What looks better to Cathay? [Archive]

View Full Version : What looks better to Cathay?

RiddleDiddle84

10th Jan 2006, 22:33

Hey guys,
I have been instructing for a while now and am getting ready to move on into the regional airline world. My future goal is to become a Cathay Pacific pilot. Would it be better to take a regional job with a short upgrade time in smaller turbo-prop aircraft (19 seat) and start logging PIC turbine, or would it be better to fly for a regional airline that has large turbo-prop and regional jet aircraft but the upgrade time is closer to five years. Once again the idea is to fly for the regional, get the best looking time on the resume, and move on to Cathay. Thanks in advance.

RD84

Kenny

10th Jan 2006, 23:29

All I can tell you is what I've been told by someone who used to conduct the interviews and has been at CX for a good while. Take it as you will but I make no claims that it's either gospel or good for everyone.

If you look at the numerous posts here on Pprune you'll find that the average time time for SO's is probably about 4500TT with at least 2000 Turbine. That's from US applicants. They have taken guys without jet time and with lower total time from Aus, Canada, Europe and SA but CX is a very technical company and they have a lot more respect for the ATPL's from those countries. I'm not going to get into the whole US vs JAR/CASA etc, thing but that's the way i've been told it is viewed. As a result US pilots require more time and hence PIC aswell. You also have to realise that things here in the US are about as sh!t as they possibly could be and with all the furloughs and Lay-offs (Comair. Mesaba, Indy, USAir, Delta, NWA, etc). Things are extremely competitive amongst those applying from the US. These guys have a tonne of time and CX offers one of the last remaining chances to actually fly for a decent airline.

You also have to take into account that as a US applicant you are in competition with Europeans who have been Captains on the A320/B737 and are prepared to work for CX as SO's. I have 3 mates at Ryanair that got on with CX as SO's with 6000TT and 5500 Turbine on the B737. It's hard to compete with that when you have just a 1000 on a CRJ. Not saying it hasn't happpened, it has but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from with this.

We all know CX is a one in a million compnay, otherwise we wouldn't be on Pprune trying to figure out the best way to get there but you have to think about the intervening time. As someone who's been furloughed, out of work and flown at 2 regionals in the US in the past 4 years my advice is to go to an airline where you'll be treated like a human being and fairly compensated. There aren't too many out there, I know but they are there if you look and have some patience. The bottom line is you don't know how long you'll be there and nothing is guaranteed in this industry.

Once again, this is simply what I've been told and don't worry I won't make any jokes about Riddle! I guess that's where you've been instructing from your user name? And if you are at Riddle you're probably talking about Gulfstream and the B1900, in which case don't even think about it!
PS, whatever you decide, good luck.

RiddleDiddle84

11th Jan 2006, 00:31

Hey thanks for the info. Don't worry I'm not thinking about Gulfstream but maybe another B-1900 operator.

RD84

Cripple 7

11th Jan 2006, 01:47

Why we require more hours from US applicants? The answer is simple. They can have one guy flying and one guy sleeping but both can legally log PIC time.

ccbull17

11th Jan 2006, 03:11

Does anyone know what weight CX places on military time or combat time from pilots in the US?

PS: I am a few years off from applying, so I will have to wait for the ultimate verdict.

robiemartin

11th Jan 2006, 06:34

Why we require more hours from US applicants? The answer is simple. They can have one guy flying and one guy sleeping but both can legally log PIC time.
Would you elaborate? Are you talking about augmented crews? Don't have my FAR's handy but there is only one PIC in 121 domestic ops as far as I know.

usualsuspect

12th Jan 2006, 17:22

that's cute cripple 7...
too bad you're wrong. the only pilot who can log PIC is the pilot who signs for the aircraft

Kenny

12th Jan 2006, 17:48

Guys,

Lets not let this turn into FAA vs Others bash fest. Let's agree that diiferent countries have different certification/licensing criteria and leave it at that.

