Co-pilot time for ATPL

[Doc]

I'd like to have the GoPro ready when the guy from the 777 goes for a few circuits in the J3 with a few knots across the field!!

Well now Iced Kiwi, if that really is your name, how are YOU in a J3 with a bit of a wind? Shall I grab my camera?

[Krimson]

No, I get your point- it's very simple, albeit, a contradiction. After all, you did just state that this very obvious lowering of requirements "is a start in the right direction" towards stricter ATPL requirements that you supposedly fully support.

Look, my point is very simple, especially if for one second you block from your mind the only form of PIC time you seem to be familiar with: Jonny Numnuts burning circuits in his 152. Forget about him for a second, as there are many other forms of PIC that are actually highly relevant to 705. My point is simply that the main privilege of the ATPL is that it allows a person to act as PlC of a 705 machine. This includes some pretty heavy tin full of large crowds of people. Now, if acting as PlC is the main privilege, shouldn't it stand to reason that a meaningful amount of command time be required? After all, effective command decision making certainly takes much longer to develop than it takes to memorize SOP's and recite checklists to another human being (which, by the way, can occur at the 703 or 704 level.) The thing is, even as it stands now, there is no direct requirement for a meaningful amount of PIC time, and of course, as you're fond of pointing out, none whatsoever for any really relevant PIC time. There is only the requirement for a very insignificant amount of PIC time and a still pretty insignificant, but higher, number of total hours. This part is a joke. However, if you can't or won't get from one to the other in the left seat, you gotta put in some overtime, possibly resulting in at least some meaningful amount of total time. Still ridiculous that you can get to the end goal with essentially no PIC time, but at least it ensures that there is a bit of experience required. This part is probably the best part of the current setup. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Disposing of it because it's what our pals do IS A JOKE but I do suppose it's in keeping with the rest of the ATPL process that way.

Yes it may seem contradicting, but looking at an end goal of stricter requirements, this is one part of it that had to be addressed, co-pilot time to count 1:1. The co-pilot time is not the time which needs to be restricted. The next thing to do would to raise PIC time to 500/1000, add two-crew aircraft time requirement, and we would be getting somewhere.

I use the 152 as a reference because I know of many pilots out there with enough PIC time for their As who got it on similar aircraft, instructing, surverys, cargo, etc.

In the end though, just because you have your ATPL does not mean you will be getting hired anywhere right away. It will still take the time and experience to get in and progress through a company. The only people this change will be helping are those waiting on total time because their time is currently halved sitting right seat on a 704 machine. As they are already ready, have the time on type, experience, etc, I don't see where the issue is. To think that staying at my previous job for an extra 3 months would make me more qualified for my current one is a joke.

As you mentioned before, there are guys and gals who can now quickly obtain an ATPL, buy a type rating and undercut everyone else. That is a different can of worms all together, one I do not wish to discuss. But I can assure you not everyone has bottomless pits of money from their parents.

[AirMail]

As it stands right now, 152 time buzzing around in the circuit is considered more valuable to the airline transport licence than sitting co-joe on a dash. Can you please explain how that makes sense?

You're right, it doesn't seem to make alot of sense. I guess the aim of the ATPL is logging time where you are "responsible" for all the decisions made. Therefore, FO in a Dash wouldn't be responsible for making decisions should something unexpected happen, versus PIC in a 152 they would be.

Not to pick on ya, but this stood out as well as others on here are comparing apples to oranges. This is about TT not PIC time, there's a column for that.

There are many avenues inwhich we all can progress in our careers, some instruct, others bush, or medevac/charter and so on. Some get right into a right seat of a king air or such, they fly every other leg usually, have some decisions to make (under supervision if you will) of the captain. So how is it that given the same amount of time in the plane, and time at the controls constitute for 50%? Yes he/she isn't in the capt seat, but again that's PIC, different story, and there's a requirement for that amount of time too.

I think it's a good change, there are some co pilots I know at 704/705 that are sitting at over the 1500 TT hrs that are great pilots but hampered because of their career path. Others I've known or had the misfortune to fly with some how easily gotten theirs at 1500 when I swear they parker' penned it all.

In any event, everyone will get their ATPL if qualified, but why single out and penalize a certain group who chose a different time building path.

[Chaxterium]

In any event, everyone will get their ATPL if qualified, but why single out and penalize a certain group who chose a different time building path.

Not just that. But the group who's being penalized is the group who chose to fly as an AIRLINE FO. Would it not seem that the quickest path to an Airline Transport Pilot Licence should be to actually work as an Airline pilot? This is what I don't get. And you're point about there being a separate column for PIC time is absolutely correct as well. When I have this discussion this is always the argument I'm presented with. "FO's aren't making the decisions." Yes that's true. But that's exactly why there is a PIC requirement for the ATPL. I think the majority of pilots will agree that 250 hours is laughably low but that's a separate discussion. Once the 250 is met and an applicant is simply waiting for his or her total time to come up enough to get the ATPL, working as an airline pilot should not be a hindrance to a licence specifically for airline pilots.

