Professional Helicopter Industry

[yzchopper]

Please Help! The Professional Helicopter Industry needs your valid points and ways to make improvments. Please post them along with steps or ideas to move in the right direction to help over come the challeges we face now and in the foreseeable future. Thank you

[permison]

It might be helpful to identify some of the specific issues the industry is facing. As I see it the following issues need to be addressed in the near term.

 

1. Lack of loans available for flight training

2. An over abundance of low time pilots and limited employment opportunities

3. Need for new opportunities for low time pilots to build hours beyond flight instruction

4. Upcoming failure of flight schools due to lack of available flight training loans

5. The obvious follow on lack of qualified low time pilots due to significant loss of schools

 

We have a bubble right now (probably the lee side of the bubble) from the Silver state debacle which has led to an over abundance of low time pilots.

 

6. How do we retain those pilots for when the jobs start to come back?

7. Low pay for flight instructors

 

Did I miss anything?

[adam32]

Nothing will ever change until the Insurance companies change...you can talk all you want about getting higher wages, better benefits, more flexible work schedule etc...but until the insurance mins change nothing else matters...

 

And again, all this leads to (the other thread) is more Government control that already has WAY too much Government control, imo.

[ADRidge]

I'm glad we're back on track. Everyone I talk to who isn't a helicopter pilot says the same thing about who trains us... "That's really weird that a new guy's first job would be teaching someone." Of course, then I feel the need to justify the status quo by saying "well, typically these guys have just spent 200+ hours doing all the required maneuvers to the standards, and they've been studying the regs quite a bit and they're up on everything..."

 

I feel like it's a hollow argument that anyone can see through. I've flown with a few gentlemen who have been flying longer than my 25 years on this earth. They know the regulations just as well as the newly minted CFI, but they've put themselves (or been placed in) situations that a 200 hour wonder has yet to face. Those few flights I've had with "old timers" have been far more informative, hour for hour, than when I've flown with very capable and competent new CFI's.

 

So I guess this brings two questions to the table in regard to "fixing" flight instruction. The First: How do we attract more experienced pilots to the flight school environment? The second: How do we give those who would have otherwise become freshly-minted CFI's the opportunity to build hours and experience?

 

The first one seems the easier of the two. Pay them more. I see it happen on a small scale, but those guys are generally Chief Pilots, and don't necessarily train PPL candidates or even CPL candidates. I had a check airman at my old school who had around 3-4k TT in helicopters, but again,one would only get a few hours' worth of ground and dual instruction. I'm not going to throw out numbers here, as people seem to fixate on them. But if a school could hire on a few higher time pilots with real-world experience under their belt, it might be worth it to match whatever pay they'd make in the Gulf or EMS or what have you. You could certainly market yourself differently than other flight schools and make yourself stand out.

 

The answer to the second question strikes me as the tricky one... where do all those CFI's go? Granted, there will always be those who get lost in the transition. How many of us know someone who went 0-200 and can't find a job? How many of us ARE that person? We know the maneuvers, we know the material and we can wiggle the sticks with the best of them. So why not put us to work? Of course there are the obvious problems with this answer... there aren't enough pt91 operators, the insurance would be almost prohibitively expensive, the operating costs would go through the roof and who could afford to pay those pt 91 operators?

 

Seems to me, those questions would solve the pilot surplus we have. I hate to say it, as I'm one of those jobless 200 hr wonders, but I've got a backup plan in action. I'm not necessarily counting on a helicopter job, and I'm in talks with a company right now who might hire me.

 

As I've said before... I don't have answers, only ideas.

[permison]

Nothing will ever change until the Insurance companies change...you can talk all you want about getting higher wages, better benefits, more flexible work schedule etc...but until the insurance mins change nothing else matters...

 

And again, all this leads to (the other thread) is more Government control that already has WAY too much Government control, imo.

 

Not necessarily. There is a lot companies can do outside of the Insurance industry influence. Here are some examples.

