Airlines Vs Fractional

[Lrjet55]

Horsesh!t

 

[rice]

I do believe or should I say know that the larger aircraft are more difficult, takes more skill than do there smaller cousins. From climbing and descending to landing on a contaminated runway, it takes more planning, skill and experience on the heavy's. I am not saying that not anyone could fly larger aircraft because that is not true, I am saying and saying from experience that the larger aircraft requires a greater skill level and much more planning and many more things to consider. . I am not talking about passing a sim ride in the 737 but the average flying abilities required for line flying on one of the heavy’s.

Someone needs to put the Crack Pipe down and just step away for a while.

 

[Astra Guy]

Ditto!

 

[CatYaaak]

"
I am saying and saying from experience that the larger aircraft requires a greater skill level and much more planning and many more things to consider.

I didn't know whether to puke or laugh when I this read this manure nugget of "wisdom", so I laughed until I puked.

 

[mobie]

I have flown 121, 135 and 91 for a very long time. The most demanding (and rewarding) has been 91. Mobie

 

[Lrjet55]

If pilots have a higher aptitude than most then what happened

to the morons boasting large aircraft require greater skill

and responsibility?

 

[WileE]

May have once been the case.

Back in the days (and for the few lucky guys that still get to do it) when the pilots had to nurse four belching, tempramental, monsters of radials down an NDB approach at night to mins with true steam guages and a lot of muscle, THEN a2b probably had it right. The bigger they were, the more actual skill it took to fly-em.

Today however with the level of automation available on the modern airliners and the amount of practice that you can get on even the most improbable scenarios in the sim it can hardly be said to still be the situation that bigger means it takes more skill.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

RAJ and Aspiring,

I would have to say that you two "Studs" would do much better to keep your ignorant opinions to yourself. You are an embarrasment to the profession. If you think that a rat jet flying under 121, with primus or proline full efis, and an FMS is more demanding than anything else out there, you guys need to actually go somewhere and learn to fly.....cause you haven't figured it out yet.

Does an RJ have complex systems...yes,Just like any transport catagory airplane) is it hard to fly or require "Stud" skill.....Good lord NO!!!! Somebody couldn't jump out of a 172 and strap one on but ANYBODY with corporate jet time could fly it!! **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** boys, just what do you think a CRJ is????? It is a stretched Challenger corporate jet!!!!!!!!! An ERJ is a Brazilia with blowers and a swept wing!!!

Heres a quiz, I am Typed in 2 turboprops (121) 3 jets (121 and Corporate 91, Including the 737(f/o) and your beloved RJ) and have 1000 hours in a ragged out 58 Baron flying checks part 135. Which one do you suppose I look back at as being the toughest job I ever had? Hint: It ain't the ones that burned Kerosene.


I bet you guys used to tell underclassmen at your flight school how tough that big ole 182Rg or Seminole was too!!!!!!

 

[flyfish]

It's the mission not the aircraft that makes one more challenging than the other. Scheduled 121, which I have done, is primarily vectors to ILS after ILS to familiar 6000+ foot runways. In fractional flying, and other 91, you might start in Anchorage and end up in the Carribean stopping at ASE, and ATL on the way.
Major airports, mountain airports, uncontrolled airports all in a days work. You never know what's next. You are always being challenged. Just not the case with 121.

But if you still want to compare aircraft, I agree the twin recip. is the harder to fly than most any jet.

 

[Aspiring to be]

I knew I would catch some flack on my original post. My main purpose was to expose the BS of Catyaak when he said

“(" Deplaning, I queried the crew as to what the problem was....wx?..mech?. "No problem whatsoever" they said, and went on to explain to me that with so many pax the safest thing to do was to not fly at all.").

I do not believe there could be any truth to that statement.

I never said that an RJ was more difficult for a 121 than it would be for a 91 or 135. I would also agree that 121 with the repetition of destinations would be easier. What I do believe and I have a great deal of time in all types is that the bigger airplanes as a rule are more difficult to fly. I say this for many reasons but I guess power to weight ratio is one of the main reason. You can do things due to the higher power to weight ratio with the business jets than you can with the bigger ones. Your planning does not have to be as good for the descent, landing, etc due to this. Try a wind shear in say a Hawker XP and then do the same thing with the same conditions way with the 747, DC-10, L-1011 etc. The response, reaction in the small jets in all axes is much greater than the larger aircraft. The physical part of flying is easier with the smaller jets. A V1 cut is easier in the small jets. The descent planning is more important in the larger jets. The smaller jets are much more forgiving than the larger ones. The larger jets are as a norm flown much closer to limits than are the smaller cousins. A small jet is much like a fast sports car. Drive a sports car through the mountains and then try the same thing in a large tractor-trailer. Put aileron correction into say an L-1011 and wait for the corrective action to start as opposed to the immediate response with say the Hawker. Yes, I know about Telluride, etc but the average business jet is not near any limits other than maybe max take-off weight. Most of the airports are much longer than needed. Yes, some of the newer aircraft have some good power to weight ratios. The 757 is a great airplane for power but even then, it takes more planning. I never said that anyone could not do it I did say the skill level is higher for the larger aircraft. I believe what Mobie is really referring to, from looking at his qualification, is that he does not have the help with wx, flight planning, fuel burn, etc. that he had with USAirways. He is with his flight time retired from airline flying, I know many people in the same boat, and many have trouble coming down to 91-type flying. My qualifications would match that of Mobie's and I believe that 90% of similar experience pilots would agree with me. The small jets are not toys yet I feel like I am in one while I am flying them. I know that they are easier to fly, control, etc and that is not saying that you do not but… Part 91 and 135 flying requires greater skill in flight planning, etc than does the 121 flying. How many times have I seen pilot’s select fuel loads that are much greater than required because it took no planning? Many. The airlines tend to cut it closer as carrying extra fuel cost money. Yes, I know about tankering. It is true that most if not all airlines are not allowed to do circling approaches unless the wx is 1000/3. The reason is because the airports that are operated into have some type of approach at the other end and if approved for circling then you must do one every check ride. Airlines do operate into some airports where special training, etc is required. What type of special training did you receive prior to go to Telluride and other similar type of airports? I can tell you that I received no training no nothing, which I believe, is the norm with the smaller business jets.

I will say again that I do not believe that it is the number of people on board that determines how we would fly. I believe the difference between three and three hundred is zero as to how we should fly. With larger passenger loads certain areas of responsibility does increase. Having a crew of 17 has more responsibility (troublesome) than three do. Having 200, 300 or 400 passengers’ causes more concern, more chances for problems than would 10.

Most of the passengers on business jets are frequent, experience flyers, and are really easier to deal with. I find when there is a weather problem etc and it is explained to the passenger it is much better understood and appreciated by the business jet passenger. Fly PIC on the big jets and then tell me I am wrong. Most of the post I read that are anti 121 are from those that have never flown 121 or if they did then it was at one of the commuters or where they had very limited routes. I enjoy flying the smaller jets and at times not having a schedule, going to different places, etc. I am not trying to say one type of flying is better, that is for each to decide. I will say that the larger aircraft require more skill and experience to fly them. I do believe the responsibility increases, the skill level increases with the increase in size, complexity, passangers, etc that you find with the larger aircraft. I do not have knowledge of all small jets but the one that is most similar to a larger aircraft is that of the Gulfstream and that is comparable to the DC-9 in system and complexity of systems. I do not mean to offend or belittle those that fly the small jets. I understand the love of flying them.