[Colonel Sanders]

Soon to be ancient history, Chax, that you can
tell your grandkids about

Attack me if you want to, but I think an ATPL
(like a bare PPL, CPL or MIFR) is a licence to
learn.

No one sits in the left seat of a Boeing or Airbus
with 1500TT. Nor should they.

But by the time someone has 5000TT, they've
been around the block a few times and they're
as ready as they ever will be.

[Chaxterium]

Soon to be ancient history, Chax, that you can
tell your grandkids about

Attack me if you want to, but I think an ATPL
(like a bare PPL, CPL or MIFR) is a licence to
learn.

No one sits in the left seat of a Boeing or Airbus
with 1500TT. Nor should they.

But by the time someone has 5000TT, they've
been around the block a few times and they're
as ready as they ever will be.

Hey Col.,

Yeah I can agree with that. I only take issue with the FO rule because it seems asinine to me to punish airline pilots in that way. Hopefully it will be published in the Gazette II in the next week or so and we'll be done with it shortly thereafter. Fortunately it's no longer an issue for me personally as I finally received my ATPL a few months ago but I still feel for those in the position I was in for a long time.

Cheers,
Chax

[Doc]

And Doc, my first time in a Cub / taildragger was fairly entertaining, that's one of my biggest annual expenses keeping those photos under cover!!

Never flown a J3, but I used to be able to make a Citrabria dance my tune in a pretty good breeze. Love to get my paws on one again. Been too long!

[xsbank]

My only tail-dragger time was on a DC3, the one with the bladder brakes. That was entertaining too.

I had plenty of time for my ATPL but I had to rent block time on a 172 and fly Williams Lake - Quesnel - Prince George - Quesnel - Williams Lake every good-weather night for months to get enough night time. What a total waste of money, brought to you by the outfit that considered introducing a carbon tax!

I totally agree with The Colonel; just like a degree, its just a license to get you in the door so you can learn.

[Doc]

My only tail-dragger time was on a DC3, the one with the bladder brakes. That was entertaining too.

I had plenty of time for my ATPL but I had to rent block time on a 172 and fly Williams Lake - Quesnel - Prince George - Quesnel - Williams Lake every good-weather night for months to get enough night time. What a total waste of money, brought to you by the outfit that considered introducing a carbon tax!

I totally agree with The Colonel; just like a degree, its just a license to get you in the door so you can learn.

Should have done your DC3 time hauling auto parts at night!!

[shimmydampner]

.... to punish airline pilots in that way

....the group who's being penalized is the group who chose to fly as an AIRLINE FO.

....why single out and penalize a certain group who chose a different time building path.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Let's climb down off the cross there fellas. No one is being singled out, penalized, or punished in any way. It's not as though the requirements are a big secret. You should have been aware of them. If you didn't bother to pay heed to them, it's your own damn fault. It merely proves my point about some pilots' short-sightedness and overwhelming anxiousness to trip all over themselves in their rush to a 705 cockpit, knowingly to their own detriment.
The would-be ATPL martyrs deserve no sympathy.

[Ki-ll]

some pilots' short-sightedness and overwhelming anxiousness to trip all over themselves in their rush to a 705 cockpit

Great way to sum up the topic. It should be 4 for 1, not 2 for 1.

[AirMail]

.... to punish airline pilots in that way

....the group who's being penalized is the group who chose to fly as an AIRLINE FO.

....why single out and penalize a certain group who chose a different time building path.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Let's climb down off the cross there fellas. No one is being singled out, penalized, or punished in any way. It's not as though the requirements are a big secret. You should have been aware of them. If you didn't bother to pay heed to them, it's your own damn fault. It merely proves my point about some pilots' short-sightedness and overwhelming anxiousness to trip all over themselves in their rush to a 705 cockpit, knowingly to their own detriment.
The would-be ATPL martyrs deserve no sympathy.

On no cross here. But yes you are right but you also single out those who again choose a different path. Should it not be equal for all.... this is the age of equality no?

some pilots' short-sightedness and overwhelming anxiousness to trip all over themselves in their rush to a 705 cockpit

Great way to sum up the topic. It should be 4 for 1, not 2 for 1.

If you'd like. But while we're at it, lets also make it for ATPL requirements to have 2 crew xp and over 12,500. So no sympathy can be equally spread to those instructors and most bush guys....

I really don't see why some of you guys have your backs up against this! It makes it equal, makes it inline with ICAO, helps out a fellow pilots... opps just answered the question, as most of you wads don't like helping fellow pilots.... backstabbers

[cpt.sam]

As it stands right now, 152 time buzzing around in the circuit is considered more valuable to the airline transport licence than sitting co-joe on a dash. Can you please explain how that makes sense?

