I preferred the term Warlock.

We called the E-2 NFOs Wizzards.

FWIW, Skywest has called me for interviews with under 1200 FW hours.

They have on occasion in the past dipped below their published mins. Obviously they can't go below ATP mins anymore.

If the FSDO says you're qualified, I'd get them to write that in a letter for you. Send it attached to your resume to any potential employer.

The issue is not FAR minimums. It takes relatively little FW time (in combination with significant RW time) to qualify for a FW ATP.

The issue is airline specific experience minimums with regards to FW time.

"Demigods" as a minimum.


Can't say I'd recommend this course of action. rickair7777 has a good explanation.

Did you use AirlineApps? I submitted to Delta and United over the weekend and it asked if I wanted to include SKW, I sent it and got a email yesterday. Similar times to you but no PIC turbine.

How hard would it be to get PDX as a new hire? Or SEA on whatever a/c as long as it's PDX or SEA. Thanks

What is SkyWest's position?

Jet? Fogetaboutit
Bro? PDX out of training.

Per their website...

Pilots » SkyWest Airlines

If you're in the ballpark but not quite there, go ahead and apply anyway.

You said two different things. I was just wondering if I heard you correctly.

Thanks much for the replies. I guess what has me confused is why they would accept my quals three months ago but not now? Also, they own expressjet which accepts all my helo time and SKW doesn't, there the same company and if anything, expressjet is flying much more IFR on the east than SKW out here. Seems like the quals would be the other way around if different at all. It is what it is, and I completely accept it. They can do anything they want. ALLLL Good!

:)

The website says what it says. There is anecdotal evidence that they sometimes dip below their published mins.

The two airlines are owned by the same company, but they are two separate airlines with different SOPs, cultures, and service geography.

IFR is easy, especially in the east where things are relatively flat. Helo IFR experience is GTG.

IMO the concern is landing skills and low-level aircraft handling skills, particularly the second-nature ability that come with doing a lot of them. SKW operates to small fields with extremely constrained geography, high winds, and potential ice/contamination...that's probably driven the culture to value stick-and-rudder skills as much as IFR. Helo stick and rudder is not the same.

No. Helo stick and rudder is harder. A lot more "gotchas" that can get you in my experience.

I'd much rather take an E-2 aboard ship or into a short field in bad weather, than take a helo aboard a frigate in high sea states.

Oook, Thanks.. Did the challenges of potential ice/contamination increase between this month and two months ago when I was qualified?

Goodspeed,

I am not a member of Flight Level Jobs, so I couldn't read the entire ad.

Goodspeed,

Job Details
Company: Air Methods
Address: Hornell, NY , , New York
Website: http://
Contact Person: Human Resources
Tel:

Job Title: Fixed Wing Aircraft Position ($7500 Sign On Bonus)
Description
General Requirements: • Commercial & Instrument license (for category and class of aircraft) • ATP rating in category meets this requirement. • First OR Second Class Medical certificate required. • Pilots must have flown in category within the previous 12 months Flight Hours (Flight time must be verified through reliable documentation) Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Program: • 2000 total flight hours with minimum of 1500 flight hours in category • 1000 hours PIC in category • 500 hours of rotor wing turbine time • 200 hours of cross-country flight time, at least 50 hours of which were at night • 100 hours unaided night as PIC • 50 hours total actual or hood instrument time in flight and in category (simulator time does not count) Instrument Flight rules (IFR) Program: • 2500 total flight hours with a minimum of 2000 hours in category • 1000 hours PIC in category • 500 hours of cross-country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time • 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time in category and at least 50 hours which were in flight in an aircraft including 20 hours in actual instrument conditions in category For Fixed Wing Programs (in addition to IFR requirements): • 100 hours of flight in actual instrument conditions in category and 300 hours of turbo prop experience Source: company website
Details

Hope that helps

If those guys went to your headquarters recruiting, half the executive staff would be Mesa FO's. Let's keep it real.