 

1. Lack of loans for new students.

Most people can't get loans by themselves. Hiring companies can cosign or subsidize loans for prospective students. I know some people who are working on a similar plan and have the backing of some of the largest companies in the industry. This is coming for sure and could have a profound impact on the industry. No insurance company involvement.

 

2. Over abundance of low time pilots and limited employment opportunities.

Helicopter companies can create SIC positions for low time pilots to ride along and build hours. This is already being done. Again no insurance company involvement.

 

4. Upcoming failure of flight schools due to lack of available flight training loans.

Hiring companies can purchase or partner with flight schools to A. provide funding for flight training and school ops B. Ensure students meet the company expectations for hiring from the start. Again this is already being tried with at least one company (Bristo?)

 

Those are just some examples that wouldn't require any change on the part of insurance companies.

[Spike]

-Take the “for profit” out of EMS.

-Illuminate incompetent managers, pilots and mechanics throughout the industry (in that order).

-Educate managers, pilots and mechanics.

-Develop an entry level turbine trainer.

-Stop using the word “Safety” as a means to forward an agenda.

-Give NVG’s to all pilots.

-Make being a CFI profitable.

[Oil Pilot]

2. Over abundance of low time pilots and limited employment opportunities.

Helicopter companies can create SIC positions for low time pilots to ride along and build hours. This is already being done. Again no insurance company involvement.

 

They can't just "create" new SIC positions. If you think the insurance companies aren't involved in who gets to sit in that second seat, you're mistaken.

 

How do we attract more experienced pilots to the flight school environment?

 

I learned how to fly in Robinsons. You could not pay me enough to get back into an R-22. Most higher time guys I am sure feel that same way. Military guys definitely feel that way.

 

there aren't enough pt91 operators, the insurance would be almost prohibitively expensive, the operating costs would go through the roof and who could afford to pay those pt 91 operators?

 

I'm glad someone understands this. Keep at it and apply for every instructor job that opens up. Continue to keep yourself current as you can afford to and the opportunity will be there eventually.

[yzchopper]

Wow, It seems to come down to insurance companies dictating the placement of pilots. I'm not an insurance guy so I will ask this question? How hard is it to start your own insurance company?. Why not start flight schools that are geared directly towards specific jobs, like Offshore, ENG, EMS, Long-line VR, and ag work to just name a few. Lets' have some ideas from some the higher time pilots and see what they say. Would they be willing to keep their current pay and start teaching to help those low time guys build hrs. Let the pilots that want their Comm but don't want to teach move into those specific training jobs, and those that want to teach go for their CFI and fly with the high time well experienced pilot so they themselves can become experienced. They may not be high timed but they will be experienced due to their very experienced CFI. As for those who want to fly for the pure enjoyment. There is training for that as well. A low time CFI can train the PPL. After all as the saying goes: " The PPL is the ticket to learn on your own!"

 

I like all the great feedback here. Keep it coming.

 

Steve

[Oil Pilot]

You'll learn more in that first 1000 hours with someone next to you who could kill you than you will in the next 3. Nothing creates a better understanding of things than having to teach it and employers know this.

 

Starting your own insurance company requires money and a lot of it, especially when you're talking about insuring items as expensive as helicopters.

[yzchopper]

Oil Pilot,

Good points. I knew the insurance questions answer would be about having lots of money. But really, how many claims do the insurances get every year on helicopters alone. I've been seeing more accidents with high time pilots than with low time pilots. So where does the insurance get its' information that is factual that it is better to have more hrs? Just a question here cause I don't know the answer.

[RkyMtnHI]

-Take the “for profit” out of EMS.

-Illuminate incompetent managers, pilots and mechanics throughout the industry (in that order).

-Educate managers, pilots and mechanics.

-Develop an entry level turbine trainer.

-Stop using the word “Safety” as a means to forward an agenda.

-Give NVG’s to all pilots.

-Make being a CFI profitable.

 

 

nicely put..

[ADRidge]

-Develop an entry level turbine trainer.

 

This makes me even more interested in the R-66. Hopefully the operating costs will be such that it could be a slightly more expensive alternative to the R-44.

