Originally Posted by
Officer Kite
I'm pretty sure EK have 200hr cadets regularly joining onto the 777 fleet so not sure why guys from turboprops with thousands of hrs are deemed a risk. Why such anti turboprop sentiment? Back in the 60s airlines had 200hr cadets in the cockpits of 707s and 720s flying transatlantic. Those flying 737s or 320s for ryanair/easyjet are accused of buying their way into aviation and not having a clue because they've never flown 'the real stuff' (usually referring to turboprops), then those that did fly the turboprops are accused of having insufficient skills simply for the fact they are flying a tp. You can never win.
Is this how bitter some people have become? Just because someone hasn't followed the exact career path that
you followed, doesn't make them inferior. If anything, pretty much any instructor I've ever had has said the bigger the aircraft the more automation is on board and the easier to operate it becomes, especially compared to an ATR or Q400, so I'd simmer down.
It wasn't a 2000hr former turboprop guy that caused the crash of the century, rather he had all the experience you guys claim is essential and heaven forbid anyone ever touch a widebody without meeting your personal past requirements
Which crash of the century are you referring to? Wasn't 521 a former cadet?