I'm guessing you don't have any jet time.....
Why Wouldn't Delta hire an RJ guy with known automation skills to fly their automated aircraft? When's the last time you saw a 767 hand flown 6 legs a day? There's a reason a lot of airlines ask for your amount of "glass cockpit" time...
Flying a jet does not take MORE skill, it takes DIFFERENT skills. Take it from someone that has given hundreds of hours IOE and sim instruction to prop guys coming over to jets...it ain't the button pushing cakewalk you think it is going to be. And yes, I have several hundred hours turboprop time and do not think less of the skills a prop pilot needs, as I said before it is the same skill level just a different set of skills. As someone else mentioned, if I were the hypothetical Delta recruiter, I would prefer a nice mix of prop/jet time, but would probably hire a 100% rj driver over a 100% 1900 driver, all other things equal, because he has experience in the automation and type of flying Delta does. And I'd hire the 1900 guy over the Alaskan bush pilot, even though the bush pilot probably has better stick/rudder skills, the 1900 guy has more "real world airline" time....

flame on... :)

Definitely agree with the above statement. It's a different set of skills.

Who said automation and turboprops were mutually exclusive?

When I instructed, I was at a place that had an all glass fleet. The average age of my students was about 45 also. I never saw them have a problem with automation. I even took a 65 year old whose last flight was in the mid 80s in a King Air. He got into a brand new 207 with the latest glass and had little trouble. Twisting some of the knobs and pressing some buttons might have been a little clumsy at first, but he always had a sound understanding of the theory behind the automation. He could understand what he wanted and how to make the automation accomplish his goal.

Also, what do you think happened when aircraft like the 757 and 767 hit the market? Older pilots new to that level of automation were able to transition from aircraft like the 727 that had almost no automation. Or also, how do you explain a 250 hour 172 driver learning how to fly a CRJ? Sure, they might PIC authority and some ADM, but plenty got the button pushing down.

We are talking about 2 different things. You have automation and you have the specific type of turbine engine powering the aircraft. Why not differentiate low bypass jets with hi bypass jets?

Never said that. I was specifically talking about the 1900 the other guy mentioned in regards to automation, and a different skill set required to fly props vs jets for the "which is harder to fly" argument...

Wow, I was actually serious. Trolling was not my objective but I see that it came off as such and for that, I apologize.

Ok, fair enough. I'll agree with this. Thanks for not attacking my opinions like some others.

Well then i'm perfect then, 11,000 hours total with 800 in small aeroplanes, 3000 in the ATR and the balance in a jet at 37,000' and PIC in all of them. Sounds pretty balanced to me and I prob make up about 85% of the demographic of RJ pilots. Don't worry! I have no intentions of leaving my job, you can have Delta

U know FLY782 you can make all the assumptions you want but when it comes down to it its who you know they could careless if you flew a box as long as you meet the requirements and put back a few beer with the right guys, its as easy as that!

Ok? Dont see the need to quote me twice. Just stating my opinion like I said, and yes I am well aware of its all about who you know...

At ASA when the ATRs when away several pilots struggled mightily with the transition to the jet. One was fired. Flying the jet takes a very different skillet that some dont have. One of them being energy management. The TP will do anything you want it to at anytime. In the Jet you have to be ahead of the plane and configured before it will do what you want it to. For example, in the B1900 almost any pilot can comfortably do 250 to the marker. In the CRJ900, you need a seasoned pilot or it'll most likely end up in a go around

As far as hand flying, the king air series including the 1900 is one of the easiest hand flying airplanes in the world. A VERY stable aircraft. I'd have no problem hand flying it 6 legs a day. Now I can only speak for the crj, but flying it six legs a day would be a pain in the butt with all the artificial "pitch feel" feedback you get in the controls. To make a long story short, it's way more sensitive than your average TP, especially at higher altitudes with the higher speeds. The plane feels as if it was built to be flown with the AP on 90% of the time

From my limited experience in both King Air's and the 1900 they maybe easy to hand fly, but the task of hand flying 7-8 legs a day is brutal. The whole 250 to the marker is wonderful, but let's step back and think about this. Every thing happens a whole lot faster in this scenario and I mean way faster and there is no AP to intercept and do all the work for you. I understand that in a jet it's all about the energy management, but how often are you not configured for the approaches at a decent distance out from the airport? How often do you hand fly approaches? Some can say well I do it as often as I can and that's great, but 1900 people don't have that option. It's all the time and the other side of the argument is you don't do the typical 6-8 legs that at least at my company is the norm. From what I hear from people who fly both is that the AP has to be there for the jet. It can do a better job than we can 9/10 times so why not use it? I'm not trying to say o it's a harder plane to fly therefore I'm more tough because right about now I'm ready to bail from the darn thing.

