Airline Pilot Central Forums
Page 2 of 4
1
2
3
4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Embraer 135 returning to XJT (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/64710-embraer-135-returning-xjt.html)

GlobeTreker 01-15-2012 07:43 AM
Originally Posted by etflies (Post 1117535)
Its ALL about cost. As far as comfort goes, I've ridden on every RJ currently flown by US operators, and all but one turboprop type and I wouldnt put any of the 50 seat jets at the top in terms of comfort. To each his own though.

It does amuse me when im walking out to the airplane for my next flight and a passengers asks methis old the Q400 they're looking at is. I had one guy tell me I was wrong when I told him the airplane wasn't yet a month old. Oh well.
Do yourself a favor and apply at Expressjet now. Flying the jet takes more skill than a turboprop and it will better prepare you for a job at the majors. If you were a recruiter at Delta who would you rather hire, a pilot of an antiquated dangerous turbo prop or a jet pilot?

DirectTo 01-15-2012 07:51 AM
Originally Posted by etflies (Post 1117535)
It does amuse me when im walking out to the airplane for my next flight and a passengers asks methis old the Q400 they're looking at is. I had one guy tell me I was wrong when I told him the airplane wasn't yet a month old. Oh well.
I enjoy the ones who take pictures out the terminal windows or as they're walking across the ramp. I do my best to photo-bomb them.

Originally Posted by GlobeTreker
Flying the jet takes more skill than a turboprop and it will better prepare you for a job at the majors.
Please tell me there is message board-hidden sarcasm dripping off this post that I missed? Having flown both, the turboprop is much more challenging and exponentially more fun.

Laxrox43 01-15-2012 08:03 AM
Everybody knows turboprop time is inferior to jet time. Expressjet is hiring if you want to make yourself marketable for the majors.
Gee you sound like you went to one of those pilot factory flight schools. I've flown both. It takes more skills, knowledge, and flying ability to manhandle a turbo-prop. Enough said.

2StgTurbine 01-15-2012 08:04 AM
Originally Posted by newarkblows (Post 1117488)
The q 400 has a small baggage compartment and has had to leave bags behind on full flights. Usually they throw them on the next flight. What CAL found out when they originally brought in CHQ was that when you start bumping people due to weight restrictions, or leaving bags behind forcing compensation it adds up to a pretty sizeable number fast.
I have never had to leave bags in the Q400 even with a full flight. It is rare to get the aft baggage compartment full, and the few times it does happen, we just put the extra in the forward hold. Also, the newer Q400s have nearly normal sized overhead bins, so fewer bags get gate checked than on most RJs.

GlobeTreker 01-15-2012 08:11 AM
Originally Posted by Laxrox43 (Post 1117552)
Gee you sound like you went to one of those pilot factory flight schools. I've flown both. It takes more skills, knowledge, and flying ability to manhandle a turbo-prop. Enough said.
If that were true they would pay people more money to fly turbo props. All ATP's has a jet transition course you can take to get you back up to speed on the jets. I would hurry up and get your 1000 jet pic if you want to catch the next big wave of hiring at the majors. They are going to pass right over the guys with turbo prop only time.

The Juice 01-15-2012 08:17 AM
Originally Posted by Laxrox43 (Post 1117552)
Gee you sound like you went to one of those pilot factory flight schools. I've flown both. It takes more skills, knowledge, and flying ability to manhandle a turbo-prop. Enough said.
If that were true they would pay people more money to fly turbo props. All ATP's has a jet transition course you can take to get you back up to speed on the jets. I would hurry up and get your 1000 jet pic if you want to catch the next big wave of hiring at the majors. They are going to pass right over the guys with turbo prop only time.
You are obviously just taking the ****, now

n9810f 01-15-2012 08:31 AM
Chq & 135
 
I believe Chautauqua still has at least 1 135 flying out of MKE that is subleased from CAL. But that'll be returned once the DOT allows them to stop the EAS flying out of MKE. There were 4 or 5 subleased for F9 Express out of MKE at one time.

