Congress Can't Erode Airplane Safety Rules That Save Lives (2024)

On a foggy night in February 2009, Colgan Air Flight 3407 took off from Newark Airport, heading for nearby Buffalo, New York. Fifty-nine minutes later, the aircraft crashed into a house, killing all 49 passengers and crew on board, along with one person on the ground.

Immediately, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board began an investigation into the crash, soon determining it was caused by pilot error due to lack of experience with icing conditions. As a result, Congress acted to strengthen training requirements for all passenger airline pilots, including, crucially, instituting what’s known as the1,500 hourrule: a regulation mandating that pilots earn a minimum of 1,500 real world flight hours before being allowed to work for an airline, with an adequate portion of those hours spent flying in difficult operational conditions.

There has not been a single passenger death caused by pilot error in commercial aviation since the rule was enacted, proving a core principle we all know to be true: that experience matters. Yet, right now, several of my colleagues are trying to gut the 1,500 hour rule, proposing legislation that would produce less experienced pilots and represent an unacceptable backsliding as well as a dangerous complacency in an industry where complacency kills. They’re supposedly doing so in an effort to address the recent pilot shortage—but this so-called solution does anything but solve the problem, and seems more akin to addressing a doctor shortage by slashing the amount of training medical school students need to earn their degree.

The thing is, existing law already allows for some exemptions—but always based on safety, not temporary labor conditions. For example, the FAA allows for an expedited pathway for military and former military pilots, and on occasion it credits time spent in certain academic training courses, but only if such courses enhance safety more than requiring a pilot to fully comply with the full 1,500 hour requirement.

To me, there has never been a worse time to weaken pilot regulations, as 2023 has already been a chilling year for our civil aviation system. We’ve witnessed a disturbing rise of near-deadly close calls—an uptick that the NTSB deemed a national safety crisis and that led the FAA to convene an unprecedented safety summit.

As both a former Army pilot and as the current Chair of the Senate’s Aviation Safety Subcommittee, I refuse to respond to thesenear-missesby further reducing pilot training. I refuse to be complicit in efforts to compromise my constituents’ safety. Instead, I’m doing everything in my power to convince my colleagues to proactivelystrengthensafety measures so that these close calls never become precursors to tragedy.

When I was serving in Iraq, I learned all too well the value of real-world experience. After all, I am only able to write this today—I am only alive today—because of the immense skills shown by my flight crew, which were earned through countless in-the-sky flight hours.

On November 12, 2004, an RPG tore through the co*ckpit of the Black Hawk I was co-piloting. We were 10 feet above the trees, we’d lost all of our avionics and total hydraulic failure was likely next. There was no way, no chance, that we should’ve been able to land the aircraft. In fact, in my decade-plus of training as a military pilot, every time—every single time—that we simulated a similar scenario, we died. The understanding was that that kind of catastrophe was simply not survivable.

And yet, on that day in Iraq, we did.

We fought to regain control of our helicopter. And led by the expertise of my pilot-in-command, we safely landed our aircraft. We survived.

This was only possible because actual, in-air flight experience prepared us to respond to the most desperate of situations with levels heads and swift action. Unlike in a simulator, there is no “pause” button in flight. So it is that training that Ihave tothank for being alive today—for my family, for my career, for my very breath.

I’m not the only one pleading with my colleagues to uphold this rule. The Hero of the Hudson, Captain Sully Sullenberger, has also implored Congress not to get complacent, trying to get them to understand that the combined 40,000-plus flight hours between him and his first officer were critical in saving the 155 lives onboard his plane the day he safely landed on the Hudson River.

Do you think that prior to that afternoon there were any flight simulations of a dual engine failure from bird strike followed by a water landing? Of course not. In fact, even when that simulation was run after the Miracle on the Hudson, even with flight crews expecting the scenario, they still crashed time after time. It was only thanks to the pilots’ experience that those 155 people made it home to their families that January night.

While I truly believe that simulators are a valuable training tool, I myself have used them, and that's why is I know they are no substitute for the real thing. For example, a simulator cannot replace the experience of walking around your aircraft and seeing ice accumulating on your wing surfaces. Life-saving instincts are earned through thousands of hours of piloting a real aircraft with real lives at stake. So while I understand that the perfect storm of major carriers buying out thousands of their most-experienced pilots combined with a post-pandemic surge in air travel has created a temporary shortage of pilots and first officers, it is critical that we resist the false promise of a quick-fix that could increase lives lost in a preventable tragedy.

The FAA seems to agree. Last year, they rejected a petition for an exemption to the flight hours requirement, stating that they had “previously concluded the argument that an exemption would serve to address a pilot shortage is overly simplistic and does not present a persuasive argument.”

So as both a professional pilot and as a mom who regularly travels with my two little girls, I am holding the line on safety. Now is not the time to go backward. Now is not the time to cut corners. Now is not the time to put corporate profits ahead of American lives. Anyone who refuses to see sense here—anyone who votes to reduce the1,500 hourrule for pilot training—will have blood on their hands when the inevitable accident occurs thanks to an inadequately trained flight crew.

