Single-Engine Turbine

[julle]

Just wanted to find out how beneficial it would be to get single-engine PIC turbine time (in, for example, a caravan). Is this better than multi-engine reciprocating PIC time?

Also, would it be better to fly right seat in a larger multi-engine turbo-prop?

 

[A Squared]

Julle,

Difficult question. Obviously Caravan PIC time isn't going to be worth as much as Beech 1900 PIC time (for example) It is "turbine time"....Or is it really? My understanding of why the airlines look for turbine time is that they are looking for pilots experienced in faster, more complex aircraft. I'm not sure that the caravan is faster or more complex than your 402, even though it does have a turbine engine. I have heard that the instructions on some airline applications tell you not to include single engine, fixed gear, turbine time in your turbine time square. In other words, Caravan time would go in the same box as 172 time. Can anyone out there confirm that this is true?


regards

 

[aero99]

Julle,

Do a search on "multi time" or "PIC time" on this forum.

There are quite a few threads on your very question and might give you more info than just this thread.


Multi PIC seems to always be the underlying important time to most aviation jobs on the other threads.

 

[skydiverdriver]

The airlines like multi time, and they don't seem to care what kind of aircraft it's in. Later on, when you are at a regional or corporate operator, turbine multi pic will be something you should work on. Caravan time is good, but not as useful as any multi. I think it's United's application that categorizes Caravan time the same as 172 time. You are better with the multi. Good luck to you.

 

[bobbysamd]

Multi recip v. single-engine turbine

Depending on your current quals, you might consider single-engine turbine. Turbine time is hard to get. If you already have decent multi PIC, say 300-600 hours, single-engine turbine might fill an important square on your resume. I have a friend who filled that square flying Caravan freight. He has something like 8000 total, 500 multi, and now 800 turbine. He has an EJA class date, which he credits in part to his Caravan experience.

On the other hand, if you're light on multi PIC, I'd go that route without question.

I'd be EXTREMELY careful about the right-seat time in the large turboprop. Be sure it can be logged legally and legitimately, or else it'll cause more trouble that it can help. We've had some good discussions in other threads on that subject.

 

[julle]

Thanks for the advice - my multi time is pretty good - over 1000, but I have no turbine time, so I know that is what I need now.

I guess my other question is, is it better to get SIC turbine time at a Part 121 carrier and be able to upgrade in, say, 18 months, or to fly as PIC in a caravan (Part 135)??

 

[COEX-FO]

Julie,

Right now if you can get the PIC SE Turbine time I would do that. Ultimately you are going to probably want to get to the majors and building that PIC turbine time now is a good way to get the 1000 PIC hrs that airline look for. Jet Blue, for example, wants PIC turbine time (number of engines does not matter)

When things start picking up and the small jet airlines are hiring again, you will get the chance to log tons of Part 121 multi time but the wait for a CA slot will be a long time. Having that PIC turbine time already in the logbook will get you to the majors faster.

In other words, in three years you could have 1000PIC SE Turbine, 1500 SIC ME Part 121 time. No other way will fill all the boxes as fast, IMHO.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Caravan time is not worth squat! I speak most unfortunately from experience. Unless you have a substantial amount of MEL PIC time, recip or turbine you will get trapped in that aircraft. It will give you Turbine PIC time, that might get you an interview at some carriers. It will get you an interview at WN but I strongly doubt that it will get you a job there. From my understanding WN did not put a multi requirement in place so that it would give ex-military types with single engine jet experience (F-16) an opportunity for employment. This is my conjecture. I have not heard of anyone getting on with WN with only the 208 time as their PIC experience, though I could be wrong.

I know that this may be hard for some Caravan drivers to swallow, and I am certainly one of them. Right now my 208 job is giving me a paycheck and that's about it. It's better than being totally out of a flying job. It certainly is not enhancing my marketability. The one benefit of flying the 208, especially the Fedex Feeders is that the aircraft are for the most part well equipped and maintained.

Good Luck To All!

 

[Spiraldive]

If you go the SE turbine route, at least make it a PC-12. Only one engine, but the performance specs are very similar to a Dash-8 in terms of speeds and altitudes. And the EFIS, EIS and FD make it easier to sell your experience on it later. The Caravan doesn't give you any of those advantages, plus many operators fly them VFR most of the time so they don't have to carry IFR fuel (more weight for cargo).

Fly safe.

 

[bobbysamd]

121 SIC

I would do that. Believe it our not, folks, 121 jobs aren't growing on trees right now and have never grown on trees. Not only is that legit turbine and multi time, it is 121 time, which will really serve you. At that point, unless you're forced out of 121, there's no looking back but only looking ahead. At the point you upgrade to Captain in 121, you are golden. You can build some excellent quals from that point on.

 

[NEDude]

PC-12 Time

I got some time in a PC-12 before my airline job. I have interviewed at three airlines and and their reactions to the PC-12 times was different. The guys at one airline didn't even know what a PC-12 was (In fact they couldn't even figure out how fractional flying was part 91 - but that is a different story), so that didn't help at all.

But the other two seemed to know a lot about the PC-12 and liked the fact that I had some time in it.

So my guess is that it really depends on how familiar the company interviewing you is with the PC-12. I went from the PC-12 to the BE-1900 and they are quite similar. Speeds are almost identical, and systems are very similar as well. The PC-12 was very good preparation for the Beech. They also have virtually identical engines the PT6A-67. The only different is the prop governor.

If you get the chance to fly a PC-12, don't pass it up. It is a great airplane with advanced systems and avionics. But I would also make sure you have your 100, 200 or 250 (depending on the airline) of multi-engine time before sending resumes out because you may need that to get past the initial resume screening. That and you are putting a lot of faith in the interviewers being familiar with the PC-12.