Welcome to FT, retired captain! Thanks for your insights and experiences. Looking forward to some more contributions from you in the future.

By the way, are you Captain Phipps?

Welcome to FT, retired captain. :-:

Great contribution...As for your question at the end...It isnt about age, it is about qualifications...Take for example what was just announced at Aurora St. Luke's in the Milwaukee Area: http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/96945709.html

They just announced that nearly 30% of the echocardiogram's administered from August 2007 to October 2008 were read completely wrong...Why did this happen? Because they were not qualified to do the interpretation, yet they were allowed to do this for 14 months.

Were some these cardiologists 45? Were some of them 26? Not sure, but it was probably a mix with the theme running through all of them that they were doing something that they were unqualified to do. Can it be assumed that the 45 year old cardiologist is a bit more qualified than the 26 year old...I dont think so, since everyone has different experiences.

My theme is that everyone is unique...We dont know what that young guy's experience was in his 1500 hours...As a passenger (or patient), the key for me is that pilots and doctors are hired and measured consistently on a regular basis and that the standards they need to meet are not bent for any reason.

Welcome to Flyertalk, retired captain.

What a brilliant first post. Thank you for posting.

The concerns you have are very real. When a brand new Q400 can fall out of the sky because it stalled and two guys choose the wrong runway to take off from, alarm bells should be going off. These two accidents should not have happened, but they did because of total lack of basic airmanship.

I'm working on my PPL and know many professional pilots, we were flying last weekend and we were as often before discussing the subject you are addressing. It's an accident waiting to happen.

Just a few months ago I was a passenger on a CRJ900, a plane with almost as many seats as the smallest DC9s. After leveling off at cruise after take off from MEM, the Captain turned off the fasten seatbelt sign. Well, it didn't come back on until we were at the gate at ORD. He actually forgot to turn it back on. Makes you wonder what else was forgotten on his check list..

As long as the conditions are good, I'm sure its safe enough, but when it gets difficult and they get into trouble, who knows what might happen? We are blessed with advanced equipment, but these concerns still makes me book mainline flights as much as possible and I stay away from a few carriers (like Colgan) altogether.

I'm not interested to risk my life to save a couple of hundred bucks.

Again, thanks for posting and I hope to see more posts from you, Captain! ^^

Welcome aboard, retired captain. We're all looking forward to more insightful posts in the future.

Just thought I would point out I don't really like that analogy, and I've heard it many times. There are a lot more aircraft flying now then 30 years ago. A more appropriate one would be: You have a brain tumor that needs to be operated on soon, you can either wait for the the more experienced doctor, however long it might be, at a unaffordable rate for most people. Or you can get the needed surgery done now by someone who has been trained to do it, but may be younger with the advantage you can actually pay for it. Both will remove the tumor 99.999999% of the time.

There simply isn't enough pilots that can build up 3000 hours before moving onto a regional carrier. 30 years ago, with far fewer commercial flights, it may have been possible. Now, reducing flights and raising fares to 30 years ago would be disastrous to our economy with no increase in our safety. Flying now is safer then it ever has been before.

I'm not a commercial pilot, but I do think practically and have a lot of knowledge in the field. I do think pilots are underpaid, but it is a free market.

Huge numbers of people have little if any choice but to fly on regionals.

I have to go to Des Moines this afternoon and it's an RJ

--There's no nonstop mainline MKE-DSM

--There's virtually no connecting flight from MKE to DSM which is all-mainline.

The work being done in DSM is highly time-critical, and when it is complete it must get to Milwaukee immediately tomorrow morning. Driving is not an acceptable option, and it is undoubtedly much less safe.

What do you propose for people in my circumstance? Or for those whose local airport is all or mostly served by regional airlines?

I believe, with all due respect to pilots, that none of this safety concern would be there if each regional pilot made $100-K a year.

Pilot experience did not help Capt. Van Zanten, nor those two flakes who overshot MSP, nor the guys who forgot to put their flaps/slats down in DTW, or the guys who did not deice their plane in Washington, D.C. They are in the same boat as those Colgen pilots. Hours did not matter in their cases.

Quality of training, improved systems, better aircraft all have made flying safer. Everyone has to start somewhere. Everyone had to take the first step in the cockpit. The only argument...really, no matter what anyone says...is pay.

Those guys would get a lot safer in the eyes of mainline pilots if they made $100-K, I would bet.

Will someone please name a career/profession where the consumer is not indifferent about trade experience.

If mass transportation at hundreds of miles per hour in congested, thin air, potentially filled with thunderstorms, and subsequent fuel management considerations, not to mention the rare occurrence of emergencies and the associated decision process, isn't one of those careers, then I don't know what is.

F9/YX FTers are more discriminatory about warm versus cold chocolate chip cookies than the experience level of their pilots.

Both sad and funny at the same time...

No, but as Knope2001 points out, that is the system. We take a chance and so far the chance has been a good one. So, howabout laying out your vision for training of beginning pilots. How many, when do they work, where do they work and how do they get that give time experience, precisely? What do they make? And you have to keep the level of flights, planes and airlines the same---or increase them--- without ticket prices rising. Lay it out.

Since I am in no position to evaluate the competency of those flying my RJ, I can only look at the statistics. The statistics tell me that our current system works. Flying an RJ from MKE to DSM is about as safe as it gets.

When planes start falling out of the sky, the system will in fact change, and the fares will go up.

However, planes are unlikely to start falling out of the sky. What is different about tomorrow from today?