QFLINK drops minimums
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: aus
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QFLINK drops minimums
Heard on the grape vine that they have dropped the minimums to 700tt and 250 multi command or co-pilot. Where will the future commands come from if they dont have the elusive 500 multi. Also how long is it before VB and J* follow.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 500 multi in command requirement only applies to operators with a low capacity AOC. It is not applicable in the case of a high capacity AOC, in which case the command requirement reverts to those stipulated for the issue of a full ATPL - ie 250 hours with no requirement for it to be on multi engine aircraft.
So those pilots joining Qantaslink, with less tah 500 multi, will have to move on if they are to ever hold a command on RPT ops!
That makes sense?
Are the management of these companies even interested in retaining their professional staff?
That makes sense?
Are the management of these companies even interested in retaining their professional staff?
MUNT - see CAO 82.3
Conditions on Air Operators' Certificates Authorising Regular Public Transport Operations in Other Than High Capacity Aircraft (includes Appendixes 1 to 5)
In appendix 4 there is the (some say obsolete) requirement for the pilot in command to have 500 hrs as PIC (or ICUS) in multi-engine aircraft under IFR rules.
This is in addition to anything required for an ATPL.
Other things listed there include 2000 TT, 50 PIC or ICUS on type.
Note this only applies to RPT other than High capacity (ie AC 36 seats or less)
so FRT CHTR etc do not have this requirement.
Conditions on Air Operators' Certificates Authorising Regular Public Transport Operations in Other Than High Capacity Aircraft (includes Appendixes 1 to 5)
In appendix 4 there is the (some say obsolete) requirement for the pilot in command to have 500 hrs as PIC (or ICUS) in multi-engine aircraft under IFR rules.
This is in addition to anything required for an ATPL.
Other things listed there include 2000 TT, 50 PIC or ICUS on type.
Note this only applies to RPT other than High capacity (ie AC 36 seats or less)
so FRT CHTR etc do not have this requirement.
slice
Can you tell me if an F/O on the dash gets a P1 or P2 rating? If they get a P1, every time they operate the aircraft as pilot flying they log P1US or ICUS as it is called in Aus. It’s also worth pointing out you don’t need an ATPL to have a P1 rating and log ICUS. They would have the 500 PIC or ICUS in no time at all.
Can you tell me if an F/O on the dash gets a P1 or P2 rating? If they get a P1, every time they operate the aircraft as pilot flying they log P1US or ICUS as it is called in Aus. It’s also worth pointing out you don’t need an ATPL to have a P1 rating and log ICUS. They would have the 500 PIC or ICUS in no time at all.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah i heard the same thing on the new minimums.. mate of mine just got the job there and the interview panel told him bout the new mins...
Wonder how soon before REX follows!
Wonder how soon before REX follows!
I disagree with you Lancer
I don't believe logging ICUS is as easy as you say it is.
Take a look at the guidelines http://http://www.airservices.gov.au...ps/logbook.pdf
The operator must permit that person to fly the aircraft acting as ICUS.
CAR 5.40 Pilot acting in command under supervision
(1) A person may fly an aircraft as pilot acting in command under
supervision only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
or
(i) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were a
commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
and
(b) the person holds an aircraft endorsement that authorises him or
her to fly the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person proposes to carry out an activity for which a flight
crew rating is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or
grade of flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out
that activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned; and
(d) the person is the co-pilot of the aircraft; and
(e) the operator of the aircraft permits the person to fly the aircraft as
pilot acting in command under supervision; and
(f) the pilot in command of the aircraft is appointed for the purpose
by the operator of the aircraft.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(2) The operator of an aircraft may permit a person to fly an aircraft as
pilot acting in command only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence,
that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft; or
(ii) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were such a
licence; and
(b) the person holds an endorsement that authorises him or her to fly
the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person carries out an activity for which a flight crew rating
is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or grade of
flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out that
activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned.
Take a look at the guidelines http://http://www.airservices.gov.au...ps/logbook.pdf
The operator must permit that person to fly the aircraft acting as ICUS.
