoid
> > carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
> > ground. His answer was "I fly alone if I haven't been in the Navajo
> > for a while."
>
> Maybe he should put it up on floats!


LOL... Don't know if he'd go for that, I doubt a float STC exists for
the PA-31

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-03-09 06:27:09 -0800, "Kingfish" > said:

> On Mar 8, 11:57 pm, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
>>> A friend of mine went from F/O in a 747 to Captain in the MD-11 and
>>> flies his Navajo fairly often. I asked him how he manages to avoid
>>> carrier landings in the 'ho seeing as it sits so much lower to the
>>> ground. His answer was "I fly alone if I haven't been in the Navajo
>>> for a while."
>>
>> Maybe he should put it up on floats!
>
>
> LOL... Don't know if he'd go for that, I doubt a float STC exists for
> the PA-31

Hey, if you can put 'em on an Aztec... :-)

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[[email protected]]

On Mar 9, 4:36 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Euan Kilgour writes:
> > Get your instructor to show you.... oh wait a minute, you aren't
> > learning to fly...
>
> If you don't know, why advertise the fact?

Oh I know alright, I'm just not telling you.

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> Oh I know alright, I'm just not telling you.

Of course.

I know everything myself. I'm just not telling you all of it.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.