Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   SkyWest Mins (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/21759-skywest-mins.html)

ExperimentalAB 01-31-2008 06:27 PM

Hired at 800 early last year...

WAVIT Inbound 01-31-2008 06:31 PM


Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB (Post 311732)
Hired at 800 early last year...

Yes but you had prior 121 rj time didn't you?

SharkAir 01-31-2008 06:34 PM


Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB (Post 311732)
Hired at 800 early last year...

That would explain all the hand flying. You still need the experience!

ExperimentalAB 01-31-2008 06:35 PM


Originally Posted by WAVIT Inbound (Post 311738)
Yes but you had prior 121 rj time didn't you?

Yep - about 200 hours...this was before long before they "officially" lowered mins for those with RJ time. I actually flew all the way from Richmond to Seattle for a job fair, just to get turned away. They wouldn't even talk to me because of my time LoL. And a day later HR called for an interview date!

ExperimentalAB 01-31-2008 06:36 PM


Originally Posted by SharkAir (Post 311741)
That would explain all the hand flying. You still need the experience!

Now that was a low-blow, Shark! :D

SharkAir 01-31-2008 06:37 PM

Oh come on. We're all on the same team here.

ExperimentalAB 01-31-2008 06:38 PM


Originally Posted by SharkAir (Post 311744)
Oh come on. We're all on the same team here.

Oh I know it - Last time I checked, both our team Jersey's said "Jerry's Kids" on the back LoL

iahflyr 01-31-2008 06:53 PM

I personally think the 100 hours of multi engine time is overrated.

I do like the 100 hours of instrument requirement. I think all airlines should have mins like that. I also think having a reasonably high TT minimums is a good idea.

But why does 100 hours of multi seem to be a universal requirement. I think there is not much difference between having 25 and 100 hours of multi. I would rather see someone with better experience (college degree, 1000+ TT, lots of instrument time, CFI/II/MEI ratings, etc...) and have 25 hours of ME rather than someone who has none of those, but bought a 100 hour block of ME time.

Maybe 50 hours of multi is a better minimum.

SharkAir 01-31-2008 06:55 PM

Yeah, 100 hours of multi isn't eco-friendly, either. Think of all the wasted fuel. Somebody better call Susan Sarandon.

WAVIT Inbound 01-31-2008 06:56 PM


Originally Posted by iahflyr (Post 311765)
I personally think the 100 hours of multi engine time is overrated.

I do like the 100 hours of instrument requirement. I think all airlines should have mins like that. I also think having a reasonably high TT minimums is a good idea.

But why does 100 hours of multi seem to be a universal requirement. I think there is not much difference between having 25 and 100 hours of multi. I would rather see someone with better experience (college degree, 1000+ TT, lots of instrument time, CFI/II/MEI ratings, etc...) and have 25 hours of ME rather than someone who has none of those, but bought a 100 hour block of ME time.

Maybe 50 hours of multi is a better minimum.

Maybe. I think the point has always been to show you can fly something a little complex with more power and speed. That's what I have assumed anyways. Of course there are some singles out there with way more of both of these that some light twins.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:07 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands