ATPL workarounds?

[cdnavater]

No, AC does not hire anyone with restricted ATPLs.

That's because no such license exists yet, but times are a changing.

I stand to be corrected but the new ATPL requirements went into effect April 1, 2026, so the restricted ATPL does exist for those who have applied and don’t meet the PIC on multi-crew aircraft requirement.

[FL030]

I think it is simply a case of being stuck in the middle during these changes. Had the changes come earlier I would have just remained left seat on the 1900 until I had my ATPL, I imagine this is what most pilots coming up will do- stay at a 703 until they can upgrade and get ATPL then move onto a 705. I do not want to give up my current job at a large 705 company & go back to a small turboprop, so I will likely just have to wait a few years for an upgrade and reassess if AC is still worth it for me.

You gotta wonder if lobbying by 703/704 operators, or even regional 705 airlines, struggling to retain pilots had something to do with the changes.

[goldeneagle]

No, AC does not hire anyone with restricted ATPLs.

That's because no such license exists yet, but times are a changing.

I stand to be corrected but the new ATPL requirements went into effect April 1, 2026, so the restricted ATPL does exist for those who have applied and don’t meet the PIC on multi-crew aircraft requirement.

My response was about AC hiring. I think it's safe to say, AC has not had a bunch of applications from the new restricted license, and also safe to say, times are a changing. Remains to be seen what various airlines do around this change.

[cdnavater]

That's because no such license exists yet, but times are a changing.

I stand to be corrected but the new ATPL requirements went into effect April 1, 2026, so the restricted ATPL does exist for those who have applied and don’t meet the PIC on multi-crew aircraft requirement.

My response was about AC hiring. I think it's safe to say, AC has not had a bunch of applications from the new restricted license, and also safe to say, times are a changing. Remains to be seen what various airlines do around this change.

Not sure what “no such license exists” means to you but it does exist, whether AC has any on file is unknown.
I also can’t see why they wouldn’t hire them, it’s really going to be simple, the check A will endorse your unrestricted ATPL after a successful ride, that will be valid for 90 days while waiting for the sticker.
You people are making a mountain out of a mole hill

[Dry Guy]

Could they use it as a way to exclude pilots that don't have the two crew PIC experience they want in order to become a Captain one day? I mean unless the pilot just pays for a PPC or does some other "workaround".

[co-joe]

I think it is simply a case of being stuck in the middle during these changes. Had the changes come earlier I would have just remained left seat on the 1900 until I had my ATPL, I imagine this is what most pilots coming up will do- stay at a 703 until they can upgrade and get ATPL then move onto a 705. I do not want to give up my current job at a large 705 company & go back to a small turboprop, so I will likely just have to wait a few years for an upgrade and reassess if AC is still worth it for me.

Appreciate the input

I agree 100%. It's a bad situation to get stuck through no faulty of your own. At some point, AC's HR department will have to make a determination if they are willing to hire frozen ATPLs or "restricted ATPL" and it would be a nice gesture if someone with no skin in the game would just email them and ask. If I was at AC I'd help you for sure. Likely they don't even know about the changes, HR people tend to have zero idea about the world outside of their micro sphere of influence, and often have no idea about aviation at all before getting this position.

[philaviate]

You could do this one weird trick where you get the experience the regulations are trying to ensure by operating a two crew aircraft as a captain.

The regulations that make no sense, are contrary to ICAO standards, and are even openly admitted by people at TC to be made in error?

So a flight instructor getting a IPC in a seneca gets the rATPL, but a FO at Encore or Jazz, flying airline multi crew daily, gets nothing.... Makes great sense and really enforces your "weird trick" idea.....

[Daniel Cooper]

Because the objective is to gain command experience. I know you guys think you can just switch seats and be good to go but it's a different ballgame. Being able to fly the plane is the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

[Me262]

Because the objective is to gain command experience. I know you guys think you can just switch seats and be good to go but it's a different ballgame. Being able to fly the plane is the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

Your ego is dripping

News flash, an atpl is just a piece of paper. Just like the "rougue" AC dude proved it. One still needs to pass a command course.

[‘Bob’]

I wonder what the failure rate is with those who have actual command experience vs those who’ve only flown with “dad”?

[MrAviator19]

No, AC does not hire anyone with restricted ATPLs.

That's because no such license exists yet, but times are a changing.

Highly unlikely. It's more of an insurance thing than shortage of pilots. And the shortage itself has always been for pilots that can be upgraded in a timely manner, not the total number. There are lots of new pilots still out there and the regionals kind of shot themselves in the foot by hiring those that are now tough to upgrade. Not their fault, really. Just the way the industry changed. The process to obtain an ATPL might have got harder, but not impossible. The doors are still open and that will forever be the argument for it.

[Bede]

Because the objective is to gain command experience. I know you guys think you can just switch seats and be good to go but it's a different ballgame. Being able to fly the plane is the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

Your ego is dripping

News flash, an atpl is just a piece of paper. Just like the "rougue" AC dude proved it. One still needs to pass a command course.

@Daniel Cooper is right: being in command is a different than being an FO. I say this as someone with 80% of my 15000 hours are in the right seat, so I know what it's like to an FO. As a captain, It's all on your shoulders. And no, an ATPL is not just a "piece of paper", any more than any other professional license.

