Current is current for most, but I don't know if all airlines view it the same. They probably do if you have an extensive military background, less so if you are from a different path.

 

Here's another question - do you think choice A or choice B improves your resume? Or might get you hired sooner?

Or are you just choosing A or B because you think your resume is good enough and you just need to tread water until they discover you?

 

Well a couple of things. I think ANY flight time improves a resume. I also think having a range of different aircraft experience is a good thing (unless you are a "high turnover" employee who can't hold a job..ect).

I think, given the current perception of hiring trends, that my Resume will be good enough in a year or two. The problem is that my currency (and my NEED to fly) needs to bridge that gap. So yes....tho I don't really see it as treading water and more as a broadening my horizons in the civilian aviation world.....you know semantics and stuff .

I think (Sc)harrier dude is right. Networking is really the key. I'm not great at it but learning. It's already helped get me a Chief pilot interview with Alaska and more importantly to learn the ins and outs and dos and don'ts surrounding civilian aviation.

 

Why isn't your resume good enough today? If you don't think it's competitive now I'm not sure getting a light civilian TPIC job is that much of an improvement.

I suggest making resumes for your current experience level and then making a new resume for 1, 2, 3, 4 and five years into the future. Make one for choosing Option A or Option B. Decide at what point you think you're resume is competitive or highly competitive. Compare the future Option A or Option B resume at that point.

I've working with a retiring squadron commander. Several type ratings, IP, Stan/Eval, etc. Loaded resume. He could get a civilian TPIC job and do fine. But even he's looking at filling the 121 squares, if he doesn't get hired before he separates, by getting a regional FO job.

 

Resume needs more hours. It will be more competitive when the airlines can't find 2500 hour plus fighter guys like they can right now (I assume anyway) when the demand is too great. I'm around the 1800 mark. Having said that....yes I could get hired tomorrow, even at the 1800 mark but I'd like to be over 2000 for obvious reasons.

So my plan was always to have the regionals as the stepping stone if I couldn't get hired in X amount of months of separation. This job just happened to find its way to me and it seems to have more convenience for my current situation then having to commute to a regional. After my "shift" I can drive home in 10 mins. Not that money is a huge factor in this decision, but it pays equivalent to what I was making when I separated. Just seems like the logical choice for now...which again is why I was wondering if Single Turbine PIC is frowned apon. The pilots down there also said I should check out Netjets.....which would be better I guess but I haven't researched that too much. Probably going to talk to those guys in the next couple of days.

 

1800 hrs fighter is probably competitive.

The additional stuff (IP, S/E, etc) is more important than getting 2000 hrs TT.

SEL TPIC is not frowned upon if the rest of the resume is strong. 1800 fighter, IMO, doesn't need support.

But... RJ jobs gives you several squares you don't currently have -
121 ops
121 training
Type rating
(^^^ would have another organization evaluate you which is why some carriers required a new job/equipment in the previous X(5?) years)

 

hmm.....explain this new job/equipment in previous 5 years comment?

I also do have a B737 type, which I found out later that Alaska frowns (or used to) upon.

 

There was a time not long ago, but I believe it's passed. USAir (pre merge) wanted to know your last "training cycle", without one you had a hard time getting a call. Specifically if it was within the last few years. Since the merge, pretty sure it's gone. Plenty of off the street (non flows) hired that were stuck on the same plane for YEARS.

That's a common rumor. It all depends on how you deal with the question in the interview.

Maybe said guy SUCKED in the interview. For EVERY guy you hear about that "wasn't hired because of his 737 type" there's AT LEAST one that was.

AGAIN, plenty of dudes hired at (insert airline here) that wasn't SW and asked in the interview about the type.

I know......I know......someone is gonna chime in with "well I know so and so and the reason he wasn't hired was because he a had a 737 type and they were afraid he'd run to SW!!!!"

Crew room/ready room gossipy bovine scatology.

 

You're being kind. I'd call it an urban legend.

 

It's not an Urban Legend if I heard if from one of their chief pilots. He basically said don't mention SW in any part of your explanation of getting the type rating....as in....don't tell the truth (at least not in this specific circumstance). Of course he also said that that opinion was more dated and not as prevalent.