You're right, it doesn't seem to make alot of sense. I guess the aim of the ATPL is logging time where you are "responsible" for all the decisions made. Therefore, FO in a Dash wouldn't be responsible for making decisions should something unexpected happen, versus PIC in a 152 they would be.

So... Flying in all weather ops under the guidance of a more experienced pilot who can teach you better practices, is second class to buzzing around in a fair weather 152?
I know SIC isn't PIC. But a pilot with 1500 hrs in the right seat of a transport machine is 10 times the decision maker than the pilot that poked around in a 152. It goes without saying.
I think it should be flipped around. FOs on 12 500 + birds should require 1500 hrs on such birds. Whilst the 152 captains should require 3000 hrs.
Just my 2 cents!

[Ki-ll]

If you'd like. But while we're at it, lets also make it for ATPL requirements to have 2 crew xp and over 12,500. So no sympathy can be equally spread to those instructors and most bush guys....

Let's do it. I am all for increasing the standards and improving the quality of personnel. As it stands right now ATPL means nothing, just a hoop 2 to 3 years after your CPL. With reduced requirements it is even more of a joke.

I really don't see why some of you guys have your backs up against this! It makes it equal, makes it inline with ICAO, helps out a fellow pilots... opps just answered the question, as most of you wads don't like helping fellow pilots.... backstabbers

I will try to explain. This new rule decreases the value of an ATPL even more. It does make it equal, everyone will have a worthless piece of paper on their hands. We can see that this had already happened to a bachelor's degree, it means nothing these days since they give them out like candy. I fail to see how this helps my fellow pilots to become better. It does help them get a useless (because of this new rule) piece of paper faster.

[shimmydampner]

But while we're at it, lets also make it for ATPL requirements to have 2 crew xp and over 12,500

A requirement for two crew experience makes sense. Over 12500 not so much; after all, a 200 skipper should hopefully be able to command a 1900.

I really don't see why some of you guys have your backs up against this! It makes it equal, makes it inline with ICAO, helps out a fellow pilots... opps just answered the question, as most of you wads don't like helping fellow pilots.... backstabbers

Despite the many opinions here, probably no one here has any influence in writing the regs so you can relax. Also, the regs don't exist to help you out or make your career progress faster.

I know SIC isn't PIC. But a pilot with 1500 hrs in the right seat of a transport machine is 10 times the decision maker than the pilot that poked around in a 152. It goes without saying.
I think it should be flipped around. FOs on 12 500 + birds should require 1500 hrs on such birds. Whilst the 152 captains should require 3000 hrs.
Just my 2 cents!

Personally, I think decision making is developed more by the type of flying being done than the all up weight of the aircraft being flown. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the aircraft MTOW is largely irrelevant. Certainly, there are single engine Cessna pilots out there doing difficult work and making difficult decisions that many SOP-indoctrinated FO's couldn't even fathom.

[jpilot77]

I agree with shimmydampner making decisions on your own is what really counts. What Canadian airlines had was pilots who had cut their teeth on bush flying (be it float, single or twin into remote locations). In my opinion pilots who jump into the right seat after flight school in 704 ops are missing out on some great experience.

[cdnpilot77]

Incidentally, this was also a part of the same proposed amendments in the Gazette I on February 23rd, 2013:

Division VII.1 — Multi-crew Pilot Licence

Aeroplanes — Privileges

401.32 (1) The holder of a multi-crew pilot licence — aeroplane may act as co-pilot of a turbine-powered aeroplane that is operated day or night, under VFR, VFR OTT or IFR, if the aeroplane

(a) is a transport category aircraft;

(b) is an aeroplane for which a minimum flight crew document has been issued that specifies a minimum flight crew of two pilots;

(c) is of a type in respect of which the holder’s licence is endorsed with a rating; and

(d) is operated under subpart 4 of Part VI or under Part VII.
(2) The holder of a multi-crew pilot licence — aeroplane may act as pilot-in-command of any aircraft for the purpose of the holder’s flight training if the flight training is conducted in accordance with section 401.19.

[Doc]

So... Flying in all weather ops under the guidance of a more experienced pilot who can teach you better practices, is second class to buzzing around in a fair weather 152?
I know SIC isn't PIC. But a pilot with 1500 hrs in the right seat of a transport machine is 10 times the decision maker than the pilot that poked around in a 152. It goes without saying.
Just my 2 cents!

