Absolutely. But we're not comparing 1 pilot at 2 points of time in his career, we are comparing 2 different pilots. I don't think the 1500 hour pilot in my example would be super great at 200 hours either.ehv8oar wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2019 7:59 pm I see what you're getting at, that someone with 200 hours and just out of flight school is going to probably be more up-to-date on the rules and regs and more keen to learn than someone with 1500 hours of bush flying.
In some ways you're right but think back to what you were like at 200 hours, now think about what you were like at 1500 hours, I'm sure you'll agree that you were a better overall Pilot at 1500 hours than 200 hours.
So we are comparing a well tested/interviewed/vetted 200 hour pilot selected out of a pool of, let's say 100 applicants versus a 1500 hour pilot out of a pool of 2? 5? applicants.
Absolutely, but still, ... what location only has a 1900 FO spot for a 1500 hour pilot nowadays?ehv8oar wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2019 7:59 pm You also can't make sweeping statements about, someone with 1500 hours who would take a 1900 fo position in this economy, as though this makes that person a moron who's unfit to fly. People make decisions based on things like location, close to family etc not just on size of an aircraft.
I brought up the argument of the 200 hour pilot as a reply towards a post complaining about the skills of a 1500 hour FO. The 1500 hour mark was considered a good play of the company to get good and safe pilots because they have experience. Yet the poster was unhappy about the skills of the 1500 hour FO. Increasing the hour requirements would -in my opinion- only make matters worse. Lowering the experience requirements so you can select out of a bigger pool of candidates would be more beneficial, unless of course the salary goes up with the requested experience, but I don't believe that to be the case in these discussions.