stoki 01-15-2012 08:43 AM
Originally Posted by Laxrox43 (Post 1117552)
Gee you sound like you went to one of those pilot factory flight schools. I've flown both. It takes more skills, knowledge, and flying ability to manhandle a turbo-prop. Enough said.
Flying itself aside. TP time is inferior to jet time. After speaking to various recruiters from various companies, ESPECIALLY overseas, a jet guy is more likely to get on somewhere then a turbo-prop driver (unless he is applying at a turbo-prop carrier). Even if it does take more piloting skills and effort to fly a turbo-prop properly. And I have been flying one for the past 3.5 years.. and wish I could replace it with jet time, being as that is what lots of employers seem to prefer.

Stupid? Yes, but it seems to be the case, more and more here in the U.S, where traditionally that hasn't been the case, but especially anywhere overseas, where your TP time is about as good as piston time.

PerpetualFlyer 01-15-2012 08:44 AM
Originally Posted by newarkblows (Post 1117488)
The emb 135 can usually fly full with a full load of bags as long as there isn't a big alt fuel burn. It makes sense if you have really light loads between two points. Ever since CAL started charging for bags the carry ons have been adding up. The q 400 has a small baggage compartment and has had to leave bags behind on full flights. Usually they throw them on the next flight. What CAL found out when they originally brought in CHQ was that when you start bumping people due to weight restrictions, or leaving bags behind forcing compensation it adds up to a pretty sizeable number fast.

These 135's are already being paid for by CAL who was able to work out a deal with the lease holder. The replacement parts are already there, the replacement parts cost a hell of a lot less when you are ordering for 245 airplanes vs 30 airplanes, no new maintenance guys needed, no new pilot training required, and if it breaks there are 245 more of them to find a replacement to still operate the flight.
Ummmmm no? I've never seen that happen with bags. I've had to get rid of 1 standby once, and that was only because we had close to max fuel.

UFFL 01-15-2012 09:24 AM
Originally Posted by stoki (Post 1117570)
Flying itself aside. TP time is inferior to jet time. After speaking to various recruiters from various companies, ESPECIALLY overseas, a jet guy is more likely to get on somewhere then a turbo-prop driver (unless he is applying at a turbo-prop carrier). Even if it does take more piloting skills and effort to fly a turbo-prop properly. And I have been flying one for the past 3.5 years.. and wish I could replace it with jet time, being as that is what lots of employers seem to prefer.

Stupid? Yes, but it seems to be the case, more and more here in the U.S, where traditionally that hasn't been the case, but especially anywhere overseas, where your TP time is about as good as piston time.
Was wondering which companies here in the US that you have talked to prefer jet vs turboprop time?

The Juice 01-15-2012 09:49 AM
Originally Posted by Laxrox43 (Post 1117552)
Gee you sound like you went to one of those pilot factory flight schools. I've flown both. It takes more skills, knowledge, and flying ability to manhandle a turbo-prop. Enough said.
Flying itself aside. TP time is inferior to jet time. After speaking to various recruiters from various companies, ESPECIALLY overseas, a jet guy is more likely to get on somewhere then a turbo-prop driver (unless he is applying at a turbo-prop carrier). Even if it does take more piloting skills and effort to fly a turbo-prop properly. And I have been flying one for the past 3.5 years.. and wish I could replace it with jet time, being as that is what lots of employers seem to prefer.

Stupid? Yes, but it seems to be the case, more and more here in the U.S, where traditionally that hasn't been the case, but especially anywhere overseas, where your TP time is about as good as piston time.
It's all relative in many ways. The RJ CA may get the interview call before the prop CA but you never know who will be sitting across from you during your interview. You just may find yourself being interviewed by a check airman who came up on props and appreciates the skill set of prop pilots vs jet pilots.

You never know

osupilot 01-15-2012 09:52 AM
Originally Posted by g-code (Post 1117278)
The memo said the 5 135s were for additional block hours....
"Along the same lines, we were able to negotiate the addition of five ERJ135s that have either been parked or have been operating at other United Express carriers. These additional aircraft will go into service in April."

