
Freelance Pilots - prot
http://romansnitko.com/blog/freelance-pilots.html
======
olympus
Falls apart right here: "Imagine David. David is an airline captain lincenced
to fly B737, B747-400, B-747-800 and any B777" There may be pilots who have
flown 737, 747, and 777 before, but there are none (or practically none) who
are current in all three at once. To get your currency back in a particular
airframe could be as simple as a single check ride with a qualified (and
current) pilot if it's only been a few weeks since you've flown last, all the
way up to a review test and multiple check rides if they haven't flown in that
airframe in quite a while.

And how did David get qualified in each of said airframes? An airline wanted
David to fly a different route that used a different plane so they PAID for
him to get the training and get certified. That would not happen in a
freelance system.

There would likely be a freelance community around each type of plane,
especially the smaller commuter varieties, but each pilot would basically be
restricted to a single airframe until he/she could afford to pay for
certification in a bigger and more lucrative jet on their own.

Would the FAA allow such a system to arise? Probably not. The status quo of
having airlines schedule crews on routes that they are familiar with (with the
occasional change) seems safer than having every single flight be with a crew
that is unfamiliar with their route.

~~~
snitko
I don't think the system where airlines sponsor pilot's
education/certification is the only viable one. Other institutions, such as
banks, can offer student loans. Another point you made about the fact that
pilots cannot fly multiple airplanes is simply false. The older the pilot is,
the more chances there are he flew multiple types of aircraft working for
different companies. I know at least one who flew b737 of various models,
b757, b767 and then b777 and he's nothing out of the ordinary.

~~~
tobltobs
> Another point you made about the fact that pilots cannot fly multiple
> airplanes is simply false.

He didn't say this anywhere.

~~~
snitko
Apologies, you're right. But I don't think he's right about the fact that a
pilot cannot fly three types of aircraft either.

~~~
ewang1
OP is right. You can get qualified on multiple aircraft types, but to maintain
currency is a different topic altogether. In the US for example, at least for
private pilots, you need at least 3 take offs and landings in the last 90 days
in the aircraft (category/class/type-rating) to be able to carry passengers.
Then there's extra requirements for night currency and instrument rating
currency.

I would imagine the airlines have even tougher currency requirements. That
said, it's probably possible to maintain currency in several aircraft types
depending on the frequency and how the jobs are scheduled.

------
throwaway_exer
The article was written by somebody who knows very little about airlines:

\- an airline has to have pilots at the gate on time, guaranteed

\- each airline has its own operating rules and checklists

\- planes and airports have unique combinations of Cat III landings

\- airline pilots are route-checked. they don't fly random routes.

\- most major airlines have unions, so freelancers are not allowed.

However, he could be describing ferry pilots or Netjet pilots or some other
non-scheduled route.

~~~
JamilD
To be fair, the author addresses some of these points at the end:

> The only two reasons this system is not widespread now are regulations and
> unions. I'm more than convinced had regulations allowed for such a system
> and had not the unions had so much power, you'd see this happening already.

…… of course, he's ignoring the fact that many of these regulations are there
for _very_ good reason.

~~~
EdHominem
Yes, those are the kind of regulation you can revisit, the good kind. If you
can solve the issues another way you change them.

Regulations that exist for no good reason are there for the whim of someone.

------
resu_nimda
This makes little to no sense. Flight schedules are worked out months in
advance, it's a carefully planned system where many pilots fly particular
routes only, and often back and forth. There's no way it could work with
pilots signing up for arbitrary flights to whatever destinations mere hours
before takeoff, unless there was a huge surplus of pilots waiting at all
airports who are willing to constantly go to random places and have no
certainty about where they might be tomorrow. It would be massively
inefficient. I doubt any current pilots have unplanned 15 hour downtimes
because they have to wait around for the right flight to come along. I just
don't believe that many pilots want to bounce around randomly, never knowing
what's happening beyond the next flight. The article also seems to ignore the
existence of short domestic flights.

 _Passengers more freedom in deciding what 's safe for them_

This seems to be creating a problem where one doesn't exist. Today most people
accept that any pilot on an established airline will be considered safe, and
you don't have to give it any more thought. I don't think any airline will
want to advertise varying levels of safety...

