Pilots Who Have NO Turboprop Time

[NEDude]

I think there are a lot of professionals up there, but flying high and fast is totally different, not harder or better, but DIFFERENT than doing a tough approach into Rockland, Augusta, Bar Harbor ME, Lebanon NH, or the perpetually windy Shenandoah valley, Beckley-Bluefield.

Or Rutland, VT and Saranac Lake, NY, or any of the places Lakes flies to in the Colorado mountains.

 

[lindsaya99]

I flew turboprops before jets and I'm glad that I did. Flying Saabs in the Northeast was a great experience. I was exposed to a lot of weather conditions you just don't see in the Southeast. After about a little over a year I became a victim of SJS and left to fly CRJs. Because I had some 121 experience under my belt, I found that my stress level in class and the Sim was far below that of my classmates (former CFIs).
That said, I don't believe that flying TPs is easier than jets. TPs may be more work sometimes, especially if the A/C is /A. But, generally speaking TPs are more forgiving than jets. If one does make a mistake (not that we ever do, right?) it is much easier to redeem yourself with straight wings and props. Not trying to throw out flamebait, just my opinion.

 

[lindsaya99]

posted twice by mistake.

 

[Ponchus pilot]

Over the last 10 years our profession has changed. We have all read threads that talk about the early to mid-90s when pilots needed 2500 hours TT to be competitive for a job flying a Jetstream or Saab 340. Even then, many of those jobs required a $10,000 "investment".

Today, we face a different paradigm. Pilots with only a few hundred hours can go directly from light piston twins, or even singles directly to a high-performance jet. Many of them came directly from a flight-instruction background, having never flown freight, charter, towed banners, followed pipelines, etc.

I'm curious. How many pilots here have never flown a Turboprop? Do you feel any regret for skipping that segment? Do you feel that you might have learned something flying a 19 seat turboprop (no a/p, no f/a) for 6-8 legs a day?

PS - If you are one of the frosted-hair, backpack, ipod, no-hat, I'm entitled to a quick upgrade crowd, this post is not intended for you. I am well aware that you're flying a jet because you're just THAT good. :smash:

They have been doing this in Europe for years, 250hours and you are in the right seat of a 737 or A320. They do have higher training standars though.

 

[MalmsteenFan]

There's so much B/S in this post that I can hear the cows mooing. You've never done a circle outside the sim and 15kts x-wind on a contaminated runway? Please. Get back to learnin how to push the button.

Ive been flying a SAAB 340 in a northeast (Western NY-NE PA) lake effect snowbelt region as a capt for over a year now. Circle to land with a 15 knot crosswind component to a contaminated runway (field condition report says "snow on ice - 3"), mu of .25, at night, light freezing rain, to a runway surrounded by Allegheny National Forrest (black hole), vasi been out of service since who knows would be a luxury for me in a 8-leg day of flying. Im proud of my 2+ years of flying a SAAB in the northeast, wouldnt trade it for anything if I could start over! Of course moving on to a major would be nice about right now!

 

[PltSkiracer]

Well I haven't skipped too many stepps. I have done it the old fashion way I guess. Was a CFI for a year before I started flying 135 passenger single pilot in PA31's and Be10/90's. Did that for close to 4 years before moving on to the EMB-145. Now the 737......it's been a very nice ride so far. Worked my ass off though.

 

[Leroy Smith]

They have been doing this in Europe for years, 250hours and you are in the right seat of a 737 or A320. They do have higher training standars though.

Blah, blah, blah. And how many of our puppy farm products do you think would make it through the JAA certification process? Or on the parallel argument, the US military flight programs?

Getting through (insert whatever 0-Hero program here) is like getting a degree from Sally Struthers while the JAA is going to a good University. And the Military, that's more like getting a doctorate (sometimes while getting shot at).

Would all three have the same number of hours in their logbooks? Yes.
Are they otherwise comparable? No.
Can someone be a good RJ FO with 250 (or less) hrs? Absolutely, but its really up to them to know what they dont know and to try like hell to make up for it and not scare their capt sh!tless.

I have a friend who got hired into the RJ at 220hrs. Worked his tail off in training and did very well (probably better than me with 10x that much exp). All the captians Ive spoken to that have flown with him have said he was a little green but did a great job and flew very well. Ive heard many more stories about the fcukwits who thought they knew it all but couldnt fly worth a danm.

A good attitude and strong work ethic will go a long way.....

 

[andym037]

If I may offer an opinion... the one fact that nobody has mentioned here is that due a number of factors (economics foremost among them) turboprops (at least as far as scheduled service is concerned) seem to be suffering the same fate as the steam locomotive. To the best of my knowledge, there are no longer any t-prop airliners in production, any many airlines have already retired them (my airline parked their last J-41 earlier this month), or will phase them out soon. Simply put, they are antiquated and in many cases no longer viable/profitable. Its kinda sad (steam engines were cool too) but the era of the t-prop seems to be in its twilight. I wouldn't have minded flying one if I'd have had the chance. The RJ's have simply replaced them... my generation will likely never fly them.

 

[xjcaptain]

If I may offer an opinion... the one fact that nobody has mentioned here is that due a number of factors (economics foremost among them) turboprops (at least as far as scheduled service is concerned) seem to be suffering the same fate as the steam locomotive. To the best of my knowledge, there are no longer any t-prop airliners in production, any many airlines have already retired them (my airline parked their last J-41 earlier this month), or will phase them out soon. Simply put, they are antiquated and in many cases no longer viable/profitable. Its kinda sad (steam engines were cool too) but the era of the t-prop seems to be in its twilight. I wouldn't have minded flying one if I'd have had the chance. The RJ's have simply replaced them... my generation will likely never fly them.

Somebody better call Bombardier quick and let them know that production has been stopped. Dumb canucks, still making planes because nobody told them to stop. As far as economics, I don't even know where to start with your argument. Why don't you check cost per ASM on short sectors and see what an RJ costs vs a turbo prop? Let me see, about the same pax on 1/3 the fuel. Maybe time to do some research.

 

[Palomino]

who calls an EMB-120 Brasilia a 'Bro'? i've never heard it called that until flightinfo.com. it's not a 'Bro'. but it's a darn fun airplane and a great type to have. challenging and fun.

i always enjoyed flying with turboprop pilots. they seem to appreciate things more and work harder.

please stop calling it a 'Bro'. it sounds stupid and shames a good plane.