Turbo prop PIC vs Turbo Jet PIC
07-03-2021, 01:57 PM
#11
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,211
Originally Posted by ZeroTT
Which I’d say is primarily a function of size. (Vs the various small military TP’s which might not get as much credit)
All other services those are essentially training or utility aircraft which you might fly on a non-operational tour. Your marketability with majors is keyed to your operational platform... if that's a helo you'll need to do a touch and go at a regional.
But even so I bet a T6 FAIP who had enough hours and did a palace chase maneuver could get hired at DL.
07-03-2021, 03:06 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
My jet type rating and flying is the easiest flying I’ve ever done. Props make you a better pilot, no magenta lines to rely on
07-03-2021, 03:35 PM
#14
Strike averted!
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: B737
Posts: 3,638
There wasn’t anything simple about ATR’s and SF3’s and Dash-8’s. It’s good PIC time and requires a type rating to boot. Add in the 121 experience and you have someone well qualified.
Corporate jet PIC time is a good number too.
If you have both, it’s a good mix and varied experience.
Can’t comment on mil experience as I’m civilian, but I’m sure PIC time is PIC time at the end of the day.
FWIW, many don’t require the PIC turbine time anymore.
Corporate jet PIC time is a good number too.
If you have both, it’s a good mix and varied experience.
Can’t comment on mil experience as I’m civilian, but I’m sure PIC time is PIC time at the end of the day.
FWIW, many don’t require the PIC turbine time anymore.
07-03-2021, 03:53 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: 1900D CA
Posts: 3,391
My old turbo prop job was substantially more challenging than my Airbus job.
I was a much better pilot then than I am now. Going from a turbo prop to an Airbus was a totally fine transition. Absolutely no reason to not hire turbo prop pilots to fly 737s/A320s
I was a much better pilot then than I am now. Going from a turbo prop to an Airbus was a totally fine transition. Absolutely no reason to not hire turbo prop pilots to fly 737s/A320s
Last edited by Aero1900; 07-03-2021 at 04:17 PM.
07-03-2021, 06:03 PM
#16
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,211
Originally Posted by Aero1900
My old turbo prop job was substantially more challenging than my Airbus job.
07-04-2021, 05:13 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by at6d
I think a lot is just information overload. Where to look for what you need from the steam era to the glass stuff. I’m pretty sure the group coming up has less round dial time to “unlearn” so to speak.
Recently my organization hired a 70+ year old, very high time former DC-8 pilot who worked for whatever ACMI/Cargo airline is flying DC-8s (like DHL or someone?). In any case - I'm not sure what the cockpits of a DC-8 is like - but this person was not (for whatever combination of age, stuck in his old ways, inability to transition to glass, or just a poor attitude which he displayed in Indoc class) comfortable in the King Air 300. Failed CAE's KA350 Initial Type checkride twice.
The (in relation) 'younger guys' coming in from either GA, the P135/121 world, and the military most have plenty of some sort of glass cockpit time and seem to transition fairly easily to any of our airplanes.
07-04-2021, 06:29 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,864
It is not a prop to jet issue or a dial to glass issue. It’s a brain malleability issue. Most common reason for deterioration is age. Being old doesn’t mean you have it worse, just more likely.
The other reason would be some sort of visual/spatial issue that makes it hard to develop a scan with the myriad of glass info depictions.
The prop guys (from my old regional) that had issues at my my major were mostly older and very often difficult personality types. Regardless, people who obsess about the way their previous type operated (prop or jet), and can’t brain dump, are going to have a harder training experience.
The other reason would be some sort of visual/spatial issue that makes it hard to develop a scan with the myriad of glass info depictions.
The prop guys (from my old regional) that had issues at my my major were mostly older and very often difficult personality types. Regardless, people who obsess about the way their previous type operated (prop or jet), and can’t brain dump, are going to have a harder training experience.
07-04-2021, 09:10 AM
#20
Gets Everyday Off
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: Relaxed
Posts: 6,929
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Same, it's not harder it's just different. But some people don't do different very well. Several of the legacies observed higher rates training problems with folks who didn't have jet time so they started weighting it accordingly. That's a known fact, so take it into account in your career movements.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
