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

What is it with this jet thing?

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
In your case, I'd stay where the money/QOL is best.

All else being equal, I'll take a jet because I feel slightly safer/more comfortable with turbojet power. The jet engine offers better reliability, better performance, better altitude capability (allowing for better weather avoidance) and more.

I'd love to be able to command an old DC6 someday, but truthfully, I do feel much more at ease knowing that the thrust is coming from out of the tailpipe.

good luck,

Turboprops are jet engines.
 
ive though about this a lot before too. I am bummed that the whole aviaiton industry will never be the way it was for my Grandpa... and even my dad. I would love to fly a DC-3 DC-6, Convair 580 or beech 18 like my relatives had. Thats some real flying there!!
 
I'm looking forward more to flying night freight in a Baron than I am my first jet job...

I enjoy the "little guy" atmosphere.
 
I've never even sat in the cockpit of a jet but I assume they go faster and things happen quicker and the pilots have to react faster. If so then that would have to explain some of it.
Was someone saying that regional jet jobs pay less than regional prop jobs? If so then why? Does it cost less to maintain a jet?
Can someone give some examples of SJS regionals?
 
ePilot22 said:
SJS is a condition of a pilot, not an airline. Shiney Jet Syndrome.


eP.

I realize that. I read the Sally Struthers thing a long time ago. Sounded like someone was saying that certain airlines have SJS pilots. I was thinking that certain airlines know there are people willing to fly their jets for practically nothing and was wondering which ones are the WORST for this (besides the PFT operators). Just trying to learn a thing or two.
 
Having only flown recips I can't speak for flying either but I am sick of all these "I am a CRJ FO and i'm gods gift to aviation" types. Have actually heard this from an instrcutor after passsing up an interview with airnet "I want to fly a real plane." What a joke! A year later he finally made it to a EMB-145, ya know a real mans airplane. If the pay is right and the QOL is right and you are happy why move on?
 
I had a similar conversation recently. I was going thru sim training at FSI before an upcoming checkride. On the hotel bus, I saw a pilot in uniform, and just out of curiousity asked him who he flew for.

He told me of his certain regional airline not held in the highest regard that has a name like Plateau, and told him I was in training to be a street captain at a cargo outfit for the twin turboprop I am now flying.

He asked me" Well have you ever thought of flying jets?...Because we are hiring." I guess for those who have stars in their eyes about jets, its better to be a jet FO, than a type rated turboprop captain.

He seemed to be a nice guy, just misguided and still new to aviation, and thinking flying jets was the pinnacle of aviation.
 
CRJ a man's airplane? Get serious. You don't fly it, you program it. Now for a real man's airplane, lets fly the DC-3, nothing is automatic, except the hyd pressure kick down at 950 PSI, that was a big deal back in 1935. 5 steps to raise the gear, 4 steps to lower the gear, have to move 5 sets of levers and switches to set power. No autopilot, no FD, just a good ole Attitude gyro, a white bar on an all black background. No radar, no storm scopes, when it rains you wear your rain slicker in the cockpit. Every minute in that airplane is an adventure.
 
pilotyip said:
CRJ a man's airplane? Get serious. You don't fly it, you program it. Now for a real man's airplane, lets fly the DC-3, nothing is automatic, except the hyd pressure kick down at 950 PSI, that was a big deal back in 1935. 5 steps to raise the gear, 4 steps to lower the gear, have to move 5 sets of levers and switches to set power. No autopilot, no FD, just a good ole Attitude gyro, a white bar on an all black background. No radar, no storm scopes, when it rains you wear your rain slicker in the cockpit. Every minute in that airplane is an adventure.

Sounds about like the C-54 :) I had fun in it, but that was an airplane too. Gear retraction and extention was one step, but that lever took some force to move. Oh and there is all the time the right seater is bent over sideways, constantly moving cowl flaps, mixtures for each phase of flight, along with 4 props and 4 throttles. Got to be quite interesting and busy, when taking off out of San Berdoo with a full load of retardant, going to a fire 10 miles away when its 105 outside. I must have been over sideways (cowl flaps and mixtures are close to the floor, bottom of quadrant, closer to captains seat, with the plane just wallowing around in the heat.

And I would not trade a minute of it away.
 
and just for humor...

We gotta get rid of these turbines, they are ruining aviation.

We need to go back to big round engines.


{Turbines are as round as you can get. What the heck are you talking about?}

Anybody can start a turbine, you just need to move a switch from "OFF" to "START", and then remember to move it back to "ON" after a while. My PC is harder to start.

Cranking a round engine requires skill, finesse and style. On some planes, the pilots aren't even allowed to do it.

Turbines start by whining for a while, then give a small lady-like poot and start whining louder.

Round engines give a satisfying rattle-rattle, click-click, BANG, more rattles, another BANG, a big macho fart or two, more clicks, a lot of smoke and finally a serious low pitched roar. We like that. It's a guy thing.

When you start a round engine, your mind is engaged and you can concentrate on the flight ahead. Starting a turbine is like flicking on a ceiling fan: Useful, but hardly exciting.

Turbines don't break often enough, leading to aircrew boredom, complacency and inattention. A round engine at speed looks and sounds like it's going to blow at any minute. This helps concentrate the mind.

Turbines don't have enough control levers to keep a pilot's attention. There's nothing to fiddle with during long flights.

Turbines smell like a Boy Scout camp full of Coleman lanterns. Round engined planes smell like God intended flying machines to smell.

I think I hear the nurse coming down the hall. I gotta go.
 
User997 said:
You fly turboprops already, so just tell them you do fly a jet - with a prop attached.

Seriously, do what you enjoy. Sounds like you got a great setup and a lot of security where you work now - thats gold in the corporate business. Jets are only fun for about 6 months to a year. After that the "coolness" wears off and its just another airplane you fly. They get old really quick after that!

Don't let any of these guys kick you around and bust your chops about not flying jets. Just do what you enjoy and be happy with it!


Tell people I fly jets - with props attached?!?!?!

BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!:D :D :D
 
pilotyip said:
CRJ a man's airplane? Get serious. You don't fly it, you program it. Now for a real man's airplane, lets fly the DC-3, nothing is automatic, except the hyd pressure kick down at 950 PSI, that was a big deal back in 1935. 5 steps to raise the gear, 4 steps to lower the gear, have to move 5 sets of levers and switches to set power. No autopilot, no FD, just a good ole Attitude gyro, a white bar on an all black background. No radar, no storm scopes, when it rains you wear your rain slicker in the cockpit. Every minute in that airplane is an adventure.



Ah. The DC-3... Now there's an airplane I wouldn't mind spending some bucks on to get a type rating in someday!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom