Eagle advertising overseas
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romansandal,
No such rumour circulating the Eagle's Nest at the moment that I know of.... but as a guess it maybe they are advertising a management position, as 1 of the management pilots has apparantly resigned to go to Dragonair in August (that's not confirmed/official yet either!). They took an age to get this guy to sign on as a Managment pilot and that was after advertising externally in the local mainstream newspapers. Maybe they predict similar trouble recuiting such a person and have gone international in their search???
S2K
No such rumour circulating the Eagle's Nest at the moment that I know of.... but as a guess it maybe they are advertising a management position, as 1 of the management pilots has apparantly resigned to go to Dragonair in August (that's not confirmed/official yet either!). They took an age to get this guy to sign on as a Managment pilot and that was after advertising externally in the local mainstream newspapers. Maybe they predict similar trouble recuiting such a person and have gone international in their search???
S2K
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: ^Up there^
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That may be the case.
From what I understand, they would like to try and entice New Zealand pilots in Australia and abroad back to the country. I knew we were short of experienced pilots on the books but I didn't realise it was quite at the stage where international advertising was required.
From what I understand, they would like to try and entice New Zealand pilots in Australia and abroad back to the country. I knew we were short of experienced pilots on the books but I didn't realise it was quite at the stage where international advertising was required.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where are they advertising then? There is nothing in Flight International (yet).
If they want to entice pilots from overseas, they will have to do something drastic with the salaries, as well as opening the door to direct entry commands. Who is going to come back for peanuts and a right seat, in an aircraft that doesn't even have an autopilot?
If they want to entice pilots from overseas, they will have to do something drastic with the salaries, as well as opening the door to direct entry commands. Who is going to come back for peanuts and a right seat, in an aircraft that doesn't even have an autopilot?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you had better get your CV in then! 
What are you flying in the UK man, a 152? Reality check! If you come back, prepare for poverty and lots of hand flying. No advancement prospects either.
Still, it is nice to be living in NZ. Beats Europe.
Good luck!
What are you flying in the UK man, a 152? Reality check! If you come back, prepare for poverty and lots of hand flying. No advancement prospects either.
Still, it is nice to be living in NZ. Beats Europe.
Good luck!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR,
It's not exactly the breadline we are dealing with at Eagle, for a new Co coming in with relatively low experience (but all ATPL's) $37.6K as a starting salary is not too bad, not gold either but not bad. In 3yrs time a similar low experience (all ATPL's) new Co will start on $40K.
There's no problem what so ever with hand flying an aircraft, keeps the skills sharp and keeps the mind occupied. As to No advancement prospects??? Co's with less than 12mths seniority are being awarded commands at the moment, and both Co's & Captains alike are being interviewed by the big Koru.
I'm not aware of your expectations from a company like Eagle but it is certainly not the worst job in the world. Keep in mind what a regional 19-seater company is capable of both with revenue and renumeration capabilties.
Anyone out there thinking of Eagle as a prospective career path (albiet a stepping stone) I can fully recommend it (despite the current rostering debacle).
S2K
It's not exactly the breadline we are dealing with at Eagle, for a new Co coming in with relatively low experience (but all ATPL's) $37.6K as a starting salary is not too bad, not gold either but not bad. In 3yrs time a similar low experience (all ATPL's) new Co will start on $40K.
There's no problem what so ever with hand flying an aircraft, keeps the skills sharp and keeps the mind occupied. As to No advancement prospects??? Co's with less than 12mths seniority are being awarded commands at the moment, and both Co's & Captains alike are being interviewed by the big Koru.
I'm not aware of your expectations from a company like Eagle but it is certainly not the worst job in the world. Keep in mind what a regional 19-seater company is capable of both with revenue and renumeration capabilties.
Anyone out there thinking of Eagle as a prospective career path (albiet a stepping stone) I can fully recommend it (despite the current rostering debacle).
S2K
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that just demonstrates the level of thinking when you are insulated from the rest of the world.
You would be hard-pressed to find any commuter operation in Europe that still uses aircraft with no autopilots. Why? Because the rest of the world knows that autopilots significantly enhance safety in critical phases of flight. This is especially so in aircraft with relatively low performance to start with, and almost certainly a relatively inexperienced crew.
Under JAA, it has been allowed for quite some time to use the autopilot during many parts of recurrent checks, including non-precision approaches. The rest of the world has cottoned on to the fact that one of the greatest assets to safety is decreasing workload during these phases of flight.
Flying 6+ sectors a day, in bad weather, by hand, may keep you sharp - but it also guarantees that you will be significantly more tired when you start your final approach of the day. Modern thinking has moved on from where Eagle are.
My point about prospects is that once you have that command, there is little left to achieve. ANZ may hire a few, but they will try and hire elsewhere as taking too many pilots from their own divisions will affect their bottom line.
