have you looked at $ for helicopter hours, captains pay will barely allow you to take helicopter lessons.

 

As for pay, I think we pilots should be compensated based on number of seats. Each seat generates revenue, and there is no discount for flying on a turboprop when I have bought tickets. A 36 seat Dash should not pay less than an E135.

Each type of flying, jet and prop, have different demands and hazards. Prop guys do tend to use smaller airports, and fly closer to terrain while stuck in the weather. However prop guys generally have more than 5-7 seconds to manage a rapid depressurization in cruise. Also, prop guys benefit greatly from reverse thrust. jet reverse is practically useless, which makes those longer runways not so long. You may be able to, and have to, kick a prop around more in a stiff wind; in a jet, you have to be very delicate and deliberate with your control inputs. Anyone who has stepped on a jet rudder in the flare knows what I mean. Props want to fly. Jets tend to more unstable and more finicky.

In truth, props and jets require different skills, and different ways of thinking and planning. Having gone from one to the other I can say I respect both and could not rank one as being tougher than the other. So, lets all have a big group hug and go get ourselves paid!

One oversimplified pay formula: 10,000/yr plus $1/hr per seat. (as a first year benchmark...add in some sort of yearly raise)

1900CA ~29000/yr
DashCA ~46000/yr
CRJ/ERJ ~60000/yr
CRJ/170 ~80000/yr
737/320 ~145000/yr
757/321 ~190000/yr

tie FO wages to 60% of captain pay, and you have an equitable and predictable payscale

You get the idea... Sure, it would be nice to make 6 figures as a 50-seat driver, but realistically you need to generate money to make money.

 

Those look like good FO rates.

 

We rarely use reverse in the Dash and we can still make a decent short field landing.

 

I flew the SAAB2000 in Europe for 3 years. Now I have flown the CRJ in the US for 3 years. The CRJ is harder to fly, but mosty because the SAAB2000 was so advanced. Fly-by-wire, FADEC, etc. It was generally very stable and easy to fly. The CRJ is less stable and somewhat of a handful in crosswinds. A V1 cut with a prop feathering problem in the SAAB2000 was a *****. But then again so is a V1 cut with a reverser unstowed in the CRJ.

Both have their challenges and easy points. Speed control in the SAAB was much easier. So were gusty crosswind landings. On the other hand, climing out at 290 knots indicated and cruising at 460 KTAS is not bad in the CRJ. Both have their niches. On the short east coast routes we do now, the SAAB would be better for most. But it would be helacious to take to STL from PHL or something like that.

The SAAB did those 6.67 degree GS approaches in the mountains a bit better than the CRJ would!! 17 degrees nose down gets your attention, but was managable in the SAAB when transitioning from the GS to the visual part of the approach. Anyway....

Which should get paid more? Hmmm....

All are underpaid.

 

Pay should be based on revenue potential...ie a formula that takes into account:

-Number of seats (this favors jets)
-Speed (also favors jets)
-Aircraft operating costs (favors props due to fuel effeciency)