Wikiposts
Search
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

PIC time before the airlines

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Feb 2012, 06:51
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PIC time before the airlines

Hi All,

How necessary/ beneficial is it to have a lot of PIC time when applying to the major airlines in Australia or New Zealand? How much is considered acceptable? Where an ATPL issue requires a certain amount of PIC time, how do first officers already within an airline obtain their ATPL if they don't hold any PIC time other than the 100 or so hours they obtained during CPL training? Does this vary much between Oz and NZ?

Cheers
NZ744 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 09:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's only really an issue if your a cadet.

Traditionally you have spent several hundred hours in command flying GA aircraft before airlines.

I'm under the impression that the airlines plan to give you ICUS time eventually when (if) they upgrade you.

Last edited by NIK320; 6th Feb 2012 at 09:32.
NIK320 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 09:50
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
you can credit 50% of your copilot time towards the requirements of the next licence, though I'm not sure if that works for the PIC (250?)requirement or it's just for the total time (1500) requirement
Sqwark2000 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 10:56
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
We are not talking several hundred hours fellas. We are talking several thousand hours.

Most guys getting into major airlines have over 3000 hours TT and are regional airline captains. This means they will generally have over 2000 hours command time.

To become a regional airline Captain you need at least 500 hours multi engine command.

To get the 500 hours multi engine command, you need to get at least 1000 hours total time flying single engine piston operations either as a flight instructor or a charter pilot.

The other option is a cadetship, however many are traps and well documented on here.
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 11:18
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some interesting responses...

What about this hypothetical situation:

Pilot Bloggs finishes his CPL at the local flying school and gets a job flying light multi engine turbo props as a first officer. Without getting command he gets a job flying a larger turbo prop or 737 etc, again as a first officer. Say he has 2000 to 3000 hours as a FO with only 100 hours PIC from flight school. How would he meet PIC requirements to be issued an ATPL for a command upgrade? Can all ICUS be credited or do you need real PIC time? Again, does this vary between OZ and NZ?

Cheers
NZ744 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 19:39
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oz you can have up to 150 icus in your 250 cmd. No idea for NZ.
As long as you have have more than 100cmd from your flying school, that airline can give you icus before the upgrade.
From a practical standpoint, I would imagine that will only happen when they run out of pilots that fit GG's description with their thousands of hours.
Taking a guess on that last sentence so happy to be proven wrong.
NIK320 is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 21:38
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Horn Island
Posts: 1,044
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
I don't remember Bloggs completing his CPL at the AeroClub?

He would struggle with a turbo prop, he may with some excellent training make the grade as F/O, and to the best of my knowledge has never flown a 737.
RENURPP is online now  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 21:48
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
When they run out of guys fitting my description they will hire contract pilots on 457 visas to fill the gaps.

Already has happened and will happen again.

The only way they will take a pilot without the required experience is if they stand to make money out of it, have no risk and can get a fairly one sided return from your employment.
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2012, 23:26
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Jungle
Posts: 638
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
What about this hypothetical situation:
Not a hypothetical situation mate. There are a number of Aussie and possibly New Zealand (they look the same) pilots in Asia flying for local airlines starting with the bare CPL/IR and around 100 hours PIC time. As there are no recognized ICUS in these parts of the world, it would be interesting to see how they get the extra 150 hours PIC to qualify for the ATPL on their Aussie license.
smiling monkey is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 01:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Perff
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
To get the 500 hours multi engine command, you need to get at least 1000 hours total time flying single engine piston operations either as a flight instructor or a charter pilot.
not completely true - more than one way to skin a cat. nothing stopping you getting a twin job very early on in your career. don't let people fool you into thinking you need to do some magical single-engine 'apprenticeship' before you can touch a twin.
bagchucka is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 02:01
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Bagchuka, I note your location as 'Perth' and your join date being as recent as 2009. What you might think is possible and the 'norm' right now is nothing like what it used to be. GG was stating the bare minimum of what used to be required for the normal progression through the ranks. There would be plenty of guys on here who could think of people who have even done way more hours than this before getting multi time.

People do have the opportunity to advance faster these days but this can sometimes lead to gaps in knowlege and skills. I have witnessed this in turbo prop operations where because companies are desperate and short on options will try guys with less than the usual experience requirements. Some of these people might make it on a steep learning curve with very good training. Others don't make the cut when if they had only been a few years further into their career would have made the step up quite okay. Be careful what you wish for...
Captain Nomad is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 02:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Horn Island
Posts: 1,044
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
What you might think is possible and the 'norm' right now is nothing like what it used to be
You got that right, 3000 hrs would not have got you close to a regional back in the 70's 80's or 90's.
RENURPP is online now  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 03:14
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You got that right, 3000 hrs would not have got you close to a regional back in the 70's 80's or 90's.
..and that was as a FO
Anthill is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 03:48
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm bloody sure yonks ago some mob operated a scheduled
parcel service in a C150 between Essendon and Moorabbin.
It was quicker to fly VFR than IFR (when the wx permitted).