Don't think it said that....

What 01-15-2012 10:44 AM
Originally Posted by GlobeTreker (Post 1117554)
If that were true they would pay people more money to fly turbo props. All ATP's has a jet transition course you can take to get you back up to speed on the jets. I would hurry up and get your 1000 jet pic if you want to catch the next big wave of hiring at the majors. They are going to pass right over the guys with turbo prop only time.
If this is the case then a Boeing product should pay more than an Airbus, an MD-80 should pay more than a 757... A 767 pilot should be paid more than a 777 pilot because they have to fly the 757/767 (more information required to know). What is your flight experience and I am not just talking TT, what airplanes have you flown and for how long?

newarkblows 01-15-2012 11:02 AM
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine (Post 1117553)
I have never had to leave bags in the Q400 even with a full flight. It is rare to get the aft baggage compartment full, and the few times it does happen, we just put the extra in the forward hold. Also, the newer Q400s have nearly normal sized overhead bins, so fewer bags get gate checked than on most RJs.
Not according to BWI, DCA, and MHT station ops. I have taken bags that couldnt fit in the prior flight and it was a normal thing in bwi because the rampers were ****y. It isn't a big deal but it does happen.

2StgTurbine 01-15-2012 11:44 AM
Originally Posted by newarkblows (Post 1117623)
Not according to BWI, DCA, and MHT station ops. I have taken bags that couldnt fit in the prior flight and it was a normal thing in bwi because the rampers were ****y. It isn't a big deal but it does happen.
Well rampers are not always the best sources for information on aircraft. I have never worked a flight where we had to leave bags or passengers behind because of weight problems. Only once we had to burn off 60 lbs of fuel before takeoff to accommodate a full load of passengers, bags, a jumpseater, and about 2,000 lbs of extra fuel. So you can either listen to a ramper who has a hard time remembering how many bags can go into the aft baggage compartment and usually fills out the load sheet incorrectly, or you can listen to people who fly the aircraft.

sinsilvia666 01-15-2012 11:52 AM
in the years i been on the q, the only time we dont take all the bags is when they dont show up on time....other then that there was only once where we took bags (4 or 5) out of the back into the cabin to get a jumpseater on for weight, and that night we had bad weather and tanks almost full...she can haul it all

Speed Pilot 01-15-2012 12:03 PM
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine (Post 1117638)
Well rampers are not always the best sources for information on aircraft. I have never worked a flight where we had to leave bags or passengers behind because of weight problems. Only once we had to burn off 60 lbs of fuel before takeoff to accommodate a full load of passengers, bags, a jumpseater, and about 2,000 lbs of extra fuel. So you can either listen to a ramper who has a hard time remembering how many bags can go into the aft baggage compartment and usually fills out the load sheet incorrectly, or you can listen to people who fly the aircraft.
Depending on the station, I'll take the ramper's word any day of the week over the pilot. But I'm biased. I used to load bags for Horizon before getting hired to fly at XJT. Hub rampers suck but most outstation employees are usually way more educated than you think. The majority of our rampers in Boise held bachelor's and master's degrees in technical fields. They were just there part time to get flight benefits or insurance for their families if they ran their own business.

Pilots, especially new hires in the last 6 years, well let's just say C's get degrees seems to have been the motto.

That said. The Q400 is an absolute beast. Usually we wouldn't bulk out the pit unless we were taking over 120 bags. My record in the aft pit was 123 bags and I still had 800lbs of floor weight left to play with if I'd have had the room.

Coehill 01-15-2012 03:13 PM
I rather be in an embraer jet than the last row in a 757 no matter how long the flight is. Love when you get the geriatric lineup to the bathroom about 1 hour into the flight with everyone monkey swinging on your setback. Not being able to stand up straight sucks, but never having a middle seat and not running out of overhead space is priceless.