[adam32]

Oil Pilot,

Good points. I knew the insurance questions answer would be about having lots of money. But really, how many claims do the insurances get every year on helicopters alone. I've been seeing more accidents with high time pilots than with low time pilots. So where does the insurance get its' information that is factual that it is better to have more hrs? Just a question here cause I don't know the answer.

 

I don't know how many claims they get a year (i'm guessing not many) but just one can cost millions...

[adam32]

This makes me even more interested in the R-66. Hopefully the operating costs will be such that it could be a slightly more expensive alternative to the R-44.

 

I guessing insurance on an R66 will be around $60k/yr...slightly more then an R44...

Edited January 20, 2010 by adam32

[miles.lowry]

Maybe we need something like an internship. The low time pilot would get hours and experience and the companies would get a trainable pilot on the cheap.

[Sparker]

-Take the “for profit” out of EMS.

 

-Make being a CFI profitable.

 

Yeah... that makes sense.

[Tom22]

Adding to the list of problems:

 

One of the problems is the temporary nature of flight instructing jobs and the attitudes sometimes exhibited by newcomers and temporary employees. These people sometimes have little commitment to the organization’s standards, values, and welfare. It is all about maintaining human assets in creating a high integrity origination.

 

My concern about raising the price for flight instruction is the unattended effects it might have on other facets of the industry; for example, support services and manufacturing – any insight on this?

Edited February 7, 2010 by Tom22

[Sparker]

All flight training should be done in turbines. Sure, they are more expensive but they are also far more safe and reliable than the industry standard R-22. This would cause training prices to skyrocket, but the banks would still give loans, trust me. The reason the banks would be on board is that more of their customers would survive through the training process so they would almost be guaranteed their money back. This would also help graduates to more easily hunt for that desired turbine job, no more "sorry need to get some turbine time first".

 

Once students understand all of these benefits they would be lining up at any school that only has turbine training, trust me.

[Sparker]

Maybe we need something like an internship. The low time pilot would get hours and experience and the companies would get a trainable pilot on the cheap.

 

I know of a few places that do that, but you don't get it by applying for it, you get it by making the right friends...

[RockyMountainPilot]

All flight training should be done in turbines. Sure, they are more expensive but they are also far more safe and reliable than the industry standard R-22. This would cause training prices to skyrocket, but the banks would still give loans, trust me. The reason the banks would be on board is that more of their customers would survive through the training process so they would almost be guaranteed their money back. This would also help graduates to more easily hunt for that desired turbine job, no more "sorry need to get some turbine time first".

 

Once students understand all of these benefits they would be lining up at any school that only has turbine training, trust me.

 

The R22 has proven to be as or more reliable than turbines.

[yzchopper]

Adding to the list of problems:

 

Ok now that we have established the many hurdles, problems, and challenges that lay ahead of us. How can we come together as one to find the solution, so as to start taking and making the right steps toward a better and more marketable future for the helicopter industry and its' pilots?

 

Steve

[yzchopper]

The R22 has proven to be as or more reliable than turbines.

 

I have heard this before and I have to agree. To train in a turbine is only going to be a partial solution to the many hurdles and challenges that we face.

[Inferno]

Exactly. And read the NTSB reports. Most accidents in R22s during training end up with minor or nil injuries. Most fatal accidents occur with EMS. I'm sure there is a chart about that somewhere. I've never seen it though. Just a pattern ive seen from reading through 10 years worth of the NTSB reports.

 

Another thing to note, almost all r22 accidents are a result of training errors. Dynamic rollover during slopes. Failed autos (a big cause), etc... Using a turbine chopper for training would just mean more turbine choppers were getting wrecked.

The R22 has proven to be as or more reliable than turbines.

[Mikemv]

Being that this is still a constructive, non-argumentative thread, I have some additions.

 

Some of you know me or have flown with me thru the years, 42+. That is not my age, I just turned 63, 42+ is helo experience.

 

On Monday past my girl friend who was off from work that day asked me do "I have a dream" now that I do not have a helo to fly for the first time in 30+ years? Maybe she picked up on that from the TV as it was MLK holiday.

