Do any cargo companies hire VFR pilots

[jet1man]

I flew for Air Grand Canyon with 500 hours TT. They had a bunch of 207's a 206, and a 182. This was in the late 90's. After that I went to ABQ to fly a 210 with less than 1200 hrs. Just couldn't do IFR until I got my 1200 hrs and IFR checkout.

 

[flyin4pennies]

Your kidding right!!

"Sorry Mr. Johnson we can't get your package to you/get you back home today because our pilot can't fly in clouds."

I just can fathom this living in the Northeast.

 

[TheBaron]

VFR freight dog? Don't count on it. Like flyin4pennies said, no fright operator would hire a Captain that couldn't get the job done when the weather is below VFR. And as far as those "ride along in the right seat to build time" jobs, like AirNet had at one time...the FAA decided quite a few years ago that you can't log right seat time in a single pilot operation. (Actually, you can log whatever the hell you want; it just isn't legitamate) Your best bet would be to stick with flight instructing until you have the 135 IFR minimums. If that isn't what you want then I know plenty of people that built time on fire patrol, pipe-line patrol, banner towing, and flying canyon tours.

 

[NoPax]

And as far as those "ride along in the right seat to build time" jobs, like AirNet had at one time...the FAA decided quite a few years ago that you can't log right seat time in a single pilot operation. (Actually, you can log whatever the hell you want; it just isn't legitamate)

My FAA Approved Ops Manual disagrees with you.

You can log the legs you fly as PIC - with the remark that you were 'sole manipulator of the controls'. At times an SIC is required (for cargo ops) if you have a particularly long run (ie over 8 hours).

This is a great way of getting on the job training, and exposing yourself to what you will be doing, by yourself, in a couple of weeks.

I'm completely against building time this way, but is excellent for experience sake.

 

[flyin4pennies]

Airnet still has an SIC program

See other posts for more info

 

[TheBaron]

My FAA Approved Ops Manual disagrees with you.

You can log the legs you fly as PIC - with the remark that you were 'sole manipulator of the controls'. At times an SIC is required (for cargo ops) if you have a particularly long run (ie over 8 hours).

This is a great way of getting on the job training, and exposing yourself to what you will be doing, by yourself, in a couple of weeks.

I'm completely against building time this way, but is excellent for experience sake.

"Sole manipulator of the controls" applies to Part 91 flying only. To log PIC time on a 135 leg (or 121,125) you must be current, qualified, and assigned as the PIC by the air carrier exercising operational control. An airplane certified for single pilot operation can have an SIC if the operation requires it (excess of 8 hours of flying or pax carrying with no auto-pilot) if stipulated in the approved company manual and OpSpecs but the SIC can still only log SIC even when he is "the sole manipulator of the controls." Sure it's great for building experience, but logging PIC when you are only an SIC or a ride-along is not legitimate.

 

[TheBaron]

Airnet still has an SIC program

See other posts for more info

AirNets old time building program in the Baron and AeroStar were specifically sited by an NTSB judge as illegal back in the late 90's. Someone who works there now may be able to provide information about changes they have made to their program to make it legitimate. Even still, you can't log PIC under 135 unless you are current, qualified, and assigned as PIC (and each flight can only have one PIC.) When any employer does a PRIA check, he's going to know whether or not you had a PIC or SIC qualification by your 8410's. If you are able to fool the Chief Pilot somewhere and get a job with bogus times...do you really want to work there?

 

[flyin4pennies]

Still, Airnet has an SIC program and there's an assigned POI to the company, so I doubt that it's Illegal.

Oh and by the way the NTSB can not make policy, they can only make recommedations to the FAA and /or other agencies.

Even still, you can't log PIC under 135 unless you are current, qualified, and assigned as PIC (and each flight can only have one PIC.)

Hence the term second in command (SIC)

 

[TheBaron]

Still, Airnet has an SIC program and there's an assigned POI to the company, so I doubt that it's Illegal.

Oh and by the way the NTSB can not make policy, they can only make recommendations to the FAA and /or other agencies.

With respect to operational and safety issues that may be true. When you get a violation and appeal it, it is the NTSB that decides your fate, not the FAA.



Hence the term second in command (SIC)

Maybe I wasn't clear. I was referring to SIC's logging PIC time because they are sole manipulator on the controls. Can't happen under 135.
P.S. plenty of POI's have jobs with the FAA because they weren't qualified for anything else. I've worked with some truly exceptional ones, and a few that could barely find there way to work each morning.

 

[flyin4pennies]

AirNets old time building program in the Baron and AeroStar were specifically sited by an NTSB judge as illegal back in the late 90's.

Yeah you weren't clear.

The time building that pilot's get at AirNet is total time to meet FAR part 135 minimums to become PIC's. They are not doing it to get PIC time.

Also when I was in college, I visited NTSB headquarters in DC for a day. They went over their entire roll in aviation, how they fit into the equation, and what they can and can not do. One of the can not's are create, regulate, and/or enforce policy. Unless something has changed in the past 7 years I don't know how this can be.