Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   hours equals experience (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/33981-hours-equals-experience.html)

dojetdriver 12-11-2008 01:00 PM


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 516598)
He did but the JAA ATPL is no walk in the park.

AL

True, but when you have A LOT of money, as well as time on your hands, I imagine it's slightly easier.

I'm going to see them in Auckland in February, can't wait. My brother works for AZ, hope he gets some cool pics of Ed Force One.

Utah 12-11-2008 02:16 PM

Bruce made some friends in the industry which helpled him land his first job if I remember correctly. 737 or A320 charter job I think.

Saw them in L.A. earlier this year. Good as ever. Almost makes me want to plan out a South American trip to see them again.

Maddog10 12-11-2008 03:44 PM

hours equals experience
 
The more you fly, the more opportunity to be exposed to situations that develop you as a professional pilot.

Would you want a loved one being operated on by a surgeon with a few hours experience or someone that's a seasoned veteran? Probably not, you want the best you can get.

Would you want a lawyer that has a few months experience or one with years of experience?

In our business, we equate hours (like years) with experience. The more you have, the better you'll be.

dojetdriver 12-11-2008 03:45 PM


Originally Posted by Utah (Post 516641)
Bruce made some friends in the industry which helpled him land his first job if I remember correctly. 737 or A320 charter job I think.

Not like knowing somebody to get a job is this career is anything new. I think it was 73 job.


Originally Posted by Utah (Post 516641)
Saw them in L.A. earlier this year. Good as ever. Almost makes me want to plan out a South American trip to see them again.

I wanted to go to that show but couldn't make it. I also would have liked to seen them on he Rock in Rio, the DVD is pretty good.

Maddog10 12-11-2008 03:52 PM

No doubt, networking can pay off.

TwinTurboPilot 12-12-2008 12:03 AM

"The 9" God i throw up a little in my mouth every time i hear someone say that, do you turn your epaulets backwards too? Yea yea it may be the same size as a DC9 but it will never be the same, you still get payed a fraction of what an NWA or other past legacy operator paid. I dunno just seems like a slap in the face to all the pilots who really flew THE one and only 9. Which I do not fly nor will I probably ever get too.

sargeanb 12-12-2008 07:43 AM

I used to argue this same thing when I was a low timer. The old argument that "you need experience to get the job, but need the job to get the experience" can be very frustrating at that point. Pilots in my hire class came in with all sorts of backgrounds, from 4000+ hr corporate and freight drivers to 400 hr CFIs. We're all exposed to different things during those hours, but in general what it comes down to is the more time you are flying, the more practice you have at your hard-earned skills, and the more chance you will encounter something out of the ordinary that will require you to test those skills. That being said, we all basically started at square one once we began airline training, and it was just a matter of how well we learned what we were taught. After training, it was just a matter of once again getting comfortable with the airplane and all sorts of normal and abnormal situations, which again showed me the value of experience. Recently I retrained on a different airplane, so now the process starts again.

alvrb211 12-12-2008 10:09 AM


Originally Posted by sargeanb (Post 517022)
I used to argue this same thing when I was a low timer. The old argument that "you need experience to get the job, but need the job to get the experience" can be very frustrating at that point. Pilots in my hire class came in with all sorts of backgrounds, from 4000+ hr corporate and freight drivers to 400 hr CFIs. We're all exposed to different things during those hours, but in general what it comes down to is the more time you are flying, the more practice you have at your hard-earned skills, and the more chance you will encounter something out of the ordinary that will require you to test those skills. That being said, we all basically started at square one once we began airline training, and it was just a matter of how well we learned what we were taught. After training, it was just a matter of once again getting comfortable with the airplane and all sorts of normal and abnormal situations, which again showed me the value of experience. Recently I retrained on a different airplane, so now the process starts again.

I think the big picture will be clearer once you've been flying heavies internationally.

AL

sargeanb 12-12-2008 03:41 PM

If the industry stays as it is, that will happen about a year before I retire!:D

HercDriver130 12-13-2008 11:44 AM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 508253)
Military flyers are carefully screened before they begin training...then the training forces an even higher standard on them. If you can't hack it within the alloted time, you get washed fast...daddy can't buy you some more training. Can't really compare a winged guy hitting the fleet with a civilian fresh out of the puppy-mill.

Major airlines will hire a 1200 hour fighter guy.

A 1200 hour civilian is lucky to get a regional interview (2006-2007 was an abberation)

this is the crux of it, and it is exactly what I have told many of my flying friends for years when asked what I felt the difference in military trained and civilian trained guys is........

As for experience..... learn everyday!!! With only about 3500 hours I consider myself relatively low time. though I have many different flying experiences across those hours. From military and combat airdrop to part 91, 135 and 121 hours..... Learn until you leave the business. Make the most of every opportunity,.

