Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Turbo prop vs. jet time

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

no1pilot2000

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Posts
529
When the legacy and major airlines hire, do they prefer whether new pilot applicants have jet time vs. turbo prop time?
 
Order of preference Military TJ, Military TP PIC, 121 TJ PIC, 121 TP PIC, with some 121 TJ SIC, Fractional TJ PIC, 135 TJ PIC, 91 TJ PIC, without PIC the the SIC time doesn't count for much especially in the 135/91 area because of the wide variance of training standards
 
Order of preference Military TJ, Military TP PIC, 121 TJ PIC, 121 TP PIC, with some 121 TJ SIC, Fractional TJ PIC, 135 TJ PIC, 91 TJ PIC, without PIC the the SIC time doesn't count for much especially in the 135/91 area because of the wide variance of training standards

Part 91 PIC is the toughest sell, since there is no proof that you've ever really touched the controls. I've seen guys stuck in that deal.
 
Part 91 PIC is the toughest sell, since there is no proof that you've ever really touched the controls. I've seen guys stuck in that deal.
That is why is was listed last. And Yes I hired one of those guys, 1500 TJ PIC in a CE-550. He could not fly instruments, on further investigation it turned out he never touched the controls, the boss flew the airplane all the time. That is why it doesn't count, there is too much variation in the product. Another thing is never log SIC in a single pilot airplane, unless it is on a 135 certificate that requires two pilots.
 
This reply is not germane to this thread, but that never stopped anyone from posting on this site before. My opinion does not affect the reality of the hiring process.

In my estimation, flying professionally as a single-pilot in a piston twin down in the weather takes more flying skill than doing the same in turbo-prop equipment. Flying a multi-crew jet is the least demanding of all. It seems to me that the requirement for "turbine time" or "jet time" is bogus.

I fully acknowledge that military pilots are provided with the best quality training. I also understand that those experienced in single-pilot operations require an adjustment when transitioning to a crew environment. But I have to say that I have flown heavy jet equipment with pilots that were quite competent in that situation that wouldn't have survived thrashing around in an iced up, heavily loaded, poorly maintained Twin Beech. I certainly give those crew members credit for having the good judgment to avoid that situation in the first place, though.

The industry seems to have had an epiphany recently in realizing that it is good for pilots to possess basic flying skills. Maybe evaluation rides should be given in J-3 Cub. If the applicant is competent in that airplane, they are demonstratively trainable for any further requirements.
 
This reply is not germane to this thread, but that never stopped anyone from posting on this site before. My opinion does not affect the reality of the hiring process.

In my estimation, flying professionally as a single-pilot in a piston twin down in the weather takes more flying skill than doing the same in turbo-prop equipment. Flying a multi-crew jet is the least demanding of all. It seems to me that the requirement for "turbine time" or "jet time" is bogus.

I fully acknowledge that military pilots are provided with the best quality training. I also understand that those experienced in single-pilot operations require an adjustment when transitioning to a crew environment. But I have to say that I have flown heavy jet equipment with pilots that were quite competent in that situation that wouldn't have survived thrashing around in an iced up, heavily loaded, poorly maintained Twin Beech. I certainly give those crew members credit for having the good judgment to avoid that situation in the first place, though.

The industry seems to have had an epiphany recently in realizing that it is good for pilots to possess basic flying skills. Maybe evaluation rides should be given in J-3 Cub. If the applicant is competent in that airplane, they are demonstratively trainable for any further requirements.
Couldn't agree more, but we are not the hirng managers at the Big Boys. It is like the college degree thingy, it has nothing to do with flying an airplane, but by listing all these requirements, it cuts down the number of resumes and applications you have to screen. BTW We have had tremendous good luck in training these single pilots 135 twin piston drivers. They can certainly fly instruments
 
Couldn't agree more, but we are not the hirng managers at the Big Boys. It is like the college degree thingy, it has nothing to do with flying an airplane, but by listing all these requirements, it cuts down the number of resumes and applications you have to screen. BTW We have had tremendous good luck in training these single pilots 135 twin piston drivers. They can certainly fly instruments

Understood. Regarding the FAR 135 piston twin drivers, continued survival is a powerful learning motivator, isn't it?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top