CAR 5.40 Pilot acting in command under supervision
(1) A person may fly an aircraft as pilot acting in command under
supervision only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
or
(i) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were a
commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
and
(b) the person holds an aircraft endorsement that authorises him or
her to fly the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person proposes to carry out an activity for which a flight
crew rating is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or
grade of flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out
that activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned; and
(d) the person is the co-pilot of the aircraft; and
(e) the operator of the aircraft permits the person to fly the aircraft as
pilot acting in command under supervision; and
(f) the pilot in command of the aircraft is appointed for the purpose
by the operator of the aircraft.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(2) The operator of an aircraft may permit a person to fly an aircraft as
pilot acting in command only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence,
that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft; or
(ii) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were such a
licence; and
(b) the person holds an endorsement that authorises him or her to fly
the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person carries out an activity for which a flight crew rating
is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or grade of
flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out that
activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned.
404 - Well new FOs only get a Co-pilot rating on the Aircraft (I presume equivalent to P2) so as such they can't log ICUS but as originally pointed out it doesn't matter anyway as QLink are not a Low capacity AOC thus no need to worry about 500 hrs multi-engine. Company Ops manual
Lancer - true but I was just pointing out to MUNT that there is a requirement as it stands. Many have pointed out in past threads that this has become to be regarded as an obsolete requirement. Although as you point all the experience can be gained through ICUS, at least they have to do that before moving to command.
Lancer - true but I was just pointing out to MUNT that there is a requirement as it stands. Many have pointed out in past threads that this has become to be regarded as an obsolete requirement. Although as you point all the experience can be gained through ICUS, at least they have to do that before moving to command.
In the past they only issued a DHC-8 COPILOT endorsement. Not sure what the guys pay for now, hopefully COMMAND.
John Citizen beat me to it, the 'ICUS thing' could be an issue and it will be interesting to see how they get around it.
Lowering the experience level is not the answer when there are heaps of potential pilots who have been put off by the BYO endorement and QF psychometric and skills, think how insulting this must be for them.
I'm not going to bet my nuts this time but I reckon 'open day' sessions in the traditional hotspots for pilot talent would be the go(north west WA, NT, FNQ etc.). Go to the action, if only the management realised how tricky it is for a working pilot to get to the east coast for the current process. Considering tourist season is about to crank up, looks like QantasLink is going to miss out on a stack of good pilots, bummer.
John Citizen beat me to it, the 'ICUS thing' could be an issue and it will be interesting to see how they get around it.
Lowering the experience level is not the answer when there are heaps of potential pilots who have been put off by the BYO endorement and QF psychometric and skills, think how insulting this must be for them.
I'm not going to bet my nuts this time but I reckon 'open day' sessions in the traditional hotspots for pilot talent would be the go(north west WA, NT, FNQ etc.). Go to the action, if only the management realised how tricky it is for a working pilot to get to the east coast for the current process. Considering tourist season is about to crank up, looks like QantasLink is going to miss out on a stack of good pilots, bummer.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: here
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slice, I stand corrected.
John Citizen, it is as easy as a command endorsement and the approval of the operator (whack it in the FAM). Plenty of operators in Oz practice this in normal operations (FO logs ICUS for sectors they fly), and its the way mainline do it. There is a common perception throughout the industry that ICUS is soley a command training tool, not so.
John Citizen, it is as easy as a command endorsement and the approval of the operator (whack it in the FAM). Plenty of operators in Oz practice this in normal operations (FO logs ICUS for sectors they fly), and its the way mainline do it. There is a common perception throughout the industry that ICUS is soley a command training tool, not so.
But before an operator allowed you to fly as ICUS, as well as the command endorsement and approval from the operator, I believe you would also need
to be recently proficiency "checked" as command (which is different to a co-pilot proficieny check).
Also to fly ICUS if you have not been checked to line as a captain, wouldn't then you only be able to be fly ICUS with a "training / Check and training captain" only ? The same way as when doing training for command and building up ICUS time.