My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment

robiemartin

12th Jan 2006, 19:06

Lets not let this turn into FAA vs Others bash fest. Let's agree that diiferent countries have different certification/licensing critera and leave it at that.
My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment
Amen to both points. RE: the second point, when I joined my current very solid company 8 years ago the jr. Captain had 3.5 years. At current rate of progression it's looking like 15 years before I have a shot at upgrade.

RE: The original question: Which is better? Tprop PIC or RJ SIC.
I don't think there is an answer. PIC is good, Jet time is good. Jet PIC is better. In line with the above point, my advice is join the best company. IE: best pay, best benefits, most opportunities you can get.

BTW, the CX application breaks out Light Jet and Medium Jet time w/o any reference to MAUW. Any insights on where current a/c such as CRJs fit?

Kenny

12th Jan 2006, 19:24

Unless they've changed the App, It should also say 2 engined business jets are considered "light" jets. So I guess that covers the CRJ

Although where do 170's and CRJ700/900's fit in? The line's starting to get blurred in more than one way.

sony

12th Jan 2006, 21:20

The CRJ is considered "light jet". You can call either Carol D. or Kelly C. @ CX to confirm this.

I would agree with the above as well. Go to the better company in terms of treatment and quality of life.

Good luck.

Drunknsailor

12th Jan 2006, 23:58

The only thing I would caution you about in terms of your next career move is that, in my opinion, the rj boom in the US is coming to a close. DL is having rj's parked. NW is trying to get larger rj's but that is probably to eventually replace the DC-9's. My point with this is that if you get on with an RJ operator right now, you may be stuck in the right seat for a loooong time. CX will interview you without the turbine PIC time, but that's about it. Granted CX is the best opportunity out there, one still does not want to be backed into a corner should that door not open up. I'm not necessarily advocating that you go fly an 1900 for a shady outfit. I'm just trying to point out that the rj fo gig may backfire. That said, after your first year with any quality (I understand that quality is a relative term when discussing US regional airlines) regional, you will be able to feed yourself as an RJ FO for as long as it takes to move up. Good luck and I'll put my soapbox away now.

RiddleDiddle84

13th Jan 2006, 01:08

Hey guys,
Thanks for the tips. I guess my next question might be, what US regionals might be the best with regard to QOL and enjoyment. Any that you might stay away from?

RD84

Drunknsailor

13th Jan 2006, 01:47

CHQ seems to be a rising star these days. I'd avoid YV & Trans States

CloudSailor

13th Jan 2006, 03:16

Skywest is a high-quality, all round classy regional airline. My brother is there right now, while I'm at Mesa. His QOL after four months is better than mine after 4 years.
Upgrade at Skywest is at about a year in the Brasilia EMB-120 and a 1.5 years in the CRJ (as of now, subject to change).
Good luck with the decision.
Just remember to enjoy the path, and not focus too much on the destination.
CS.

Drunknsailor

13th Jan 2006, 15:42

I know first hand that OO is a great place to work. However, upgrades are going to be slowing WAY down unless we get some more airplane orders. Right now we have about 10 CR7's to be delivered between now and the end of May. After that the horizon is empty. Also, from the looks of the new training schedule that management published, there are no new hires forecasted for the 1st quarter of this year and only about 40 upgrades; that includes both EM2 and CRJ. That being said, staff planning accuracy over here seems to be slightly less on target than an 8 ball if you know what I mean. Also, right now it seems we are having 8-10 pilots a month move on to bigger and better things so we will need newhires eventually. Hopefully I'll be joining that rank in due course. Good luck in deciding your next career move.:hmm:

Cripple 7

14th Jan 2006, 13:04

Would you elaborate? Are you talking about augmented crews? Don't have my FAR's handy but there is only one PIC in 121 domestic ops as far as I know.

No bashing intended.

I am not talking about Part 121 operation. I am talking about newly licenced pilots building time to get to their ATP. I was involved with recruitment awhile back and this is what I was told about the US. A instrumented rate pilot can fly in simulated instrument condition (e.g under the hood) and logs PIC time. The safety pilot/instructor logs PIC as well.

