Who Is The Best Applicant For Regional?

[CFI'er]

Who will be the best candidate for the Regional’s?

Candidate Charlie, holds an ATP-multi with 1500 total hours and 130 hours multi.

Candidate Bravo holds the CFI certificate, has 1500 total hours, 1000 hours as a Flight Instructor, and 200 hours multi.

 

[Deftone45075]

Since "charlie" was not a CFI, he obvioussy built time otherways and likely flew 135 and probably has a lot more multi time than "bravo".

In your case, the'r both about equal, IMO.

If charlie had 400 multi and 350 turbine, he would likely get the job over bravo, again IMO.

 

[jeff333]

The best applicant is the one who is determined and persistant to get the job he or she wants. Don't get caught up in all the numbers. Don't worry about what the other person has. The number one goal is to get an interview do well and get the job. I have seen less qualified pilots in the flight time area get jobs because they were more qualified in the attitide department.

Jeff

 

[B190Captain]

Since "charlie" was not a CFI, he obvioussy built time otherways and likely flew 135 and probably has a lot more multi time than "bravo".

In your case, the'r both about equal, IMO.

If charlie had 400 multi and 350 turbine, he would likely get the job over bravo, again IMO.

Uhh, it says how much multi time they each have but IMO, the ATP cerificate holder carries a more weight.

 

[Deftone45075]

Uhh, I know it says how much multi they each have! What I was trying to say is that it is a poor hypethetical example by putting down that the non-cfi will have less multi time. That's why I added my own example. And I agree the ATP would carry the most weight out of the credentials.

And I also believe it is above all, about attitude and professionalism.

 

[B190Captain]

Uhh, I know it says how much multi they each have! What I was trying to say is that it is a poor hypethetical example by putting down that the non-cfi will have less multi time. That's why I added my own example. And I agree the ATP would carry the most weight out of the credentials.

And I also believe it is above all, about attitude and professionalism.

Ahh ok, no need to shout!! LOL!!

I do agree that the example given was poor and attitude and professionalism do carry you the farthest.

Fly Safe!!

 

[Deftone45075]

Ahh ok, no need to shout!! LOL!!

You'll have to excuse me. I fly the Jetstream, so my hearing is shot and therefor I wind up screaming.

 

[B190Captain]

we fly similar animals so I can relate.

 

[Timebuilder]

Man, there's something scary looking about that avatar. Like he's ready to take a piece out of your leg...

 

[B190Captain]

LOL!!

 

[bobbysamd]

Best applicant

Who will be the best candidate for the Regional’s?

Candidate Charlie, holds an ATP-multi with 1500 total hours and 130 hours multi.

Candidate Bravo holds the CFI certificate, has 1500 total hours, 1000 hours as a Flight Instructor, and 200 hours multi.

First, I will give my cynical answer. The one who is more lucky. We tend to evaluate quals by objective information. We don't always factor in luck. One would be surprised at the large number of great pilots who are working at Home Depo or McDs because no one will look at their apps.

Now, having said that, I think both applicants are about equal. Bravo may have more multi, but it may be from instructing students and not having his hands on the stick. On the other hand, Bravo has learned a ton about aviation, has had his aeronautical knowlege reinforced, and has learned about CRM by working with students through his 1000 hours of instructing. Charlie probably has a decent amount of actual and perhaps experience in scheduled ops as a 135 pilot. Both have quals to offer. However . . . . .

Neither has enough multi to be called in for an interview. I believe that these days are similar to ten years ago, maybe worse; during those times you needed 500+ hours of multi and much more total time to be a street interview.

I, too, like B190Captain's avatar!

 

[100LL... Again!]

-----------------------------------------
Now, having said that, I think both applicants are about equal. Bravo may have more multi, but it may be from instructing students and not having his hands on the stick.
-----------------------------------------


Not to get too far off topic, but I never bought the idea that the fact that CFIs get a little less stick time than other pilots matters much. It's the headwork that counts most. Also, CFIs get to make more saves, which is worth a whoooole lot more than many hours of fire patrol, jumper flying, or undisciplined hour-buying.

IMO, the ATP cert proves NOTHING about a 1500 hr pilot. Too bad some view it as some sort of 'advanced degree'. Any moron with mediocre stick skills and a thousand or so bucks can go to a certificate mill and walk out with an ATP in a couple days.

I know a guy who got his ATP at guess where, and he could fly his way out of a wet paper sack.
Type ratings prove little as well, unless you know the circumstances under which they were earned.

 

[Deftone45075]

Not to get too far off topic, but I never bought the idea that the fact that CFIs get a little less stick time than other pilots matters much. It's the headwork that counts most. Also, CFIs get to make more saves, which is worth a whoooole lot more than many hours of fire patrol, jumper flying, or undisciplined hour-buying.

And I never bought the idea that CFI's were any better than non CFI's. They fly in a controlled environment, local o their airport, mostly VFR. No doubt they're reenforcing their knowedge, and teaching is a great way to learn, but it doesn't mean they have anything up on a guy who didn't instruct.

I know a guy who got his ATP at guess where, and he could fly his way out of a wet paper sack.

I know a couple of guys who went to a two week CFI/II course and paid 5,000 for their tickets. Both made bad instructors whose students needed an awful lot of help when they left and a new CFI took them on. It goes both ways.

 

[Timebuilder]

No doubt they're reenforcing their knowedge, and teaching is a great way to learn, but it doesn't mean they have anything up on a guy who didn't instruct.

There is a LOT of disagreement on this issue.

Instructing, IMHO, is like building a firm foundation, upon which a sturdy home may be constructed.

While you can build a house on a poor foundation, you are left with a question as to how sturdy it might be.

To learn anything best, teach it.

Flame suit fully zipped.

 

[Deftone45075]

Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, teach teachers.

Instructing is not the only way to build a solid foundation. What you learned, how well you understood it, and what experiences you had early on will be your foundation, and you can build a strong one in many ways.

I wouldn't disagree with you that instructing is an excellent way to build such a foundation, but it is wrong to beleive it is the ONLY way.

 

[Timebuilder]

I wouldn't disagree with you that instructing is an excellent way to build such a foundation, but it is wrong to beleive it is the ONLY way.

Not the ONLY way, I agree.

It is perhaps, the best way.

Very likely, those who take the other routes may not find a way that is anywhere near as effective.

 

[100LL... Again!]

One possible advantage of a GOOD instructor is that since they know the learning process so well, they can apply those skill to airline training. It is difficult to see where fire spotting, jumper hauling or banner towing develops these skills. Not a slam, just an observation.

Also instrument instructor time is VERY valuable, IMNSHO.

 

[T-Gates]

It all boils down to quality of training recieved and the overall professionalism and attitude. Unfortuneatly being selected for the interview in the first place steers more towards quantity, not nessicarlily quality.


--03M