As far as I am aware, to fly command, you need to be checked to line as command or flying ICUS with an "approved training captain".
to be recently proficiency "checked" as command (which is different to a co-pilot proficieny check).
Also to fly ICUS if you have not been checked to line as a captain, wouldn't then you only be able to be fly ICUS with a "training / Check and training captain" only ? The same way as when doing training for command and building up ICUS time.
As far as I am aware, to fly command, you need to be checked to line as command or flying ICUS with an "approved training captain".
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowering the experience level is not the answer when there are heaps of potential pilots who have been put off by the BYO endorement and QF psychometric and skills, think how insulting this must be for them.
Pity some guys' thousands of hours of flying is considered secondary to the HSC they didn't do 10 years ago.
For sure, the HSC requirement should be removed in my opinion.
What does the HSC prove? Maybe it could show that a potential candidate is able to study but so does an ATPL. If the HSC was that important it would be a regulatory issue, but it's not.
I don't know when or why QantasLink made the HSC a requirement. I have a mate who was not able to apply to QantasLink due to it but thats alright he was snapped up by the competition and is now flying jets. There are many similar stories.
What does the HSC prove? Maybe it could show that a potential candidate is able to study but so does an ATPL. If the HSC was that important it would be a regulatory issue, but it's not.
I don't know when or why QantasLink made the HSC a requirement. I have a mate who was not able to apply to QantasLink due to it but thats alright he was snapped up by the competition and is now flying jets. There are many similar stories.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICUS
John Citizen
There is no requirement for you to be checked to line in Command to log ICUS, mainly because you won't ever be on the line as PIC. The requirements for logging ICUS do not specify any additional requirements of the PIC. The PIC therefore doesn't need any check and training experience. There is also nothing stipulated about the seat the ICUS logger must be in, infact the only thing that really is said, is that the person logging ICUS must be co-pilot. Basically, the PIC experience ends at the endorsement.
This is how many airlines (particularly outside of Australia, where the ICUS deal is often the same), enable candidates to achieve their ATPL. Infact the inclusion of ICUS in ATPL hour requirements is evidence of the intention for its function outside of training. There is no recency requirements for logging ICUS either (as in recent PIC time on type).
There is wide confusion regarding this subject, and its mainly due to the lack of information in the law, leaving it hopelessly open to interpretation. As someone said before, it is not confined to the realms of training.
There is no requirement for you to be checked to line in Command to log ICUS, mainly because you won't ever be on the line as PIC. The requirements for logging ICUS do not specify any additional requirements of the PIC. The PIC therefore doesn't need any check and training experience. There is also nothing stipulated about the seat the ICUS logger must be in, infact the only thing that really is said, is that the person logging ICUS must be co-pilot. Basically, the PIC experience ends at the endorsement.
This is how many airlines (particularly outside of Australia, where the ICUS deal is often the same), enable candidates to achieve their ATPL. Infact the inclusion of ICUS in ATPL hour requirements is evidence of the intention for its function outside of training. There is no recency requirements for logging ICUS either (as in recent PIC time on type).
There is wide confusion regarding this subject, and its mainly due to the lack of information in the law, leaving it hopelessly open to interpretation. As someone said before, it is not confined to the realms of training.
Hoss
Hoss, with all due respect, things have changed. You might only be 9 years older than me (judging by your profile age) but I think you would be hard pressed to find many professional pilots in their twenties these days who didn't finish school. I don't know ANYONE who didn't finish high school - friends (including plenty from outside aviation), family, etc.
Given that a large majority of QFLink applicants would be aged in their mid-late twenties, I doubt many would have not finished school. I think you'll find it is the norm these days to stay at school right up to Year 12, even for a lot of those doing apprenticeships.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think it would rule out many applicants at all, but instead is just another tick in the box.
What does the HSC prove? Maybe it could show that a potential candidate is able to study but so does an ATPL. If the HSC was that important it would be a regulatory issue, but it's not.
Given that a large majority of QFLink applicants would be aged in their mid-late twenties, I doubt many would have not finished school. I think you'll find it is the norm these days to stay at school right up to Year 12, even for a lot of those doing apprenticeships.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think it would rule out many applicants at all, but instead is just another tick in the box.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The HSC thing is a joke, just like the rest of mainlines screening process, over the next few years the minimums will drop and so will the requirements.
