NC Software is having a Black Friday Sale Event thru December 4th on Logbook Pro, APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook, Cirrus Elite Binders, and more. Use coupon code BF2020 at checkout to redeem 15% off your purchase. Click here to shop now.
NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
We don't operate heavy iron, but we do fly jets. The high mins policy has certain merits so, in the past, we simply adopted it pretty much as written out of the regs. We operated under Part 91 and a problem arose after a while - our new aircraft was very similiar, operationally and systems wise, to the other aircraft that we also flew and pilots adapted very easily to the new type. It was basically a Falcon 50 vs Falcon 900 issue, but two type ratings were involved. After 20 or 30 hours it became pretty difficult to justify those self-imposed operational limitations.
That was then, this is now. We're going to be confronting the same situation in the near future as we transition into a Falcon 50. Currently we have no high-mins policy and I don't know that I will incorporate one. In our particular situation a little common sense and an explination to the boss will allow us to safely transition into the new airplane at an appropriate pace.
I know what you mean. In the airlines a new guy will get that 100 hours pretty quick but in the corporate world, at least around my operation it could take 6 months or more and to top it off, the total landings could be pretty small based upon the mission profile. Obviously the Falcon issue you describe has it's own set of circumstances and if some guy has a 1000 hours in a G1V, then the GV issue might be mitigated by this past experience. Just looking for somebody that has actually created a written policy, especially one that is driven by the number of landings in the aircraft, as opposed to hours.
If there are any NetJets guys watching, how about sharing your company policy on this issue.
Glad to hear the positive review. I think we have hired two guys and I was only involved in the first round of interviews so I remain clueless sometimes regarding our new guys, especially on the corporate side of the house. Hope he enjoys it here, as we have a pretty good group of guys working together to accomplish the sometimes what seems impossible.
You are obviously talking Part 121 stuff. The dynamics of the corporate world tend to inhibit this type of initial hi-min oversight. As stated in my earlier post it could take six months to get 100 hours in type and in addtion with our typical 10-12 hour legs the landing frequency is minimal. I was looking for something that could possibly take credit for similar aircraft/avionics/etc.
Going back to the 121 requirements. If you are flying the MD11 or B777 you are facing the same issues but the fact is they are not addressed. 100 hours cruising over the Atlantic really does not serve this well either. IMO