The driver had to have a full ATPL.
Slasher is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 05:09
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Perff
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
point taken gents but it's not 1984 anymore. you have 28 year old captains on 737s.

i'm not advocating that getting into an airline asap is a good thing - i did my apprenticeship just like alot of other people did. sure it mightn't have taken me 10 years to get a sniff at the airlines but those days are long gone fellas. provided the guy is capable, has a good check and training system and meets the required standard then you can't chip him.

i think it's become alot more about balance and the individual these days. just because a guy does 5 years in ga busting his chops on single/twin pistons and perhaps a turbine twin shouldn't automatically grant him passage to the right seat of an airliner.

we could argue til the cows come home about that one, but i'll stick by my original comment - you don't need to do 1000hrs on a single before being given the keys to a twin.
bagchucka is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 06:00
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Horn Island
Posts: 1,044
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
No your partly correct, some people don't, and I believe they are in the serious minority.
I base my opinion (and it is only MY opinion) on 30+ years of flying 10 of which was instructing, another 12 check and training and I can tell you the current day standards do not make me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Now we have university degreed, low houred pilots who believe they should have been jet Captains the day after they went solo. Along with their attitude is the perception that young guys have nothing to learn from the more experienced. Never was the case and shouldn't be now.

You would think with the resources available today that were not available all that long back, the internet, mobile phones, FAX machines, modern aircraft with all their modern equipment, (TCAS, EGPWS, wx radar, FMS,) the list goes on, aviation standards would be much higher than they ever were. Maybe they are, but I have this feeling that sooner rather than later one of these serious incidents we read about so regularly, are going to turn into a serious accident. I used to feel safe in the passenger seat, now I like to have that control column within easy reach. It some times worries me to the leave the flight deck to have a squirt.
RENURPP is online now  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 07:59
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10'S 100'E
Age: 47
Posts: 148
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
As an FO that has heard plenty of stories re cadets without GA exp I have a hypothetical question;
If a captain and an FO were to only fly with each other whenever they flew for, say 2 years, gathering say, 1000hrs-1500hrs flying time together. Now they have both experienced exactly the same situations, and as a crew, have both worked through the same (pardon the pun) ups and downs together. How can one pilot have gained more experience than the other?..
noclue is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 07:59
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by bagmonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
To get the 500 hours multi engine command, you need to get at least 1000 hours total time flying single engine piston operations either as a flight instructor or a charter pilot.
not completely true - more than one way to skin a cat. nothing stopping you getting a twin job very early on in your career. don't let people fool you into thinking you need to do some magical single-engine 'apprenticeship' before you can touch a twin.
This isn't "not completely true", it's 100% true.

This is what you need to aim for and if you're lucky enough to fly a multi engine aeroplane earlier than that then good for you. You are in the minority.

What this means is you will still need to fly over the 1500tt to get an ATPL, you'll still need over 2000 hours before most regional airlines will look at you, and you'll still need multi crew time before a serious airline will look at you. Multi crew command time is most favourable.

What does this mean if you fly a piston twin earlier? You'll be exposed to something that'll probably kill you if you have a serious failure for longer.

I felt much safer in a high performance single than the usual piston twin suspects. They are good for 500 hours then get out of there!
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 08:49
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Perff
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin

This isn't "not completely true", it's 100% true.

This is what you need to aim for and if you're lucky enough to fly a multi engine aeroplane earlier than that then good for you. You are in the minority.
how can in it be 100% true when you yourself acknowledge that some people are fortunate enough to fly a twin before this magic 1000hr milestone you speak of.

i'm all for gaining as much experience as possible before entry to the airlines, but to say you must have 1000hrs single before you can touch a twin is a blatant lie.
bagchucka is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 09:36
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Horn Island
Posts: 1,044
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
Noclue, that's a rather strange, maybe naive question.
Firstly, experience is not simply hours in a log book. Experience is learnt by "experiencing" different situations and learning from them. If you spend 5000hrs climbing to 10,000 feet overhead an airfield, dropping parachutes and nothing else, you are experienced at doing exactly that, not much else. In a general context I don't consider that person an experienced pilot, I do however consider them an experienced local parachute pilot. I wouldn't feel comfortable flying in crap weather doing an NDB approach with them.
Same could be said for an instructor who has done nothing but basic training for GFPT, or a charter pilot that has never ventured more than a couple of hundred miles outside there normal base.

As for your scenario, to become a Captain one would hope he had some previous experience? That would be the difference. That's not to say some F/O's are not more experienced than the captains they fly with, as a lot are, especially these dys.

Not that long back the company i work for employed two new pilots.
1 came straight off some sort of basic Cessna twin. The other had been a chief pilot for a turbo prop operator then an f/o on a similar jet. He had previous experience with FMS, weather radar, two crew , cabin crew, flight director, TCAS and the list goes on. As they started the same time, their seniority and time to command was very similar. Both were considered by the troops as ok pilots when it came to manipulative skills. They both did ok in the sim and on line checks, you have to achieve a minimum standard, not be the ace of the base.
Which one would you like you throw your family behind when things were tough?
Over time the first guy will catch up, but hey, that's what experience is all about


The captain in your situation would have a lot of spare capacity to Obsorb what's going on around him. The F/O is possibly just holding on for dear life.

Have you ever taught any one to drive or fly? A simple experiment is to talk to the student whilst they are working hard, during approach, or in heavy traffic see if they answer you and see if their response makes any sense. That's what Expwrince allows.
RENURPP is online now  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.