AxialFlow 01-15-2012 06:39 PM
Originally Posted by etflies (Post 1117535)
It does amuse me when im walking out to the airplane for my next flight and a passengers asks methis old the Q400 they're looking at is. I had one guy tell me I was wrong when I told him the airplane wasn't yet a month old. Oh well.
My standard answer for when the Saab was made is sometime during WWII.

2StgTurbine 01-15-2012 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by Speed Pilot (Post 1117649)
Depending on the station, I'll take the ramper's word any day of the week over the pilot. But I'm biased. I used to load bags for Horizon before getting hired to fly at XJT. Hub rampers suck but most outstation employees are usually way more educated than you think. The majority of our rampers in Boise held bachelor's and master's degrees in technical fields. They were just there part time to get flight benefits or insurance for their families if they ran their own business.
I never questioned the general intelligence of rampers, just their specific knowledge on aircraft. I no some get the Dash 200 and 300 mixed up. I wouldn't be surprised if a ramper heard a Q200 couldn't take all the bags and then retold that info as a Q having to leave some bags behind causing the next person assume they meant a Q400.

shimmydamp 01-15-2012 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by Speed Pilot (Post 1117649)
Depending on the station, I'll take the ramper's word any day of the week over the pilot. But I'm biased. I used to load bags for Horizon before getting hired to fly at XJT. Hub rampers suck but most outstation employees are usually way more educated than you think. The majority of our rampers in Boise held bachelor's and master's degrees in technical fields. They were just there part time to get flight benefits or insurance for their families if they ran their own business.

Pilots, especially new hires in the last 6 years, well let's just say C's get degrees seems to have been the motto.
Master's degrees? Yes. You are biased. Newarkblows mentioned BWI rampers in his case study. Not sure how close that is to Boise in terms of demographics.

blakman7 01-15-2012 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by GlobeTreker (Post 1117540)
Do yourself a favor and apply at Expressjet now. Flying the jet takes more skill than a turboprop and it will better prepare you for a job at the majors. If you were a recruiter at Delta who would you rather hire, a pilot of an antiquated dangerous turbo prop or a jet pilot?
Are you kidding? If I were a recruiter at Delta, I would hire a B1900 guy over an RJ guy any day of the week. The B1900 guy will know how to FLY the airplane because that's what they have to do with no autopilot. It's all RAW flying which would make that guy much more proficient. I'm not saying that an RJ guy doesn't know how to fly the airplane because that would simply be a lie but some RJ guys would be more apt to rely on automation rather than flying the darn airplane. I don't know who the hell told you that flying a jet takes more skill but I think that you're HIGHLY mistaken.

blakman7 01-15-2012 09:14 PM
Originally Posted by GlobeTreker (Post 1117554)
If that were true they would pay people more money to fly turbo props. All ATP's has a jet transition course you can take to get you back up to speed on the jets. I would hurry up and get your 1000 jet pic if you want to catch the next big wave of hiring at the majors. They are going to pass right over the guys with turbo prop only time.
Again making yourself sound foolish. If there was a turboprop that carried 300+ people, I would guarantee that it would pay close to equal of what the majors are paying to fly a 737 or bigger. You do sound like you have "the shiny jet syndrome" though.

blakman7 01-15-2012 09:16 PM
Originally Posted by The Juice (Post 1117596)
It's all relative in many ways. The RJ CA may get the interview call before the prop CA but you never know who will be sitting across from you during your interview. You just may find yourself being interviewed by a check airman who came up on props and appreciates the skill set of prop pilots vs jet pilots.

You never know
+1 for The Juice

XJT Pilot 01-16-2012 03:26 AM
Originally Posted by blakman7 (Post 1117819)
Are you kidding? If I were a recruiter at Delta, I would hire a B1900 guy over an RJ guy any day of the week. The B1900 guy will know how to FLY the airplane because that's what they have to do with no autopilot. It's all RAW flying which would make that guy much more proficient. I'm not saying that an RJ guy doesn't know how to fly the airplane because that would simply be a lie but some RJ guys would be more apt to rely on automation rather than flying the darn airplane. I don't know who the hell told you that flying a jet takes more skill but I think that you're HIGHLY mistaken.
Yeh, because you r gona get alot of stick time at delta...give me a break

Fly782 01-16-2012 03:43 AM
Originally Posted by XJT Pilot (Post 1117851)
Yeh, because you r gona get alot of stick time at delta...give me a break
Thats not the point...