Your statement "under the guidance of a more experienced pilot......" In other words......somebody who is there to bail your self centred ass out, when your "decision" is a bad one? makes your "2 cents" worth exactly that, 2 cents!
You obviously have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about. Ever gone anywhere in a simple single engine airplane? Ever had to make "go, not go" decisions? On YOUR OWN? Ever had to sit in some crap hole airport while the weather clears enough to launch? Without somebody there to hold your hand? Believe me, taking a 152/172/Cherokee, etc., from, say Toronto to MIA and back, requires a Hell of a lot more thought, skill and decision making than riding "shotgun" in a B1900D/King Air/Metro, etc......don"t buy it? Try it!

[Krimson]

Believe me, taking a 152/172/Cherokee, etc., from, say Toronto to MIA and back, requires a Hell of a lot more thought, skill and decision making than riding "shotgun" in a B1900D/King Air/Metro, etc......don"t buy it? Try it!

The majority of people flying 152/175/Cherokee are not flying YYZ MIA. A lot are sitting as instructors not even touching the controls, flying the same few flights 1000s of times> Depart, head to the practice area, fly back. With the exception of a few who actually get relevant experience in light piston singles, the majority just are not prepared for a 705 machine once they have their ATPL.

The good thing is that a job will not just fall on their lap because they have their paper signed off. However, the pilots sitting right seat on a 704 waiting for an upgrade will benefit from this, have the experience required, and will be ready and accept this change gladly.


Getting the paper is just as meaningless for both, but one group will benefit and have the checkbox ticked off for transport so they can move ahead with their career.

[shimmydampner]

not even touching the controls, flying the same few flights 1000s of times

Sounds like pretty good prep for an airline job.

[Krimson]

not even touching the controls, flying the same few flights 1000s of times

Sounds like pretty good prep for an airline job.

[Doc]

Believe me, taking a 152/172/Cherokee, etc., from, say Toronto to MIA and back, requires a Hell of a lot more thought, skill and decision making than riding "shotgun" in a B1900D/King Air/Metro, etc......don"t buy it? Try it!

The majority of people flying 152/175/Cherokee are not flying YYZ MIA. A lot are sitting as instructors not even touching the controls, flying the same few flights 1000s of times> Depart, head to the practice area, fly back. With the exception of a few who actually get relevant experience in light piston singles, the majority just are not prepared for a 705 machine once they have their ATPL.

The good thing is that a job will not just fall on their lap because they have their paper signed off. However, the pilots sitting right seat on a 704 waiting for an upgrade will benefit from this, have the experience required, and will be ready and accept this change gladly.


Getting the paper is just as meaningless for both, but one group will benefit and have the checkbox ticked off for transport so they can move ahead with their career.

I'm just going to toss out the example of the Air France "swim team".......any flying instructor out there would have been able to recover from a stall.....something an entire crew of your precious "705" folks couldn't seem to accomplish.

The other thing I read here is JEALOUSLY! You're all GREEN with envy that the guy who became an instructor when you didn't has an ATPL, and you don't. BooHoo!

[Krimson]

The other thing I read here is JEALOUSLY! You're all GREEN with envy that the guy who became an instructor when you didn't has an ATPL, and you don't. BooHoo!

Not the case at all. I could have stayed at my last job for a few extra months and had my ATPL but chose to move forward to a 704 which should be seen as relevant experience for the licence. Does not really matter to me as it is a difference of a few months but I think the regulations are backwards and they are changing for the better. It will help out the people who shouldn't be held back for their career choices and I am all for that.

PS. I have my class 4 (now expired), had the option to use it and turned it down. I don't 100% agree with the instructor route but I do like the additional training and wanted to see it for myself.

[Doc]

The other thing I read here is JEALOUSLY! You're all GREEN with envy that the guy who became an instructor when you didn't has an ATPL, and you don't. BooHoo!

Not the case at all. I could have stayed at my last job for a few extra months and had my ATPL but chose to move forward to a 704 which should be seen as relevant experience for the licence. Does not really matter to me as it is a difference of a few months but I think the regulations are backwards and they are changing for the better. It will help out the people who shouldn't be held back for their career choices and I am all for that.

PS. I have my class 4 (now expired), had the option to use it and turned it down. I don't 100% agree with the instructor route but I do like the additional training and wanted to see it for myself.

Oh, I didn't mean you specifically when I said jealous......the industry as a whole is suffering from the "green monster". Personally, I feel an instructor should have at least 3500-5000 hours, multi IFR rated, make at least 60K a year, and have been in the industry for a period of time BEFORE being allowed to instruct others. Right now, we have people learning to fly, teaching others all they don't know. Seriously, how can a guy with 250 hours teach student pilots? What does this instructor actually know? As a higher time pilot, I've had conversations with 250 hour pilots.......SPACE, the the finale frontier.....they know NOTHING.....and are willing to share it all.

[Colonel Sanders]

how can a guy with 250 hours teach student pilots?

Very inefficiently, has been my experience. Someone with
250TT barely knows how to fly himself, and typically doesn't
know much about teaching, either.