Congress Can't Erode Airplane Safety Rules That Save Lives (2024)

FAQs

What is the FAA 1000 hour rule? ›

(e) No pilot may fly as a member of a crew more than 100 hours during any one calendar month. (f) No pilot may fly as a member of a crew more than 1,000 hours during any 12-calendar-month period.

What is the flight safety rules? ›

You can make your flight even safer by following these guidelines: Pay attention to the flight attendant safety briefing at the beginning of your flight and read the safety briefing card. Buckle up. Keep you and your family safe by wearing a seat belt at all times while seated.

What safety equipment is on a plane? ›

Each passenger seat, flight attendant seat and bathroom is equipped with oxygen generators and masks. If the cabin altitude reaches 14,000 feet, oxygen masks automatically deploy from above. If the automatic system fails, the flight crew has access to an override switch to open the oxygen doors for the cabin.

Will I be safe on my flight? ›

“There were five fatal accidents among 32.2 million flights in 2022. That tells us that flying is among the safest activities in which a person can engage.

What is the 1% rule in aviation? ›

In aviation medicine, the 1% rule is a risk threshold that is applied to the medical fitness of pilots. The 1% rule states that a 1% per annum risk (See also risk management) of medical incapacitation is the threshold between acceptable and unacceptable.

What is the one sixty rule in aviation? ›

That's why pilots are taught the 1 in 60 rule, which states that after 60 miles, a one-degree error in heading will result in straying off course by one mile. Which means the lake you planned to fly over could turn out to be a mountain.

What is the rule of 3 flying? ›

In aviation, the rule of three or "3:1 rule of descent" is a rule of thumb that 3 nautical miles (5.6 km) of travel should be allowed for every 1,000 feet (300 m) of descent. For example, a descent from flight level 350 would require approximately 35x3=105 nautical miles.

Which words are banned in airports? ›

Avoid using the following words on international flights:
  • Terrorist.
  • Bomb (Bomb)
  • Missile.
  • Weapon (Gun)
  • Fire.

What is the least safe aircraft? ›

In terms of fatalities per mile or per hour, it is very likely to be the Comet 1 or Concord was the least safe Commercial aircraft model. The 12 Comet 1s were produced, 3 had complete crashes with all on board killed (nearly 100 people) in the course of 6 years of operation.

What are the safest spots in a plane? ›

Aisle, Middle, Window

OK, so toward the back of the plane yet still close to an emergency exit is probably your safest bet.

What tools are not allowed on a plane? ›

Tools 7 inches or shorter (measured from end to end when assembled) may be allowed in carry-on baggage. Power tools and all tools longer than 7 inches (measured from end to end when assembled) are prohibited in carry-on baggage; these items must be packed in your checked bags.

Do passenger planes carry life rafts? ›

If you're on an airplane, you can rest assured that aircraft life rafts will be onboard with you in all-weather carry cases made of plastic, fiberglass containers or canvas holdalls.

Which airline is the safest? ›

As per the rating, Air New Zealand has once again managed to secure the designation of the world's safest airline, reclaiming the top position for 2024 and surpassing its counterpart Qantas. Air New Zealand's skilled pilots played a pivotal role in attaining the top position.

What is the safest airline in the US 2024? ›

UNDATED (WKRC) - Ultra-low cost carrier Spirit was named the safest airline of 2024 by WalletHub. The personal finance company ranked the nine largest carriers in the United States, as well as one reginal airline.

What is the safest form of travel? ›

However, much to the surprise of many, air travel is the safest option. This is due in part to the minimal crashes and incidents that have resulted in injury and fatalities throughout the years. While it's not impossible for any serious event to occur on a plane, historically, the number of occurrences is quite small.

Can pilots fly over 1000 hours? ›

The total flight time of the sectors on which an individual crew member is assigned as an operating crew member shall not exceed: (1) 100 hours of flight time in any 28 consecutive days; (2) 900 hours of flight time in any calendar year; and. (3) 1 000 hours of flight time in any 12 consecutive calendar months.

What are the exceptions to the 1500 hour rule? ›

The 1500-hour Rule required for pilot flight training does have some exceptions. These exceptions include: Graduates with a bachelor's degree in aviation can reduce their time to 1,000 hours. Graduates with an associate's degree in aviation can reduce flight time to 1,250 hours.

What is the 1000ft rule in aviation? ›

Low flying

In general, except when necessary for take-off or landing, an aircraft should be 1,000 ft over a built-up area or otherwise 500ft from people, vehicles, vessels and structures.

How expensive is it to get 1500 flight hours? ›

That time as a CFI can vary but most people get their total 1500 hours in 12-15 months as a CFI. A CFI license is probably going to cost another $6,500 to $7,000. Our lenders may lend you all the money to get all of these licenses.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Tish Haag

Last Updated:

Views: 6478

Rating: 4.7 / 5 (47 voted)

Reviews: 86% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Tish Haag

Birthday: 1999-11-18

Address: 30256 Tara Expressway, Kutchburgh, VT 92892-0078

Phone: +4215847628708

Job: Internal Consulting Engineer

Hobby: Roller skating, Roller skating, Kayaking, Flying, Graffiti, Ghost hunting, scrapbook

Introduction: My name is Tish Haag, I am a excited, delightful, curious, beautiful, agreeable, enchanting, fancy person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.