How much would a Falcon 7X First officer pay be

[Hugh Johnson]

Part 121 has to train to the lowest common denominator. Bad 121 pilots live by seniority, bad 91 pilots get fired.

 

[CA1900]

Whats 'YMMV' Stand for?...

http://tinyurl.com/clyfkm

 

[NCherches]

http://tinyurl.com/clyfkm

lol! I am going to (over)use that one!

 

[AA717driver]

Sorry I'm late. Did I miss anything?

Oh, just another 121 v. 91 pi$$ing contest.

There are 121 pilots who can't fly. There are 91 pilots who can't fly.

There are 121 pilots who can NEVER learn customer service and working as a team to provide good customer service.

There are 91 pilots who don't give good customer service. (I've seen it.)

Anything else?



TC

P.S.--If you're not smart enough to know that 91 is a 'wide spectrum' job, you deserve to be labeled "just another lazy airline pilot".

 

[Cat3C]

man did this thread change directions

 

[Ty Webb]

Pinnacle crew that zoomed their mighty CRJ to FL410 and then stalled

Hmmm . . . . I believe this flight was operated under Part 91 . . . I'm just sayin' . . .

 

[Ty Webb]

Actually, the common link between half of those airliner accidents you listed, if you really want to get down to it, were weak-d!ck crews that were trained at Gulfstream.

91 versus 121 . . .This argument has been going on here at flightinfo for the past 14 years, literally.

Having flown jets under 91/135 and 121 I have to say that 91 gives you the extra knowledge about your aircraft to do your own performance planning and flightplanning and develop problem-solvinng skills, whereas the repetition and "fly in nearly any conditions" world of 121 gives you some experience with stuff you probably would rather not have (like the 35 kt direct Xwinds, the 600 RVR Cat III landings, being the first in/ or the last in as a squall line passes, or dealing with the ridiculous drama and p!ssin!ng matches in the cabin . . . . . Oh, wait, that's the same. Nevermind.

 

[UnstableAviator]

Actually, the common link between half of those airliner accidents you listed, if you really want to get down to it, were weak-d!ck crews that were trained at Gulfstream.

91 versus 121 . . .This argument has been going on here at flightinfo for the past 14 years, literally.

Having flown jets under 91/135 and 121 I have to say that 91 gives you the extra knowledge about your aircraft to do your own performance planning and flightplanning and develop problem-solvinng skills, whereas the repetition and "fly in nearly any conditions" world of 121 gives you some experience with stuff you probably would rather not have (like the 35 kt direct Xwinds, the 600 RVR Cat III landings, being the first in/ or the last in as a squall line passes, or dealing with the ridiculous drama and p!ssin!ng matches in the cabin . . . . . Oh, wait, that's the same. Nevermind.

Thats a quality post. Its all individual capability and the ability to adapt to changing job requirements. As a 121 guy to regularly flies 60+ legs a month and 85+ hours, I can certainly attest to the repetition and "fly in nearly any conditions" part.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

Hmmm . . . . I believe this flight was operated under Part 91 . . . I'm just sayin' . . .

Flown by 121 pilots protected by seniority.

 

[AA717driver]

...or dealing with the ridiculous drama and p!ssin!ng matches in the cabin . . . . . Oh, wait, that's the same. Nevermind.

"or dealing with the ridiculous drama and pi$$ing matches in the hangar...."


Fixed.

 

[Ty Webb]

Flown by 121 pilots protected by seniority.

Seniority isn't protection, fool. Brown-nosing, maybe. Seniority, nope.

Seniority does, however, keep the brown-nosers from upgrading before you do.

 

[jonjuan]

Flown by 121 pilots protected by seniority.

Seniority, like at netjets that is the largest operator and has the best safety record in the 91 industry? LOL.....

 

[BoilerUP]

NJA isn't Part 91; they're 135 & 91K (much closer to 135 rules than 91).

 

[2000Easyguy]

''

Hi

I saw an ad looking for a FO on the Falcon 7X in the middle east. I was wondering what would the pay be for that. Considering it is not a job in the US, it must be high if it is in the middle east, i am thinking anything around 100-120K a year

Sorry about your thread "question" being hijacked. Hope you found your answer.
Obviously not here.

 

[jonjuan]

NJA isn't Part 91; they're 135 & 91K (much closer to 135 rules than 91).

Yes, but the operation of either is transparent to the pax-they are fundamentally the same thing. Just trying to dispute huhg's inference that below average pilots on a seniority list are not weeded out like they are at a non-union department. In fact, you could make the claim that there are more politics involved in a non-union shop with those who have been there longer, are older, or have stronger personalities and do the sucking may very well be the pilots who should be shown the door. All too often I have heard aircraft owners say they "trust their pilots and feel safer" simply because they hang out together or happen to know their families. It may make for a better and more personalized customer service experience, however it has been known to breed complacency in the operation of the aircraft.

 

[Caveman]

I don't think I caught any cycle... I have been flying steadly and securely now for some time (im only 27) but I have made smart decisions, worked hard, and earned everything I have...

Not going to lie... when the weather is bad and im in anything 'Regional Jet' I am a little nervous knowing that those guys have little experience, make less than 75K combined.... I'd put my family on a business jet over a regional ANYDAY!

Do you realize that a junior CA at Comair or Eagle has at least 10,000 hours in their logbook? Most have significantly more than that and when I say junior I'm talking about guys with 10+ years with the company. I would guess that most (meaning at least 51%) of the CAs at Comair have upwards of 15,000 TT. I personally know dozens of FOs at Comair that have at least 8000 TT and aren't senior enough to hold CA. Even at the places with supposedly quick upgrades like Republic the junior CAs have at least 5000 hours and usually a lot more.

Any RJ pilot is flying a lot more than you are and sometimes in conditions you wouldn't even consider flying in. They may be underpaid but they aren't inexperienced.

 

[NachoMamma]

Uh huh...

Any RJ pilot is flying a lot more than you are and sometimes in conditions you wouldn't even consider flying in. They may be underpaid but they aren't inexperienced.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-02-02-buffalo-plane-crash_N.htm

 

[BoilerUP]

A Q400 isn't technically an RJ...

 

[jonjuan]

Part 121 has to train to the lowest common denominator. Bad 121 pilots live by seniority, bad 91 pilots get fired.

http://www.cessnacitationforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=303

 

[Caveman]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-02-02-buffalo-plane-crash_N.htm

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm

Pay particular attention to the graph indicating which kind of flying is safer. The numbers suggest you are 5 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash flying part 91 than you are flying part 121. If you remove intentional events like sabotage, hijacking, bombs and terrorism from the mix the numbers would be even more skewed in favor of 121 over 91.

We have poor pilots in all segments of aviation including part 121. What I take exception to is the false belief that the typical RJ crew is inexperienced. At the larger regional airlines (Eagle, Comair, Skywest, ASA, etc) the crews generally have a lot of experience and there is no evidence showing someone is more at risk riding on an RJ vs riding on a corporate jet. In fact the NTSB stats linked above suggest the contrary.

I am NOT making a 121 vs 91 argument. I'm just refuting the contention that regional pilots are unsafe and inexperienced. It's simply not the case.