Thedude 12-13-2008 01:51 PM


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 516072)

I know an Airbus A319 FO who has just over 1200TT of which 700 is international, overwater, class 2 nav time in the A319.

AL

I would say at 1200 TT he is just going though the wrote memory of what to do. If faced with a real emergency, at 1200 hrs , he just does not have the background to pull from. I dont believe a A-319 can cross oceans as in Atlantic or Pacific. Crossing the Indian Ocean (PIA that it might be) or the Carribean doesn't really count as overwater. As with all the fancy wizz bang neaty stuff the Airbus has, class 2 nav means nil. In Europe all the flying can be considered international since you are passing over a country about 1 per hour.

If you had said a 2000 hr check hauler instead of A CFI, I would pick the check hauler over the A-319 SIC. Why, because the check hauler has been out there making the decision to make things happen and not being just along for the ride.

Thedude 12-13-2008 01:56 PM


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 516523)
International flying is a different ballgame and a lot of guys in the US won't see it until they've already logged thousands of hours in regional jets, if at all. My point here is that the learning curve is much steeper in the early days for pilots overseas.


I disagree from the learning curve being steeper. I will say that it is just different.

alvrb211 12-13-2008 06:05 PM


Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 517855)
I disagree from the learning curve being steeper. I will say that it is just different.

Have you actually seen the syllabus???

Take a look at the 14 ATPL exams. They cover subjects like climatology and international ops. 700 hours study is the norm before taking the 14 exams. It is impossible to take all 14 at once due to the very high workload. Most split them up and take just 3 at a time. Most require to re-take 1 or more tests. The 2008 pass rate is 86%.

Then take a look at the amount of CRM. Then take a look at what's involved with getting a type (including tighter PTS) and approx 5 months IOE before the sign off.

Compare that to Irwin Gleim's easy Commercial book, virtually no CRM, and a couple of 4 day "domestic" trips in a user friendly rj not equiped for overwater ops.

In the US, you won't see half this stuff until you get to a major and it will be your airline that trains you. You are not required to be tested on it in the ATP exam like the EU guys are.

"Just different?"

The learning curve is steeper. No question about it.

AL

alvrb211 12-13-2008 06:22 PM


Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 517853)
If you had said a 2000 hr check hauler instead of A CFI, I would pick the check hauler over the A-319 SIC. Why, because the check hauler has been out there making the decision to make things happen and not being just along for the ride.

Not sure what you mean by saying, "you would pick him".

Pick "him" for what type of operation?

I logged 450 hours in a Piper Seminole. I'm a former MEII but I'm not current in the a/c as I haven't flown one in over a decade. I fly medium jets at a Major.

There are many current MEII's out their flying seminoles every day. If I show up at a flight school in the morning and get recertified, Am I better suited to teaching right away with students, or should the job go to a proficient MEII?

I'd say give the job to the other guy.

Is he currently a "better" pilot than me with my 8000 hours?
For that particular job at that level...............YES!

Is he more experienced and knowledgable overall?

Highly unlikely. If he shows up at my airline tomorrow, he might have a mountain to climb.


I'd have a job on my hands trying to get through IOE on a long haul trip in the A380 though.

As for decision making, in my limited 8000 hours, I've declared a few emergencies including engine failures, flap failures, gear failures, and hydraulic leaks/failures. Not one of those emergencies required much decision making skills. Make a decision, follow the QRH, follow SOP's, land safely, and do some paperwork. Done!
It's not rocket science although some would like to believe so.

I used to fly with FO's who had only a few hundred hours. I flew with low time airforce guys too. Fortunately, when problems occured, they were right on the ball because they had ability, if not experience.

AL

N6724G 12-13-2008 07:16 PM

Guys,

Again I dont think its about hours. I have 800 hours that I accumulated over 12 years of on and off flying. Take another guy that has 500 hours that he accumulated in 2 years flying consistantly.

I think he would be a better stick than me just because he has flown more consistantly and I havent. So, its not about thehours. its about the experiences

Thedude 12-14-2008 12:11 AM


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 517968)
Have you actually seen the syllabus???
Take a look at the 14 ATPL exams. They cover subjects like climatology and international ops. 700 hours study is the norm before taking the 14 exams. It is impossible to take all 14 at once due to the very high workload. Most split them up and take just 3 at a time. Most require to re-take 1 or more tests. The 2008 pass rate is 86%.

I thought we were talking about actual flying and not theory. Yes, the JAA-ATP test are quite difficult from what I understand but at the same time they are teaching antiquated stuff such as OMEGA. Remember OMEGA went OTS quite a few years ago. I still believe that alot of those exams are teaching pure theory and could easily be honed down to what is relavant.