People appreciate the hand flying skills of TProp pilots. Many of guys that will be doing the hiring for the next couple of years flew many of them in their career progression, so they certainly know what it takes and the skills one acquires flying one. They also get warm fuzzy feelings when they know a candidate can hand fly if all goes bad. With all that said jet time on the other hand is just as valuable for different reasons, I think the ideal candidate would have a mix of both IMO. Ask most mainline guys what they flew before they got where they are... 99% chance it was a turbo with a prop added on.

Laxrox43 01-16-2012 04:28 AM
Are you kidding? If I were a recruiter at Delta, I would hire a B1900 guy over an RJ guy any day of the week. The B1900 guy will know how to FLY the airplane because that's what they have to do with no autopilot. It's all RAW flying which would make that guy much more proficient. I'm not saying that an RJ guy doesn't know how to fly the airplane because that would simply be a lie but some RJ guys would be more apt to rely on automation rather than flying the darn airplane. I don't know who the hell told you that flying a jet takes more skill but I think that you're HIGHLY mistaken.
...my point exactly.

lavMan 01-16-2012 05:39 AM
Originally Posted by GlobeTreker (Post 1117540)
Do yourself a favor and apply at Expressjet now. Flying the jet takes more skill than a turboprop and it will better prepare you for a job at the majors. If you were a recruiter at Delta who would you rather hire, a pilot of an antiquated dangerous turbo prop or a jet pilot?
Having types in turboprops, and one jet. That is a load of crap. A monkey can fly a jet, it does everything for you. I know numerous folks who got hired with prop pic time. It's a fact most regionals operate jets now a days, but prop time won't limit you. Experience in both doesn't hurt either.

Cruz5350 01-16-2012 06:09 AM
All this prop talk makes me warm and fuzzy inside.

Laxrox43 01-16-2012 06:13 AM
All this prop talk makes me warm and fuzzy inside.
Giggity Giggity gig-uhhh-dee

stoki 01-16-2012 08:23 AM
Originally Posted by UFFL (Post 1117591)
Was wondering which companies here in the US that you have talked to prefer jet vs turboprop time?
In the particular example I recall it was jetBlue, where the guy said if he had two exactly equal candidates but with one time in jet and other in TP, he would take jet everytime. Which has taken our captains into their ranks, and many other TP drivers. But I am sure there is more then one recruiter at jetBlue.

Flying a TP is great fun and you actually get to fly. But I am starting to hear more and more that given two equal candidates, the jet guy has bigger chances.

2StgTurbine 01-16-2012 09:13 AM
Originally Posted by stoki (Post 1117941)
In the particular example I recall it was jetBlue, where the guy said if he had two exactly equal candidates but with one time in jet and other in TP, he would take jet everytime. Which has taken our captains into their ranks, and many other TP drivers. But I am sure there is more then one recruiter at jetBlue.

Flying a TP is great fun and you actually get to fly. But I am starting to hear more and more that given two equal candidates, the jet guy has bigger chances.
Lots of former SAAB and Q drivers from Colganhave been going to JetBlue.

DirectTo 01-16-2012 09:59 AM
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine (Post 1117955)
Lots of former SAAB and Q drivers from Colganhave been going to JetBlue.
Shh! Don't tell him that!

I've noticed that some of the biggest proponents of jet time are the ones who went to a regional, maybe chasing a quick upgrade, and have been stuck in the right seat of that jet for 5+ years. Perhaps trying to justify that?

stoki 01-16-2012 10:55 AM
Yea well I have been flying a TP for the past 4 years, and have heard this from our captains who have been out there interviewing and talking. Of course they are getting picked up. TP isn't discriminated against, but in the minds of some recruiters, if you're going in to fly a jet, then they want you to have jet time...

