Originally Posted by
Boudreaux Bob
Is there a great difference in experience required for big and not quite big helicopters?
What is the key difference between and 225 and a 155 that would drive a huge difference in Total Flight Hours or whatever criteria is being used today?
If it is mere weight of the aircraft then I would find that a bit odd if the two aircraft had very similar flight control systems.
Liikewise if it were just the number of seats then I would find having a different standard even more problematic.
Time in Type would mean more than Total Time in my view.
That added to Total Offshore Experience should be the more important Skill Set being used to determine PIC requirements in my view.
Who would want to be the guy that has to write the Rule and upset the current Apple Cart?
More legacy rules from the seized wing industry. In days of yore bigger a/c were considerably more complex. It also helps justify and entrench the wage structure.
The offshore world does use a baseline minimum and then there is an ability to use a high time in type, for instance, to offset lesser offshore. Ultimately a tally of hours should be an indication of potential, not a definer of capability.
I'm sure a pilot with 250 hrs total time, but 50 in a 747, would be better qualified than me, with 8000 hrs and 0 in a 747, to do the trans-atlantic hop for LH.