A mate of mine from school dropped out in Yr10...... he now flys a bus for a particular one star airline. Before you all jump up and down he did start with Oxley.... so that shows how long he has been in the system.
Dont think I am jealous about not working for the rat, I work 6 months a year, earn as much as a short haul captain, and have a life and friends outside of a cockpit that many of my mates who are in the roo club simply dont have.
$0.02
A mate of mine from school dropped out in Yr10...... he now flys a bus for a particular one star airline. Before you all jump up and down he did start with Oxley.... so that shows how long he has been in the system.
Dont think I am jealous about not working for the rat, I work 6 months a year, earn as much as a short haul captain, and have a life and friends outside of a cockpit that many of my mates who are in the roo club simply dont have.
$0.02
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The Euro
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the old HSC requirement is just a waste of time and you will see why when they drop it to attract more people to come and join them in their line of assulting bill****. I know someone who was there for 10yrs, and he was LHI & HOT approved and still didn't kill anyone and he didn't have the HSC either. But Qantas on the other hand told him that he NEEDED the HSC so he would have the intellingence to pass the PYSHCO testing and he passed that as well. But in true Qantas style he and many others had enough of all of the QF GOD selection and now most of these guys are flying things like B747-400's,
A330's, A340-600/300, A320/1.(Only about 90 - 120 from Eastern) It's only taken QF 10 years to relise that there is something wrong so when they pull their heads out of their arses they might have a very slim chance to hangon to the reigns before someone gets seriously hurt.
Please guys if your going to cough up some money for endorsement have a good look at the A320 and B737 first because there plenty of jobs out there with the upgrade option after 2-3 years.
A330's, A340-600/300, A320/1.(Only about 90 - 120 from Eastern) It's only taken QF 10 years to relise that there is something wrong so when they pull their heads out of their arses they might have a very slim chance to hangon to the reigns before someone gets seriously hurt.
Please guys if your going to cough up some money for endorsement have a good look at the A320 and B737 first because there plenty of jobs out there with the upgrade option after 2-3 years.
Guys gimme a break.
HSC education is the basic standard. If you want to do alot of things these days you will need to at least of completed year 12. Trade apprenticeships these days often prefer year 12.
QF want people who have a certain level of academic achievement. You can do the bridging courses if required. It is not unreasonable for a major international airline to have such requirements. If you look at the USA you won't be a airline pilot over there unless to have University education as a minimum. You would also need that to fly freight over there too!
The best job you'll get in the USA with a year 12 diploma is probably a job a the local supermarket or at McDonalds!!
Year 12 is a minimum education standard and really a basic one at that. You won't find many other jobs based in a capital city that pays QF money where all you need is a HSC. Most jobs for that sort of money you will need many years of experience plus multiple degrees and post graduate qualifications. Every doctor and lawyer in Australia would have university level education yet not many of those would be seeing pay figures in the mid $100 000+
Either go and do a bridging course or shut up! Year 12 is not a unreasonable requirement.
HSC education is the basic standard. If you want to do alot of things these days you will need to at least of completed year 12. Trade apprenticeships these days often prefer year 12. QF want people who have a certain level of academic achievement. You can do the bridging courses if required. It is not unreasonable for a major international airline to have such requirements. If you look at the USA you won't be a airline pilot over there unless to have University education as a minimum. You would also need that to fly freight over there too!
The best job you'll get in the USA with a year 12 diploma is probably a job a the local supermarket or at McDonalds!!
Year 12 is a minimum education standard and really a basic one at that. You won't find many other jobs based in a capital city that pays QF money where all you need is a HSC. Most jobs for that sort of money you will need many years of experience plus multiple degrees and post graduate qualifications. Every doctor and lawyer in Australia would have university level education yet not many of those would be seeing pay figures in the mid $100 000+
Either go and do a bridging course or shut up! Year 12 is not a unreasonable requirement.