Kenny

14th Jan 2006, 13:22

No bashing intended.

I am not talking about Part 121 operation. I am talking about newly licenced pilots building time to get to their ATP. I was involved with recruitment awhile back and this is what I was told about the US. A instrumented rate pilot can fly in simulated instrument condition (e.g under the hood) and logs PIC time. The safety pilot/instructor logs PIC as well.

And you know what's even worse about that? There's a certain, fairly large flight school over here that will put 2 students in the front of a twin in the same situation as you've described above and an instructor in the BACK, who's loggin PIC and Dual given!!

Nobody ever said the FAA was smart.

Cripple 7

16th Jan 2006, 22:24

This is what I got from a friend in the US.

The three-pilot scenario:

1. The instrument student logs PIC because he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft he is rated for. 61.51(e)(1)(I)

2. The pilot in the right seat is the acting as PIC and performing safety pilot duties under 91.109(b)*. He logs PIC as he is PIC in a flight operation that requires more than one pilot. 61.51(e)(1)(iii).

3. The CFI-I who gives instruction logs PIC 61.51(e)(3).

Each person in the airplane has a rule that sepcifically alows him to log the time.
:ok:

Cripple 7

16th Jan 2006, 22:29

< 20 tonnes=light jet

junior_man

16th Jan 2006, 23:28

Safety pilot cannot log PIC time, only SIC time.
An instructor can log PIC time, but if that is the concern ask pilots to separate PIC time from instuction given. I think AA used to ask that you not include flight time as an instructor in your PIC time, but listed it separately.

BlueEagle

17th Jan 2006, 10:18

Cripple7 - Don't think it makes much difference whose rules you operate under, the only person who can log PIC is the aircraft commander, nominated by the company and who signs all the necessary paperwork, he will be someone who has passed that company's command requirements and been appointed a captain, an FO can only log PIC/Under Supervision.

A check and trainer can log whatever the company tell him to do but if he sits on the jump seat and didn't sign the load sheet or tech log then the guy that did can legally log PIC.

The pilot in the right seat, if not the Pilot Flying, is the P2.

Hellenic aviator

18th Jan 2006, 01:00

Does anyone know what weight CX places on military time or combat time from pilots in the US?
PS: I am a few years off from applying, so I will have to wait for the ultimate verdict.
I know quite a few guys here that are flying for our Freighter division, based out various domiciles throughout the U.S., who are ex military. Most flew fighters for the USN or USAF. Looks to me that Flight Crew Recruitment looks favourable on this experience...
Best of luck :ok:

Cripple 7

20th Jan 2006, 23:29

junior_man

22nd Jan 2006, 01:02

That is correct, FARs permit both pilots to log PIC IF one of them is an instructor. But, he must also sign the other pilots logbook for dual given and must log the time not only as PIC but as dual given. Failure to log it as dual given and PIC would be an FAR violation. So, if this troubles anyone, you separate the PIC time from PIC as instructor time.

Now, if one pilot who isn't a CFI rides along as safety pilot, then he cannot log PIC time, only SIC time.

But, if you show up at and interview and you have many hours of PIC time (Pilot In Cabin) then it will show up quickly and you will not be hired or given a second chance.

I used to know some of the interviewers for a large US commuter airline. They were very experienced at analyzing logbooks. I am sure that the folks at CX are extremely good at this too.

ANDRE25i

22nd Jan 2006, 06:46

Regardless of your specific intentions rd84; qf certainly looks better than cx. Tougher to get into? after all, airline with probs the best safety record

Stereolab

22nd Jan 2006, 16:57

< 20 tonnes=light jet

Wondering what catagory the CRJ-700 or the E170 fits into. E170 weighs 82000lbs...hardly a "light jet"....

By the way...FAA considers anything less than 50000lbs to be a light jet...