If he went and got some tail wheel time he'd be good to go!

skykid and skypilot35 thanks for the info. I got an email from flight level jobs too but I couldn't see the whole ad.

I was trying to find out if this was for Texas Children's Hospital but I think another company has that contract? I thought a former 9L Saab driver was working there, maybe?

Kind of funny, I have the skills to haul dynamite on a 50 foot cable off the bottom of a helicopter and place it in a person;s hand but may not be able to acquire the skills to land an airplane in a crosswind. By the way, been flying a C-195 for the last two weeks. Taildragger!- Whooo!!

Yes, lots of "moving parts" in helo flying. But they are different moving parts than FW.

There are two types of FW pilots, those who are rated in helicopters and those who are not. If you are not rated the only thing you can do is offer supposition as to how a dual rated pilot might perform in FW. That is exactly what drives the decisions of those who determine the qualifications required at most airlines.

As a dual rated pilot who is on the SKW seniority list allow me to tell you I would have no problem with a dual rated pilot who is mostly experienced in helicopters operating in the challenging environments SKW operates in. In fact, as you point out the stick and rudder skills are different and from what I have observed those with helicopter experience fly airplanes better than those who have spent most of their careers in front of a yaw damper.

I recently checked out in a DC-3 and received a DC-3 type. There were a half dozen pilots all checking out in the same relative time. All of us had extensive airline experience coupled with military experience. All six had over 20K hours. For four of the pilots it was the first time they flew a prop airplane. Two of us were former Army pilots who flew helicopters. At no point in the training did the two helicopter pilots require the instructor to cover the controls or augment what the students did. OTOH the pure jet pilots all required different degrees of "help" on the controls. The part they were most deficient on was yaw control on both take off and landing. I would point out all they had to do was fly as the instructor handled all of the engine duties. Do not doubt the ability of a dual rated pilot being able to handle "funny winds" or any other winds. Frankly I am appalled by the cross wind technique I see with too many pilots I fly with on line.

For the record when I earned my multi-engine ATP I only had 300 hours of fixed wing time. I now hold ratings in 7 types. I haven't flown many of those for many years, but I think I could step in and go on any of them. It has also been many years since I flew a helicopter, but I wouldn't think of flying one without an instructor.

Nice, now that reply I can dig my teeth in to.
This thread is complete..

Thank you...

I've flown with a few pilots who had mostly RW time. All were excellent stick & rudder pilots. Although the actual control inputs between FW & RW are certainly different, the main point of stick & rudder flying is being able to sense deviations from your desired attitude/speed/position very quickly and making immediate smooth & accurate control inputs to correct them before they're ever that noticeable. Once your S&R skills are well developed, they transfer pretty quickly between aircraft types. To give one example in fairly tame taildraggers: rudder/tailwheel feel & response is quite different between the J3 and C170. But when I checked out in the 170 after having flown the Cub, it took one or two takeoffs & landings to adapt to the different feel, whereas it would have taken the average 172 pilot quite a bit longer despite the many similarities between the 170 & 172. Most helo guys have very good stick & rudder skills both by the nature of their machines and due to the types of missions they fly. Transferring those skills to FW airplanes is fairly natural.

Order of stick & rudder skill demand/development, IMHO:

Modern Jet < PA28 < J3/docile taildragger < Gliders < Pitts/sporty taildragger = Helo.

I've found that most guys with time in the last 4 categories, especially the last 3, make very good stick & rudder pilots. Even taking the old Cherokee around the patch once in a while tends to freshen you up. If stick & rudder skills were all there were to flying a modern jet, I'd hire every helo pilot that applied. Obviously there's more to it than that, and a guy who's been flying a R22 VFR around LA could be as deficient in other important skills as a similar-background FW pilot.

Absolutely true, most of my instructing has been in helicopters and I found that most students would neglect to get the bookwork done until the end. i.e. Regs, systems, airspace, theory etc.