And yeah the Bitcoin product placement seems totally unnecessary.

~~~
pjc50
_Passengers more freedom in deciding what 's safe for them_

No, this is totally in line with the Bitcoin "do your own risk assessment"
product placement: a total disregard of how hard it is for the end user to
work out what's safe or not.

------
Justin_K
I have my certificate and know many career pilots. I can for aure say that
pilots want a schedule more than anything. When they're on the road so much
all they look forward to is getting home. Leaving that up to the mercy of a
free market wouldn't work for a majority of career pilots. Many young pilots
do charters and it's basically slave labor like this... The charter co's will
only fly the jet home if the leg is paid for. So these guys end up spending a
lot of time doing nothing while they wait for new legs to be booked. And those
legs will turn into many stops before coming home. It's grueling work but
pilots do it to build a lot of hours. Number one complaint is not knowing when
they're going home.

------
rdl
I thought this was going to be a counterpoint about "so, pilots don't fly this
way -- why should developers?" or something.

------
a3n
This sounds like the libertarian fantasy blog post awhile back where a
freelance cop is shooting heroin in his patrol car, and deciding whether to
take the next radio call.

~~~
paulcole
New Yorker:

[http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-
libertaria...](http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-
police-department)

------
tobltobs
> had not the unions had so much power, you'd see this happening already.

It is funny that you only mention airlines (lufthansa, Air France) where
pilots are organized within strong unions. And most pilots would love to work
for just those airlines, because they are the last ones which pay good wages.

------
kps
Very good; I can't tell whether it's parody or not.

~~~
nether
Techies can be pretty cute.

~~~
tobltobs
Feel honoured, because usually they are rude to people who do not know any
facts but propose solutions.

------
emdowling
This would never fly (excuse the pun). For all the practical reasons like
currency on so many aircraft and the cost (being checked to line on a A380
takes 2-3 months full time - who pays for that? Simulators ain't cheap!)

Above all else, the human aspect is terrible. I'm flabbergasted the author
glosses over this. A Frankfurt - Chicago - Frankfurt trip would see a pilot
away for 3-4 days as it is. Factor in not getting a direct flight back and
waiting 15 hours for the opportunity to fly a 1 hour flight, it's gonna be
closer to 5-6 days. What spouse is going to be happy with that?! Pilots
already have enough stress worrying about how to their family while away -
adding in a variable time frame would be hell on earth.

------
sneak
"Passengers more freedom in deciding what's safe for them"

This makes it seem like reasonable defaults are absent; "safe for them" is a
one-size-fits-all when we are talking about air travel.

~~~
snitko
Not really. There are airlines who hire young low paid unskilled pilots, there
are pilots from various countries with different English skills, there are
pilots who didn't get enough sleep last night. Then there are airports that
have different standards for security, different border-control waiting time,
different luggage waiting time & equipment, different ground-crew serving the
airplane. All this information is obscured from the passengers, but it doesn't
mean it's not affecting safety, because it is.

~~~
sneak
Allowing individuals to adjust the safety levers means more people will die,
because the vast majority of individuals who use air travel are not qualified
or informed enough to make good decisions about these things. More people will
die unnecessarily than under the current system.

~~~
snitko
People don't need to make those decisions. Currently, safety decisions are
made by the government, which really doesn't have any competition and thus is
not incentivized to improve its set of regulations. If you had 2-3 companies
providing market review for the passengers, I'm pretty sure the situation
would improve, not deteriorate. Perhaps some regulations simply don't make any
sense and do not improve safety, but you'd never know that until you have one
agency managing it.

~~~
mikeash
Airline safety is currently in a state where it is nearly indistinguishable
from perfect. Accident rates are so low that it's no longer possible to put an
accurate number on the risk of taking a flight. And all of this has been done
while keeping ticket prices at extremely low levels. It would be remarkable
for any change to this to result in an improvement, since there's almost
nowhere to go but down.

------
partisan
Uber for pilots! The next big unicorn!

I do think that pilots are commoditized, but not to the extent that they are
interchangeable in this manner. The industry is way too heavily regulated for
this to ever work, and for good reason.

Honestly, well before something like this would come to pass, there will be
whole fleets of autonomous planes in the air, thereby avoiding this scenario
altogether.

~~~
poolbath1
There are already whole fleets of autonomous planes in the air. They have
autopilot. The only difference is that when something goes wrong in the air,
you can't just pull over and get a tech to the plane. You need someone already
in the cockpit who knows what they are doing.

------
minimuffins
Imagine how big the reserve army of pilots would have to be for this to work!
Like half the world would have to be pilots. They'd make five bucks a flight.

Now imagine something better: Universal Basic Income.

------
clueless123
My best guess? In less than 15 years most aircraft will be self-flying. It
will probably start with cargo planes over ocean routes, then inland, then
passengers.