Also look at any job postings over-seas that don't require a type-rating. They all want jet time. TP time need not apply is pretty much the flavor of the month, and being that I want to get out of the ****ty U.S industry, it is frustrating and a fact I am very aware of.

Jetlinker 01-16-2012 12:32 PM
Originally Posted by DirectTo (Post 1117971)
Shh! Don't tell him that!

I've noticed that some of the biggest proponents of jet time are the ones who went to a regional, maybe chasing a quick upgrade, and have been stuck in the right seat of that jet for 5+ years. Perhaps trying to justify that?
That's funny...isn't chasing the quick upgrade the reason most people went to Colgan, even though the working conditions sucked? I'm not trying to be a tool...just keeping you honest.

DirectTo 01-16-2012 01:10 PM
Originally Posted by Jetlinker (Post 1118026)
That's funny...isn't chasing the quick upgrade the reason most people went to Colgan, even though the working conditions sucked? I'm not trying to be a tool...just keeping you honest.
Colgan, CommutAir, Lakes, Gulfstream, wait...all the turboprop operators.

Six one, half dozen another - we all want to get our time and get the hell out of these places.

Prop guys take the low pay in exchange for a quick upgrade (in theory), the jet guys take a longer upgrade but have better living conditions should things tank out and they get stuck. I would say there's no right or wrong way, it's just an individual risk/reward assessment.

GlobeTreker 01-16-2012 03:11 PM
Originally Posted by blakman7 (Post 1117819)
Are you kidding? If I were a recruiter at Delta, I would hire a B1900 guy over an RJ guy any day of the week. The B1900 guy will know how to FLY the airplane because that's what they have to do with no autopilot. It's all RAW flying which would make that guy much more proficient. I'm not saying that an RJ guy doesn't know how to fly the airplane because that would simply be a lie but some RJ guys would be more apt to rely on automation rather than flying the darn airplane. I don't know who the hell told you that flying a jet takes more skill but I think that you're HIGHLY mistaken.
You're never going to get to a major with that kind of attitude. You should really consider taking the first jet job that comes your way. It takes much more skill to manage the complex systems and automation of a modern day jet than it does of a tired old turbo prop. Because of the age of most turbo props they are also not as safe.

Nevets 01-16-2012 04:44 PM
Originally Posted by blakman7 (Post 1117819)
Are you kidding? If I were a recruiter at Delta, I would hire a B1900 guy over an RJ guy any day of the week. The B1900 guy will know how to FLY the airplane because that's what they have to do with no autopilot. It's all RAW flying which would make that guy much more proficient. I'm not saying that an RJ guy doesn't know how to fly the airplane because that would simply be a lie but some RJ guys would be more apt to rely on automation rather than flying the darn airplane. I don't know who the hell told you that flying a jet takes more skill but I think that you're HIGHLY mistaken.
You're never going to get to a major with that kind of attitude. You should really consider taking the first jet job that comes your way. It takes much more skill to manage the complex systems and automation of a modern day jet than it does of a tired old turbo prop. Because of the age of most turbo props they are also not as safe.
Ok, we get get it. You're trolling.

The Juice 01-16-2012 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by Jetlinker (Post 1118026)
That's funny...isn't chasing the quick upgrade the reason most people went to Colgan, even though the working conditions sucked? I'm not trying to be a tool...just keeping you honest.
Colgan, CommutAir, Lakes, Gulfstream, wait...all the turboprop operators.

Six one, half dozen another - we all want to get our time and get the hell out of these places.

Prop guys take the low pay in exchange for a quick upgrade (in theory), the jet guys take a longer upgrade but have better living conditions should things tank out and they get stuck. I would say there's no right or wrong way, it's just an individual risk/reward assessment.
DirectTo sounds pretty close to reality right there.

GlobeTreker 01-16-2012 05:34 PM
Originally Posted by Nevets (Post 1118110)
Ok, we get get it. You're trolling.
Babba Booey's monkey nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:02 PM.
Page 2 of 4
1
2
3
4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


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