 

In e-mails with DP and others, I have offered help.

 

My ideas are:

 

To offer Seminars to Schools and pilots to solve short comings in helicopter training & pilot mis-conceptions that have become common in todays CFIs & pilots. This would make CFIs/pilots more aware and create a knowledge base that cures the holes/gaps in it now. This is far beyond the PTs and basic, get the rating Curriculums but mostly covered in Ground School and reinforced in flight training so not very expensive to a student or a school. In essence, just a complete foundation, integrated by knowledgeable CFIs from day one for every student. A complete training standarization industry wide would be the ideal result!

 

To help schools develope Scenario based training for the Commercial Certificate and Scenario based CFI training to really mentor CFI applicants to make them worthy and confident as their feet hit the ground and make sure that their first student gets everything that I would give them for that Certificate.

 

To be available to go to schools and mentor their CFIs as possible.

 

To approach Insurance Companies and try to get schools discounts for their pilots attending an Initial Seminar and refresher training or continued training for new hire/turnover CFIs.

 

To convince Insurance Companies that Flight Instruction including Scenario based training with ADM & CRM engrained will produce safer pilots and reduce accidents and risks.

 

The first Seminar was offered to DP for Colorado Heli Ops. We have been talking about this for some time and I hope to make it happen in March after HAI. However, I am available to discuss help with any school or CFI group.

 

Yes, I am one of the old farts of the industry and want to give back and make the industry better, safer and a recognized and respected profession.

 

MikeMV

[500pilot]

This post is going to piss of alot of lower time pilots but I need to say my feelings about pilots looking to learn as low time SIC's. I know you want to learn and are excited to try new things and think that being in the left seat will give an operator a cheap way to build a pilot the way they want.

 

I fly a dual pilot IFR aircraft and in a very challenging enviroment in the NE. I would not want a lower time pilot to be in the aircraft with me. The reason being is I'm not there to train someone. When I am in the cockpit with my SIC we are a crew and we both use our experience to do get the job done safely and effeciently. I have flown with some new pilots that were qualified on paper but once they got in the cockpit they were overwhelmed. It was worse than being single pilot as I felt like I was babysitting the other pilot and did not feel the confidence I had with a more compitent crew member. A new pilot would be even worse and can lead to serious safety issues. Some of these pilots got better and became much better pilots, some just felt overwhelmed and left. These pilots were all high time guys (over 2500hrs) coming from both the military and civilian world.

 

When we fly in a world outside the training enviroment most of the flying is boring and mundane and thats the way I like it. Add in IFR, tight landing spaces and takeoff spaces, power management and a young pilot will quickly get overwhelmed. I need to be able to trust my SIC and his knowledge about flying not having to second guess his/her descisions. I have no problem teaching a new pilots stuff I know but would not want to do that in every day situation. It would be to stressful on myself and probably on other pilots as well.

 

People think that teaching a student at 200 hours is stupid as you hardly know anything at that stage, but those hours you build as an instructor are the most valuable hours you will obtain in your career. I also wanted to fly a big helicopter when I was low time but back then, like now you had to instruct. Looking back at those hours it was some of the most usefull learning experience I have had. It prepared me to go into the bigger ships at the time (206's 500's etc) The hours I built then set the foundation for the rest of my career. If you have been taught by a good instructor you will in turn be teaching those skills and knowledge to the next generation. You will in turn be developing a solid decision making process which will be expanded by the first turbine operator you work for.

 

All the initial entry turbine companies know that you are low time and don't expect you to be Mr perfect pilot. Instead what they look for are your decision making skills that you built up as an instructor. They don't want to train you to fly or to give you a learning experience. That extra seat in the cockpit is revenue. If you have made it to the magic 1000-1500 hour mark you by now have the skills they need and want to fly thier helicopters.

 

I personally have no problem mentoring lower time pilots and have done so many times. I have always tried to offer up an extra seat if I have an mx flight or position flight. But when it somes to doing my job I do not want a low time pilot sitting next to me. I want someone with equal experience working as a competent flight crew getting our job done safely.