Lear70

23rd Jan 2006, 03:12

BlueEagle:
You are absolutely correct except that doesn't always apply in the US. I checked again and again. I am 100% sure that under FAA rules, if it is not a commercial flight (ie, not Part 121, 135, 125, etc but a Part 61, 91 or 141 flight) 2 pilots can both log PIC if one is rated and flying under the hood and the other is the instructor.
I just go by what I was told by my Yankee pals. :cool:
That's not the only situation in which this can happen.

When working at Flexjet it was common practice for the pilots to swap legs in the left seat or the Lear since both were typed and rated in the aircraft. Flexjet for many years (up to 1998 when I left) TRAINED its crewmembers to Part 135 requirements but OPERATED the company purely Part 91.

The pilot then in the right seat was the Company's appointed PIC, signed the logbook, and was therefore responsible for the flight and logged PIC time under Part 1 of the FAR's.

The pilot in the left seat was the Company's appointed SIC, but since he/she was the sole manipulator of the controls for the entire flight and was rated in the aircraft, he/she logged the time as PIC under Part 61.51(c).

The new fractional regs make that harder to do.

That said, I don't buy this as a reason U.S. pilots may not be looked upon as favorably as other countries. Especially with so many of us applying whose background is primarily part 121 where that combination of time logging is simply impossible.

In any eventuality, it's a simple matter to require U.S. applicants to include ONLY the time they were the Part 1 PIC, Aircraft Commander, who signed for the aircraft. As someone else pointed out, several U.S. airlines do this already.

Incedentally, at the BNA FSDO, the primary POI of the facility has long held that a safety pilot CAN log the time as PIC while another person is operating the aircraft under the hood if on a VFR flight plan operating in VMC conditions, as the safety pilot is responsible for ensuring traffic avoidance and therefore shares the responsibility for safety of flight. Don't shoot the messenger, I don't necessarily agree with it, just saying the interpretation of PIC logging for safety pilots can and WILL vary from FSDO to FSDO. Isn't the FAA great? ;)

Cripple 7

24th Jan 2006, 00:36

hey guys!! I am a Canuck and before I came to Lantau, I have spent quite a few hours cruising the friendly skies in the US. Since then, I have flown with several colleagues from south of the border. They are competent and good pilots. That said, while I was doing the recruitment gig, I was simply told to discount some of the hours if they are not military or Part 121 hours. It's usually the hours between PPL and ATPL that's questionable. When we did the interview, we looked at the pilot's logbook and inquired the details of flights logged. Quite often, the guy will say he couldn't remember enough of the details as it was too long ago.

RiddleDiddle84

31st Jan 2006, 22:52

Macgyver

1st Feb 2006, 01:32

Riddle,

Try asking that question at www.flightinfo.com or www.clear-and-a-million.com. These are both American message boards and frequented by many regional pilots.

usualsuspect

13th Feb 2006, 18:09

RiddleDiddle84-
Eagle is good for stability and benefits, but upgrade is obsolete.

I've got over 1000hrs SIC in the jet there but now I'm looking at some corporate jobs where I might possibly get some PIC. I dont care if its tubroprop or jet PIC, just any PIC I assume is better than being a pilot at eagle for a couple more years with only SIC time to my name.

So my question is: should I venture into the corporate side of things for PIC?
I know CX would love to see jet PIC from an air carrier, but is it ok if it comes from corporate flying? I don't see any upgrade on the horizon at my current job, but that seems like the only thing wrong with it so it makes it kinda hard to leave.
Advice? Suggestions?

Thanks-

Start4&3

13th Feb 2006, 20:04

Hey guys,
Thanks for the info. What do you think about American Eagle as a regional. I want to hang out down in the Bahamas for a couple years to get the Cathay time and I think Eagle would be a descent place to do it. Thanks, RD84.

You won't get any CX time if you want to stay in the Bahamas as an Eagle FO. Eagle only operates ATRs in the Bahamas/Carribean area. CX is looking for at least 1000 jet time.

Start4&3

13th Feb 2006, 20:07

RiddleDiddle84-
So my question is: should I venture into the corporate side of things for PIC?
I know CX would love to see jet PIC from an air carrier, but is it ok if it comes from corporate flying? I don't see any upgrade on the horizon at my current job, but that seems like the only thing wrong with it so it makes it kinda hard to leave.
Advice? Suggestions?

