Interested parties talk air travel safety
The Pilot’s union likes the current rules, the employer’s association doesn’t. Our representatives chime in. It is unlikely that any party is primarily concerned with safety.
We need to look at the training that happens at the foundation and ensure we are providing the right supplemental training and bridge programs. And we need to make sure we’re not relying solely on flight hours as a proxy for experience because that’s not serving us well today.–Regional Airlines Association CEO Faye Malarkey Black
Our Representatives overlooked Ms. Black’s testimony.
The mere suggestion that we should put Americans on an airplane with pilots that are undertrained is absurd and dangerous. In Western New York, we learned the risks that come with this thinking the hard way. The families of Flight 3407 have worked tirelessly to see that other families don’t face the same fate. Together we will continue to fight for the safety of the flying public.
No one suggested that we should put Americans on an airplane with pilots that are undertrained.
Rep. Nicholas Langworthy (R-NY)
I’m proud to join with my colleague Congressman Higgins, the families of Flight 3407, and the Air Line Pilots Association in this bipartisan fight to protect airline safety. Since the 1,500 hour training requirement was implemented, there hasn’t been a single crash of a U.S. airline and making any changes this rule would undermine passenger safety. We can never get back the souls we lost on Flight 3407 but we can fight to ensure that no other travelers of U.S. airlines suffer the same tragic fate. No business decision should ever trump public safety.
It’s not possible to ensure that there will never be another accident.
Responding to industry problems that arose during the pandemic with permanent changes to pilot training and qualification requirements is ill-considered and dangerous. Attempts to undermine or otherwise alter or repeal the lifesaving set of requirements established in 2010, including moving from an experiential-based training and qualification regime to a simulation-based system, threatens the traveling public and should be summarily rejected. The current production of certificated pilots has outpaced U.S. airline hiring needs to replace retiring pilots and has also covered the new hiring demand created by flying increases before the pandemic and today.
Labeling current rules as “lifesaving” begs the question.