No, it isn't the worst job in the world - it's better than flying in Vietnam for example - but it is hard to see how they will attract many expats who are probably captains already (but not if they go to Eagle), flying much better equipment, and on three times the money.
You would be hard-pressed to find any commuter operation in Europe that still uses aircraft with no autopilots. Why? Because the rest of the world knows that autopilots significantly enhance safety in critical phases of flight. This is especially so in aircraft with relatively low performance to start with, and almost certainly a relatively inexperienced crew.
Under JAA, it has been allowed for quite some time to use the autopilot during many parts of recurrent checks, including non-precision approaches. The rest of the world has cottoned on to the fact that one of the greatest assets to safety is decreasing workload during these phases of flight.
Flying 6+ sectors a day, in bad weather, by hand, may keep you sharp - but it also guarantees that you will be significantly more tired when you start your final approach of the day. Modern thinking has moved on from where Eagle are.
My point about prospects is that once you have that command, there is little left to achieve. ANZ may hire a few, but they will try and hire elsewhere as taking too many pilots from their own divisions will affect their bottom line.
No, it isn't the worst job in the world - it's better than flying in Vietnam for example - but it is hard to see how they will attract many expats who are probably captains already (but not if they go to Eagle), flying much better equipment, and on three times the money.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Have to agree with MOR on this one..(sorry MOR..I flew with the blackadderman again!)
Why would guys earning 3 times as much, flying in challenging and interesting modern airspace..oh and operating heavy jet transports..want to come back to a B1900...with no autoflight capability..?
Think about it for a second..............then wake up
Why would guys earning 3 times as much, flying in challenging and interesting modern airspace..oh and operating heavy jet transports..want to come back to a B1900...with no autoflight capability..?
Think about it for a second..............then wake up
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guys will always come back to nz because they dont want to live overseas their whole lives. who cares what you fly back in nz if you have been able to save £'s or US$'s, can buy a house and then get a job that covers all your costs. would be nice to have an autopilot etc but certainly wouldnt turn down the job because of a lack of said autopilot.
From what I understand, they would like to try and entice New Zealand pilots in Australia...back to the country
TL
You would be hard-pressed to find any commuter operation in Europe that still uses aircraft with no autopilots. Why? Because the rest of the world knows that autopilots significantly enhance safety in critical phases of flight. This is especially so in aircraft with relatively low performance to start with
I wouldn't say the B1900 is low performance for what it is asked to do, even relatively....
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well let's look at that. In the group of aircraft that are involved in multi-crew air transport operations, we have low-performance aircraft (like the B1900D), and medium-performance aircraft (B737 etc) and high-performance aircraft (GV etc).
So tell me which is safer... a tired crew on their sixth sector, in crappy wx all day, doing a hand-flown NDB/DME approach in a B1900, or a 737 crew, with full autoflight and flying a coupled approach? Especially considering the likely experience levels of each crew.
But no, hand-flying in bad wx makes men out of us... only a girl uses an autopilot... etc etc etc
So tell me which is safer... a tired crew on their sixth sector, in crappy wx all day, doing a hand-flown NDB/DME approach in a B1900, or a 737 crew, with full autoflight and flying a coupled approach? Especially considering the likely experience levels of each crew.
But no, hand-flying in bad wx makes men out of us... only a girl uses an autopilot... etc etc etc
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Good point Reynolds....which is why you fly to minimums...using Heading select...and vertical speed...if your flying something with a bit of technology on-board...you also get a track bar to line up on the QDM inbound (on the EHSI) to the dual NDB...and back that up with the RMI. Stressful?..a little...easier and more accurate than hand flying..absolutely.
you also get a track bar to line up on the QDM inbound (on the EHSI) to the dual NDB
Thank you for your patronisation. Eagle had a choice, and they made their selection based on the nature of their operations and the finances available - not because they didn't know what an auto-pilot was...
Horses for courses.....
Horses for courses.....
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh no they didn't. They chose the equipment most likely to theoretically increase their chances of getting in to aerodromes in marginal weather, whilst cynically ignoring the clear safety benefits of an autoflight system. In other words, they were compelled by their bottom line, and somewhat less interested in maximising safety.
It is yet another example of the outdated attitudes that pervade the airlines in NZ. Ever since the complacency of the times of Erebus, NZ has been ignoring the worldwide developments in Human Factors research. From the original Swedavia report (regarded as laughable by other aviation authorities), to the present CAA refusal to accept any responsibility for safety, the whole system needs a major overhaul.
Things were much better in the days of MoT-CAD.
It is yet another example of the outdated attitudes that pervade the airlines in NZ. Ever since the complacency of the times of Erebus, NZ has been ignoring the worldwide developments in Human Factors research. From the original Swedavia report (regarded as laughable by other aviation authorities), to the present CAA refusal to accept any responsibility for safety, the whole system needs a major overhaul.
Things were much better in the days of MoT-CAD.