Thanks-

I had 2500 jet time SIC and no PIC time when CX called me for an interview. I know CX is not particular about PIC time especially for SO applicants, but PIC time is nice to have and you're right about not getting it from AE because I didn't get any after 7 years.:{

mayday911

14th Feb 2006, 13:17

I left AE after 3 years and would still be a 7 year RJ FO if I had not resigned. I gambled on leaving and it has worked out for me (currently an RJ captain), but I can't say the same for some of my buddies that have also left for "greener" pastures.

That being said....when I applied to CX for the first time in 12/04 I had 0 turbine command time and only a CPL. I was called 2 months later for a DEFO interview. The only thing that I could see that got me the interview, was all of the total turbo jet time that I got at AE plus a little from my current job. I just upgraded to Captain but I already had the successful letter from CX on the fridge when that happenned.

Mayday
"Anxiously awaiting a DEFO course date"

Start4&3

14th Feb 2006, 13:36

Start4&3- with your location stating ´midwest´, you currently apppear like an F/O on an outbase.
Just out of curiosity:

That was a DEFO interview then ?

It was for SO interview and no I didn't pass the final interview. I'm an FO for a national carrier of Taiwan and I'm commuting to/from the Midwest.

confirm-finals?

15th Feb 2006, 01:58

What about 727 time? No EFIS = no joy?

rogerover

9th Mar 2006, 05:13

Pertaining to the previous posts about the total time CX looks for, I think it's not very consistent. I've heard of guys with less 3000 hrs getting called for an interview while some guys with 7000+ hours not even being considered. For DEFO or DESO, I don't think PIC really matters. Just get your total turbine or jet time up there. Cathay "overlooks" the fact that your jet time is light, medium, or heavy. However, having medium or heavy jet time can't hurt one bit. I think it's safe to say that the majority of the candidates called for DESO/DEFO interview had 5000+ total time - with turbine or jet time being a big chunk. And not necessarily with a lot of PIC time. As for Eagle, yeah the upgrade time kinda sucks because of the previous acquisition of Business Express and mainline American flowback pilots. But there are people who go straight into the jet upon hiring nowdays. Another note worth mentioning is, try to build up your hours with a 121 carrier (look at the profiles and majority of the U.S. pilots called for int. are from 121 carriers and a few military, but not much corporate) and enjoy the ride regardless of who you fly for - whether it be smooth or rough. Because in the end, your dues will pay off one way or the other. Good luck.

TruBlu351

9th Mar 2006, 09:10

Regardless of your specific intentions rd84; qf certainly looks better than cx. Tougher to get into? after all, airline with probs the best safety record

ANDRE25i...........

QF seems on the bow wave of some real uncertainty at the moment so I find your statement a little hard to believe.

QF is all about reshaping and cutting costs at the moment to remain competitive in this tough business............guess who cops it?

A few quotes from various sources...........

"QANTAS pilots are lodging an appeal and launching Federal Court action after yesterday failing in their first bid to stop a new Jetstar agreement that they claim undercuts industry wages and conditions."

and

"But Qantas pilots say the deal, which pays Jetstar international pilots up to $100,000 a year less than their mainline counterparts, lowers industry salary levels and conditions."

All new S/O's now face the high probability of being sent to Singapore....you think you'll be on a CX Honk Kong 15% good tax deal? Survey says......!! No CX housing allowance, schooling bennefits, medical etc.

With the new aquisition of QF's 787....who gets them first? Jetstar. The elcheapo flying pay rates etc on this type will be set and when QF mainline gets them, what are the chances of being able to increase pay etc???

There's an uncertain future ahead with QF and IMHO. CX first option.

RiddleDiddle84

31st Mar 2006, 15:21

Hey guys,
Thanks for all the info. I just sent some resumes in today so we'll see what turns up with that.

RD

DOJETDRIVER

1st Apr 2006, 03:55