Quote:
Originally Posted by Electra
Here's the thing, though. There are currently 32 people waiting to either transfer or transition to CRJ SFO, and nearly all of them will be off seatlock by the time you start in September. That will require almost 45% of the base to turn over right now. In the meantime, that junior FO will probably stay as the plug on the list for quite some time as people senior to him transition in. On the flip side, as people transition out or upgrade, your seniority on the EMB tends to only go up, thus getting you off reserve quickly (which you want, because it is not fun, either). Coincidentally, there is currently a 2-year MSP FO waiting to transition down to EMB SFO. Wonder why that might be...
The jet is a nice plane, but at the end of the day, it's still just a plane. A lot of people look down on the turbo prop, but it ought to be a badge of honor that you've flown it. Most of the strongest pilots I've flown with came flew the Bro first. Best flying in the system, too. And the question you keep asking that no one has addressed, is NO, not having thousands of hours in an RJ will not hamper your career progress. The one and only Delta pilot I know personally never flew the RJ while he was here. I know more Bro pilots who went to Southwest than RJ pilots. I know a lot of RJ pilots who were turned down by Southwest, though! At the end of the day, quality of life trumps all. The pain and suffering you will experience trying to commute halfway across the country will in no way be dampened by the excitement of putting on the autopilot on an RJ, particularly when you'll be doing it to overnight in Duluth and Iron Mountain. In the winter. You'll make as much or more being able to drive to work, flying with kick-butt captains, getting schooled by the mighty EMB learning how to really FLY an airplane and overnighting in Santa Barbara and Monterey. So check your ego at the gate, and enjoy a few years on the turboprop, then transition in to lineholder status on the jet in SFO and keep on driving to work.
So that's fantastic advice. Thank you very much. Really.
One thing, though. I don't remotely 'look down on' the turboprop. Not at all. I do have a bit of turbine time, all in all-glass bizjets (SIC type on the CL-30 (Challenger 300), plus a bunch of unloggable time flying CJ's as sole manipulator, but without a type, therefore rendering the time unloggable.) Those jets were vastly easier to fly than, say, the turbocharged piston twins that fill up quite a few hours in my logbook. CJ vs. Seneca III, in the flight levels? CJ is a baby carriage compared to nursing those temperamental TSIO-360s, that's for sure.
I believe that the jets are easier to learn, systems-wise, and that you typically do significantly less manual flying as opposed to the t-prop. Part of me was hoping for the jet so I'd have a slightly smaller firehose to drink from during ground school. Definitely not a question of me looking down on the turboprop ;-)
And thank you for answering the question about how the majors will perceive turbofan vs. turboprop time. Very helpful.
You've all been making the same point, and making it eloquently, and you're all speaking with plenty of experience. Makes the decision pretty easy. I really do appreciate it.
(Not to throw a wrench in the works, though, but I will say that OO's decision to pull out of 2 SFO Bro-served markets (MOD and LMT), plus the financial filing that forecasts a significant reduction in the amount of Bros on property...does worry me a bit. Anyone else feel that way?)
Yesterday
AIRLINE