I get it that those starting out want to make it easier to get this license but this is short term thinking. The reason that our pay is so much higher than the average Canadian is because the ATPL serves as a pretty big barrier to entry. Jobs with lower barriers to entry have either much lower wages or are near impossible to differentiate yourself in (firefighters).

It you are starting out, and have a flying job, you've already made it to the show. Jump through the hopes and collect your well-earned pay cheque.

[philaviate]

Because the objective is to gain command experience. I know you guys think you can just switch seats and be good to go but it's a different ballgame. Being able to fly the plane is the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

You think a flight instructor flying a Seneca for an IPC and sitting right seat in a 172 is learning more than an FO at Encore or Jazz, or even a decent medevac operator?
How much decision making takes place going back and to to the practice area and in 5000 circuits?

[philaviate]

Because the objective is to gain command experience. I know you guys think you can just switch seats and be good to go but it's a different ballgame. Being able to fly the plane is the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

Your ego is dripping

News flash, an atpl is just a piece of paper. Just like the "rougue" AC dude proved it. One still needs to pass a command course.

@Daniel Cooper is right: being in command is a different than being an FO. I say this as someone with 80% of my 15000 hours are in the right seat, so I know what it's like to an FO. As a captain, It's all on your shoulders. And no, an ATPL is not just a "piece of paper", any more than any other professional license.

I get it that those starting out want to make it easier to get this license but this is short term thinking. The reason that our pay is so much higher than the average Canadian is because the ATPL serves as a pretty big barrier to entry. Jobs with lower barriers to entry have either much lower wages or are near impossible to differentiate yourself in (firefighters).

It you are starting out, and have a flying job, you've already made it to the show. Jump through the hopes and collect your well-earned pay cheque.

No. We are commenting on the stupidity of getting a restricted atpl when you could have 1492 hours in a 172 and 8 in a Seneca, do an IPC and it's yours, vs a FO, type rated in a large jet or transport category plane, flying hundreds or thousands of hours and getting nothing.

[Bede]

You think a flight instructor flying a Seneca for an IPC and sitting right seat in a 172 is learning more than an FO at Encore or Jazz, or even a decent medevac operator?

Having done both, I'd say it's a toss up. You learn lots of things in every branch of aviation.

[philaviate]

You think a flight instructor flying a Seneca for an IPC and sitting right seat in a 172 is learning more than an FO at Encore or Jazz, or even a decent medevac operator?

Having done both, I'd say it's a toss up. You learn lots of things in every branch of aviation.

You learn things sure. But are you learning relevant skills, specifically you honestly think an instructor who logs 95% + of their time not even touching the controls, and spending 95% of their time within 30 minutes of one airport is learning more toward the skills necessary for an AIRLINEtpl than a person flying all over the continent as an FO on an airliner?
Because most instructors I know are so far behind any large plane FO I know it's not even close. Hell I know a bunch of instructors near me who won't even fly to the local class C airport as it's too scary for them.
I've informally taught a few friends who were being failed by poor instructors, and got them through the tests, and while I learnt a bit about the finer points of teaching flying skills, it was pretty limited and certainly less than I learnt as an FO on a turbine in a few days and orders of magnitude less than I learnt as PIC on those planes.

[Bede]

You learn things sure. But are you learning relevant skills, specifically you honestly think an instructor who logs 95% + of their time not even touching the controls, and spending 95% of their time within 30 minutes of one airport is learning more toward the skills necessary for an AIRLINEtpl than a person flying all over the continent as an FO on an airliner?

No. It's about the same. No more, no less On average of course

But I'll tell you who's miles ahead of both of them: the guy flying as captain on a King Air, Metro, or even Navajo. There is no substitute for command experience. And I say that as someone with relatively little That's why it's an ATPL requirement and most airlines value it above FO time. You'll be hard pressed to find a job at a major airline without any PIC time.

The only reason that Jazz and Encore hire pilots without any PIC or ATPL is because they're desperate. If there's a pilot surplus once again they'll be hiring King Air captains with ATPLs.

[digits_]

You think a flight instructor flying a Seneca for an IPC and sitting right seat in a 172 is learning more than an FO at Encore or Jazz, or even a decent medevac operator?

Having done both, I'd say it's a toss up. You learn lots of things in every branch of aviation.

You learn things sure. But are you learning relevant skills, specifically you honestly think an instructor who logs 95% + of their time not even touching the controls, and spending 95% of their time within 30 minutes of one airport is learning more toward the skills necessary for an AIRLINEtpl than a person flying all over the continent as an FO on an airliner?

It's not like airline crew are touching the controls that much more, are they?

Both are different. I would argue that most airline accidents nowadays happen due to attitude, multi crew or knowledge issues. In the majority of accidents, raw flying skills are not a major factor.

Learning when to say no, making the hard(er) decisions of when to call it quits are where the value lies in the current philosophy.

I also preferred to fly with captains with an instructor background. On average I find they are rarely micromanaging, much more relaxed and better mentors.

And yes, there are incompetent instructors, just like there are incompetent fos and captains.