Most of the JAA guys have never even flown single pilot other than what was required to get their intial certificates. If the new rule goes through, they will have to have a special certificate or theirs wil read "CREW ONLY".


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 517968)
Then take a look at the amount of CRM. Then take a look at what's involved with getting a type (including tighter PTS) and approx 5 months IOE before the sign off.

That is what happens when you hire guy that have only 250 hrs and have been pretty much flying supervised for nearly all of it. I have also heard stories here in the US about those low-timers getting 100+ of OE in that shiny new RJ. I don't know about the PTS, I was under the assumption that JAR ad FAA standards were about the same.


Originally Posted by alvrb211 (Post 517968)
Compare that to Irwin Gleim's easy Commercial book, virtually no CRM, and a couple of 4 day "domestic" trips in a user friendly rj not equiped for overwater ops.

Have you ever flown in Europe? Its almost the same as the US, only the accents are different and you have to watch the transition levels. If you are flying intra-Europe, that could be considered domestic ops.

Oooo, overwater ops. Just through in a lfe raft and a HF radio and you good to go. I don't know why people make such a big deal about over water ops. ie. the Atlantic and Pacific crossings. (The training I had was pretty ****ty and I learned by doing it) Really only 3 things you have to know. How to fill out a plotting chart, how to make proper position reports and the most important, what do to in-case of an emergency.


I have spent the last three and a half yrs flying a wide-body around the world and I tell you the learning curve is not that steep, its just different.

alvrb211 12-14-2008 04:48 AM


Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
I thought we were talking about actual flying and not theory. Yes, the JAA-ATP test are quite difficult from what I understand but at the same time they are teaching antiquated stuff such as OMEGA. Remember OMEGA went OTS quite a few years ago. I still believe that alot of those exams are teaching pure theory and could easily be honed down to what is relavant.

I don't recall seeing anything on Omega in the JAR books other than a reference to it in a history paragraph. Everything else is relevant. Now, you may not be thinking about the Kurosiwo current, Oyasiwo current, or the Siberian high in your every day life. But when your flying just east of Hong Kong during a monsoon, you'll at least understand what to expect as you fly north of the ITCZ. Yes.....it's a bit geeky but is it useless information? I often hear guys criticize the JAR ATPL program. Most have never even opened the books. Is the system perfect? No. But it certainly is a lot more indepth than what the FAA requires of you.


Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
Most of the JAA guys have never even flown single pilot other than what was required to get their intial certificates. If the new rule goes through, they will have to have a special certificate or theirs wil read "CREW ONLY".

I used to fly rj's with FO's with 300 hours and an FAA commercial fresh from 4 days of IOE. I wasn't a check airman.




Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
That is what happens when you hire guy that have only 250 hrs and have been pretty much flying supervised for nearly all of it. I have also heard stories here in the US about those low-timers getting 100+ of OE in that shiny new RJ. I don't know about the PTS, I was under the assumption that JAR ad FAA standards were about the same.

You are correct. The IOE and CRM is a lot more indepth. But, like I said, the regionals here in the US hire low timers without the extra training. They get a sign off after a few days IOE and the regular line Captains have the burden of babysitting.




Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
Have you ever flown in Europe? Its almost the same as the US, only the accents are different and you have to watch the transition levels. If you are flying intra-Europe, that could be considered domestic ops.

Yes I have. But, when I started flying at the airlines in the US, my first plane was a 30 seat turbo prop. I had just an FAA commercial ticket and no type. All flights were over land and less than 2 hours. My commercial training was adequate for "that" type of "domestic" flying. Compare that to what the young guys in the EU have to do to land their "first" job. It's night and day.


Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
Oooo, overwater ops. Just through in a lfe raft and a HF radio and you good to go. I don't know why people make such a big deal about over water ops. ie. the Atlantic and Pacific crossings. (The training I had was pretty ****ty and I learned by doing it) Really only 3 things you have to know. How to fill out a plotting chart, how to make proper position reports and the most important, what do to in-case of an emergency.

Ok but did you have to worry about being tested on that stuff on your ATP exams or applying it in your first job?



Originally Posted by Thedude (Post 518069)
I have spent the last three and a half yrs flying a wide-body around the world and I tell you the learning curve is not that steep, its just different.

Again, when did you study international ops?
Did you do it to study for your ATP written? Or did you have the luxury of grasping that stuff later on in your career?

If you're a kid in the EU and you want to be a pilot, the JAR ATPL exam requires 700 hours study, you need a frozen ATPL (not a commercial) and a type rating. After a few hundred hours, you may end up flying a medium, overwater equiped aircraft internationally. Of course this sounds like a piece of cake to you. But, when you're trying to get your first flying job, the kids in the EU have a much steeper mountain to climb!

AL


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:00 AM.


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