As far as IFR, many wouldn't even bother to achieve it. That's why I have made every effort to better "understand" the fixed wing side by training for a jet type rating with my multi-ATP, getting all the fixed wing CFI ratings as well as complete ground school for Hawker-700/800, CE-525 and B-737. Unfortunately, I was just to broke to do the fun SAR stuff.

Skywest just isn't in the cards at this time. Perhaps some time with another regional than come back and try again.

Landing an H-46 in 20 ft. Indian Ocean seas was pretty hairy. On a Spruance class Destroyer you only had 2 ft. of rotor clearance from the hangar and 2 ft. of landing gear clearance from the deck edge. RAST hadn't been developed yet and it wasn't for the -46 anyway.

Then try it at night.

Fun times! NOT!

I only used RAST once not in training, coming aboard with a hydraulic boost failure on a FCF. Most of the time it was just "free decks" where we tried to get the RAST probe in the RSD and get locked to the deck before anything bad happened.

Seven pages for "SKW trying to swipe pilots from RAH"

Wait HR is doing their job? That should be the title.

I was explaining what I thought was the underlying reasoning, not trying to justify it.

SKW I think is more helo friendly than most airlines, and we have a few long-time helo guys in training and management. But even when other regionals were hiring wet commercials they never backed off much from their 1000-hour requirement (same helo credit as now).

From what I have seen lately Skywest knows how to hire pilots. They hire good people who have potential. A lot of regionals are unable to do this, or think helo pilots and people who have been out of flying for awhile are not good enough.

I did not and do not question your motives. However, your comment came across to me as a little condescending towards those who have a strong helicopter background. I'm usually more of a lurker, but I thought I through my post I could do a little educating by sharing my experiences.

I agree to their credit SKW has been able to keep their standards high in the past, but it makes no sense to me to bypass someone who meets FAA requirements while running classes with vacancies. Anyone who holds an ATP MEL and a jet type would be much more qualified than the 1000 hour instructors SKW used to put in the Bro regardless of how much total FW time he has. It seems to me in this case there needs to be a little more enlightenment exercised.

Agreed, based off of an hour of helo time. Most fun, and challenging experience I've had in aviation.

That said, it sounds like you carry a bit of a chip on your shoulder about your skills and experiences. If I'm way off, then my apologies, carry on and best of success. If not, then carry on and best of success.

It's not so much a chip on my shoulder, as being told everywhere I went flying either in the Navy or after the Navy, that my "helo hours don't count" and "in no way prepares you to fly a turboprop/jet"

I found doing instruments and airway flights to be much, much easier in the jet than flying a TERF route in a helo. Yes, you are going 2-10x faster. But, you are also not making a turn every ten seconds, or trying to fly a COPTER approach in a jet either.

Stick and rudder in a helo, vs any transport-type turboprop flying I have done is much harder.

And I do get sick of being told, either via uninformed opinion, or policy that it counts for less than boring a hole in the sky in a C152, which as far as most airlines are concerned is true.

I'm pretty damn sure the reason I've had a pretty good BI scan is flying at night, unaided, in an aircraft 200 feet off the water with no moon. If you aren't good on the gauges, you will die flying 200 feet all night in bad weather, while doing some fairly aggressive maneuvering at times.

I'm not saying it's a jet. It's not.

But it has to count as least as well as a C152.

EC2Master, why would you want to work for a company that doesn't want you? Chalk it up as their loss, not yours, and move on. I wouldn't recommend anyone coming here. You'll never upgrade and this place will soon be all senior captains and junior FO's that accept being a permaFO.

Not condescending, I have a little helo stick time so I have an appreciation, and rode plenty of them in the military.

Not my call. There's a guard helo unit at SLC and some of those guys are or have been SKW management so I wouldn't say RW is under-represented there.

What it's stick and rudder or a jet, you mean that thing that I rest my feet on while going down the runway and the thing I pull back before turning the autopilot on?

On a serious note, what is the outlook out here for rotor pilots, not in the airlines but flying helicopters. I know it's competitive and many mil guys with a whole lot of turbine time. But what is the outlook?

There might be some truth in this, depending on how things play out over the next couple years.