The U.S. has a staggering pilot shortage

Over the next two decades, 87 new pilots need to be trained and ready to fly a commercial airliner every day in order to meet our insatiable demand to travel by air.

 

That's one every 15 minutes.

 

Passenger and cargo airlines around the world are expected to buy 41,000 new airliners between 2017 and 2036. And they will need 637,000 new pilots to fly them, according to a forecast from Boeing released this week. That staggering figure is matched only by how many will leave the profession in the next decade -- particularly in the U.S.

 

Retirements at U.S. airlines will start to rise precipitously starting in 2021 as the current crop of pilots turns 65, the mandated age of retirement. More than 42% of active U.S. airline pilots at the biggest carriers will retire over the next 10 years, about 22,000, according to a recent report by Cowen & Company.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/27/news/companies/pilot-shortage-figures/index.html

Here's an interesting commentary from one of America's most respected pilots.

 

'Sully' Sullenbeger wants to save the FAA

 

What do you do about a pilot shortage, though, Sully? … How can we get more capable people attracted to this very important job?

 

Well, they’re crying wolf. In this country right now for most carriers, there is not a pilot shortage. They are still able to attract qualified, experienced applicants, the number they require. We need to make sure that the industry as a whole can find efficient pathways, and some now exist. There are some good examples where major airlines are partnering with regional airlines and partnering with universities that provide aviation degrees and training.

 

It’s really only a few of the real bottom-feeders that are the least well run, the least capitalized companies that are having the most trouble. A couple come to mind: Great Lakes and Mesa. There are still a few of them that have extraordinarily low starting pay, in the $20,000 range, barely above food-stamp wage levels, and they’re the ones that are still trying to continue to use what is a broken economic model and one that is not sufficient in this market to attract sufficient numbers of fully qualified candidates. They’re the ones that are having the most trouble.

 

http://naplesherald.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/1433298575_clint-eastwood-to-make-biopic-of-pilot-sully-sullenberger-e1433298752731.jpg

I remember reading something a while ago about pilot's pay. For example if you start as s first officer, work for the company for x amount of years and get promoted to captain, work for more years with that company and then leave to join another.

You start as a first officer again on bottom pay, to my mind that is wrong, you could be more qualified than the guy sat next to you and he's the boss and on top pay.

Here's an interesting commentary from one of America's most respected pilots.

 

'Sully' Sullenbeger wants to save the FAA

 

What do you do about a pilot shortage, though, Sully? … How can we get more capable people attracted to this very important job?

 

Well, they’re crying wolf. In this country right now for most carriers, there is not a pilot shortage. They are still able to attract qualified, experienced applicants, the number they require. We need to make sure that the industry as a whole can find efficient pathways, and some now exist. There are some good examples where major airlines are partnering with regional airlines and partnering with universities that provide aviation degrees and training.

 

It’s really only a few of the real bottom-feeders that are the least well run, the least capitalized companies that are having the most trouble. A couple come to mind: Great Lakes and Mesa. There are still a few of them that have extraordinarily low starting pay, in the $20,000 range, barely above food-stamp wage levels, and they’re the ones that are still trying to continue to use what is a broken economic model and one that is not sufficient in this market to attract sufficient numbers of fully qualified candidates. They’re the ones that are having the most trouble.

 

I already read that Katie Couric article, and while I admire Sullenbeger, I have to disagree. Just because he landed a plane on the Hudson doesn't make him all knowing.

I am more inclined to believe Mr Sullenberger as he actually works in the trade ( and has nothing to do with " landing " a plane in the Hudson ) , as opposed to an armchair pilot any day .

 

John

John is right. Sully knows the airline industry and has a more accurate assessment than corporate airline lobbyists or flightsim hobbyists like us. Just because Sully got press coverage from the emergency landing doesn't mean he should be discounted. A similar situation is occurring in my field, IT, where corporations claim labor shortages and want to rig the H-1B Visa program, hire in lower-paid foreign IT employees, instead of Americans.

A similar situation is occurring in my field, IT, where corporations claim labor shortages and want to rig the H-1B Visa program, hire in lower-paid foreign IT employees, instead of Americans.

 

This has already happened in the UK, where IT services have been outsourced to Asia for years. The company I work for here in the UK, a US multinational corporation, even outsourced it's UK Finance operations to Manila last year. Office morale is now: "If that can happen to Finance, none of us are safe".

But back to the topic: Sully is right, the industry can attract the applicants they require. It's how the industry is doing it that causes concern, as ColR1948 mentioned - just Google "P2F Pilot Jobs" to see what I mean.