Autopilot or No autopilot 7-8 legs a day is brutal. But while its commendable that 1900 pilots handfly all day, the difficulty of such a task is over-exaggerated. The plane is so stable it almost doesn't need an autopilot. Flies like a Duchess. The plane was truly built by geniuses.

Ok guys, put your measuring sticks away.

Nobody really cares where you get your time as long as you meet the published minimums.

I seriously doubt many people care where you get your flight time as long as you can get through training and, most importantly, aren't the type of person who makes the other guy want to suck on a 9mm and end it all during a 4 day.

agreed. lets get back to the original topic shall we?

That's good to hear the sim is working me out and there is moments where I feel like the job is going to be too much for me. Thanks for the input.

So is the 135 hard to fly?

You mean it has been modified like crazy!!! But you hear from allot of people that the 1900 and the SF340 are great flying airplanes unlike their cousin french pig (ATR)

I hear it's like a sports car, when compared to the 145!

how should i know? never flown it.

EMB creates bad habbits....especially when it comes to landing the aircraft...the trailing link landing gear makes horrible pilots look good.... Whenever I have a new capt upgrading from the emb to the crj I know I am going to see some interesting landings... Unless they had turboprop experience in the past and didnt gain all their experience on embryo.

I don't know about that. Even though the 135/145 has trailing link landing gear, the plane is not the easiest to land softly all the time.

It's the same deal as the 145....it just climbs a lot better (except for the 145XR). The most frustrating thing about the 135 is finding a place to stash your bag.

what other bad habits do you speak of? trailing link gear is on a ton of aircraft. Yeah they cushion the blow sometimes but not always. The airplane never lands the same and the trailing link never guarantees squeakers...

We had an older guy in our class with types in the 747, 737, 727, and a few corporate aircraft. He said out of every airplane he's ever flown the 145 is by far the most difficult to land. I wouldn't know, but take the fwiw.

shhhhhhhh, don't tell him the CRJ-200 also has trailing-link landing gear....

What is the junior base these days? Seems it is always changing...

still seems to be a mix of EWR and ORD.. Im still trying to figure out the mass hiring. Its nice for sure, but it seems the company is staffed much better than when I was hired a year ago.

Boy I hope you're talking about the CRJ700/900 series because the CRJ200 is just as forgiving if not more forgiving than the EMB when it comes to landing

Negative, they look at the quality of your flight time once you meet published mins. And that your crew won't commit suicide on a 4 day with you.

not always an exact science......

Wow. You do realize both the ERJ and CRJ have trailing link landing gears, right? Plus, that trailing link landing gear doesn't always make you look good. I had my fair share of carrier landings in the E145. :D

The company I work for doesn't have any 200's. A running joke around with the fo's is that whenever we have a x embreyo pilot on the crj they end up having a really hard time with the crj. If we have an x turbo prop from our company they seem to have no problems with it. It's the 250 hour pilots that have only flown the emb, hired 5 years ago and just made capt. Being thrown in a jet with training that focuses on using the auto pilot with that low of hours creates bad habbits....aka happy hands...idol at 50 feet...not using the rudder....having the experience with a big turbo prop with no auto pilot helps create a better base for a pilot. It's just a observation not a fact. :eek: and yes there are exemptions to that rule.
I typed this on my iPhone and I yes i need to back to English 101.

I'll respect that. What's up Trip7? I haven't heard from you since I saw you at Flight Safety that one day while you were in training on the ATR.

I don't believe the EMB 145 creates bad habits. I guess its all about your particular viewpoint on how YOU choose to learn......if that makes any sense. When I was new at XJT, I tried to hand fly as much as I could to really get a feel for the airplane and to get to know its quirks. It has a lot of quirks! I felt it was a great way to know how the plane was going to respond in certain situations. I'm a new capt and I'm flying with a bunch of new 500hr wonder pilots. A lot of them seem afraid of the aircraft, meaning they turn the autopilot on as soon as they can and just sit and watch it do its thing. In my opinion that will create bad habits when you're new and really low time.

As far as landing this thing smoothly and consistantly......I have close to 5,000 hours in it and I still can't figure out why every third landing feels like it fell out of the sky! Its just the way it is.

Oh yea that was a while back! I've been around

Imma let you finish, but the Dash 8-100 was the worst landing airplane OF ALL TIME!

Until they came out with the Q400.

I don't know of any ERJ pilot that chops the power to idle at 50 ft unless he/she has a death wish. It doesn't sound like the airplane is the problem, it sounds like the training dept. at whatever company you work for.

Did you guys hear about Expressjet getting the 135's back?

I deadheaded on a Q a month ago and I didn't even know we touched down until I felt the braking. Though I guess, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then