^ This.


There is also data that some new-hires struggle through training learning certain flows or procedures that are specific to the airline....even if they’re type rated on the same airplane. They start with the excuses after they start struggling....”well at my previous airline, we did it like this.” Before you know it they fail training.

Adding a recent type rating demonstrates trainability and determination.

A 737 PIC type is one of the cheapest you can get. My C680 type was $40K.

You’d have enough left for a DC-3 type.

I would have the same issue doing it through an employer. The difference here is I don't have the stress of a employment training event. This is just like going to get my private. And I don't have to deal with a 2x and you're unemployed. I can do this on my time off and take my time getting ready.

Either way I face the same challenge. The ONLY difference is that I am doing it on my own vers doing it through an employer. It's still the same check ride and I can focus on just learning the airplane rather than a specific airlines way of doing things. Then once I have the type it's just a matter of learning how to do it the way the airline wants me to. I'll already know all the systems and have passed the check ride making the employment training fairly simple.

Again, this is a leap of logic not even core to the question. One could argue, and I am, that one would face the same struggles through employer provided training. The difference is doing it on my own is easier with less to learn vers all the stuff crammed down your throat during indoc and flight training.

To suggest I would fail training "because" I didn't get my type through an airline paid program is the very definition of a red herring. Once I hire on with a employer I would still get the exact same training that any other candidate would get, I just hopefully already have the type. That makes airline specific training much easier once I get to that point.

Yeah, I am good with that. I don't have an issue spending a few weeks in a hotel. One of the facilities is a close drive from home. Not close enough for me to do the commute every day but close enough that I can just drive there and stay in a hotel. Plus I think my travel and hotel stay is covered under my VA benefits. All the training facilities I am looking at have the same timeline, or within a day or two of each other.

Airbus. There is a different philosophy in this plane and I’ve seen some new guys really struggle to get it. If you end up working for someone that flies them, indoc will just be a review. I agree that it probably won’t help you land the job, but training will be less stressful. Good luck wherever you end up.

Thanks, yeah the less stressful training is what I am looking for. Well that and the options. I looked up which have more in service and it was pretty much 50/50 between Airbus and Boeing. Based on my research there doesn't seem to be any benefit over one or the other as to which is more likely to find. I was hoping one manufacturer clearly had more in service and there would be more options for employers but it's literally right down the middle. So now it's figuring out which makes one better over the other.

You're not the first to say the Airbus is harder to learn so that might be the way to go (provided I don't go with the DC-3 option).

When you get to large airplanes in the airlines even aircraft limitations may be different. I fly 737s and commute regularly on another 737 operator. We don't even fly them like they are the same airframe. The procedures and limitations we use are that different. I'm not saying that getting a type somewhere else is going to make you untrainable, but you are very fast to discount what others have observed. You are doing a disservice to the person who tried to give advice by calling it a "red herring." The point people are trying to make is that it most likely won't really have any impact on how "easy" or "less stressful" airline training is. People who think that they don't need to worry about it because they already have the "type" seem to be the ones that get into trouble. The advantage you have will be things like FMS operation and overall operating philosophy, but they can be a hurdle if you lean on them too much.

I'd say that the A320 logic is the most intuitive and simple to learn Flight Control Panel. It's simply a push or pull system. I'd recommend learning the intricacies of the Boeing logic and then being able to easily adjust to Airbus if/when you're given the opportunity. Just my humble opinion.

Without actual time in the aircraft, either type rating will be meaningless, and could be an actual liability if you’re asked about it in a future interview....someone who has thousands of hours in it might ask you a simple question, and being unable to answer it would paint you in a negative light.