Turbine for recency? Yes or No?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbine for recency? Yes or No?
Hi guys,
I'm planning on moving to Darwin in around about September for my first job. But there's just one problem and that is the last time I flew was on the 21st of March and that was my MECIR test.
I was thinking about doing my Turbine and JPA for 6k but if I did do that all my savings that I've worked for over past 4 months would be drained and I wouldn't be able to pay for bond for rent or other expenses such as moving all my gear.
I will most likely have a non-flying job lined up before I move, Such is the Joy's of working at LiquorLand but I'll most likely need a second job just in case I don't find a flying job straight up.
I have 25 hours 206 time with 6.2 of that as pic with about 190 total flying and around 230 total exerience.
tyvm
I'm planning on moving to Darwin in around about September for my first job. But there's just one problem and that is the last time I flew was on the 21st of March and that was my MECIR test.
I was thinking about doing my Turbine and JPA for 6k but if I did do that all my savings that I've worked for over past 4 months would be drained and I wouldn't be able to pay for bond for rent or other expenses such as moving all my gear.
I will most likely have a non-flying job lined up before I move, Such is the Joy's of working at LiquorLand but I'll most likely need a second job just in case I don't find a flying job straight up.
I have 25 hours 206 time with 6.2 of that as pic with about 190 total flying and around 230 total exerience.
tyvm
Last edited by Sierra117; 14th Jul 2018 at 23:56.
Don’t waste your money on turbine with those sorts of hours. Highly unlikely you’ll touch one for a while and then make it your companies expense, not yours.
Go jump in something worthwhile like a few more hours in a 206.
morno
Go jump in something worthwhile like a few more hours in a 206.
morno
Hi guys,
I'm planning on moving to Darwin in around about September for my first job. But there's just one problem and that is the last time I flew was on the 21st of March and that was my MECIR test.
I was thinking about doing my Turbine and JPA for 6k but if I did do that all my savings that I've worked for over past 4 months would be drained and I wouldn't be able to pay for bond for rent or other expenses such as moving all my gear.
I will most likely have a non-flying job lined up before I move, Such is the Joy's of working at LiquorLand but I'll most likely need a second job just in case I don't find a flying job straight up.
I have around 10 hours 206 time with about 190 total flying and around 230 total exerience.
tyvm
I'm planning on moving to Darwin in around about September for my first job. But there's just one problem and that is the last time I flew was on the 21st of March and that was my MECIR test.
I was thinking about doing my Turbine and JPA for 6k but if I did do that all my savings that I've worked for over past 4 months would be drained and I wouldn't be able to pay for bond for rent or other expenses such as moving all my gear.
I will most likely have a non-flying job lined up before I move, Such is the Joy's of working at LiquorLand but I'll most likely need a second job just in case I don't find a flying job straight up.
I have around 10 hours 206 time with about 190 total flying and around 230 total exerience.
tyvm
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there is I haven't seen it
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just checked my logbook and I have 25.2 total 206 time with 6.1 of that as PIC lol
Maybe consider doing some flying when you get up there for local familiarisation. That way you might stand a better chance of making the right impression on a Chief Pilot...
Refer August Australian Flying magazine - it has an article about a course in Darwin that might be of interest...
Refer August Australian Flying magazine - it has an article about a course in Darwin that might be of interest...
I was going to suggest you look at the training.gov.au and see if there is a unit of competency like 'operate a gas-turbine aeroplane', and if there was then find a provider. But I just looked and there isn't such a unit. There is a unit of competency for 'operate a multi-engine aeroplane', but I suppose there is no gas turbine unit because there is no air craft class rating for gas turbine aeroplanes, only type rating. So yeah, my suggestion doesn't help. Perhaps there is a market out there for a new unit of competency?.
Morno and Flying Bear offer good advice.
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC.
Whatever you train on, doing it locally with a recognised and respected operator will enhance your chances of a job.
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. The devil, however, is in the detail, as most turbines do require specific training -e.g. a King Air won't allow you to fly a Conquest without some extra training. There is a CASA list somewhere.
Quite unlike the good old USA where in my day we flew anything and everything and somehow survived. Later the FAA did make the MU2 an exception requiring specialised training, but this was after my experience on that type. And I must say it was/still is the best small turbo prop of all time, but it is sufficiently 'different' to justify extra training.
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC.
Whatever you train on, doing it locally with a recognised and respected operator will enhance your chances of a job.
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. The devil, however, is in the detail, as most turbines do require specific training -e.g. a King Air won't allow you to fly a Conquest without some extra training. There is a CASA list somewhere.
Quite unlike the good old USA where in my day we flew anything and everything and somehow survived. Later the FAA did make the MU2 an exception requiring specialised training, but this was after my experience on that type. And I must say it was/still is the best small turbo prop of all time, but it is sufficiently 'different' to justify extra training.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morno and Flying Bear offer good advice.
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC.
Whatever you train on, doing it locally with a recognised and respected operator will enhance your chances of a job.
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. The devil, however, is in the detail, as most turbines do require specific training -e.g. a King Air won't allow you to fly a Conquest without some extra training. There is a CASA list somewhere.
Quite unlike the good old USA where in my day we flew anything and everything and somehow survived. Later the FAA did make the MU2 an exception requiring specialised training, but this was after my experience on that type. And I must say it was/still is the best small turbo prop of all time, but it is sufficiently 'different' to justify extra training.
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC.
Whatever you train on, doing it locally with a recognised and respected operator will enhance your chances of a job.
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. The devil, however, is in the detail, as most turbines do require specific training -e.g. a King Air won't allow you to fly a Conquest without some extra training. There is a CASA list somewhere.
Quite unlike the good old USA where in my day we flew anything and everything and somehow survived. Later the FAA did make the MU2 an exception requiring specialised training, but this was after my experience on that type. And I must say it was/still is the best small turbo prop of all time, but it is sufficiently 'different' to justify extra training.
Morno and Flying Bear offer good advice.
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC....
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. … .
There is no point in spending money on some more advanced type that, even if the Operator would allow, the Insurers won't cover you to fly PIC....
Georgee, not all turbines require a type rating per se. If below 5700 kg they fall into the MEA Class endorsement category. … .
If that is the case, then there is nothing preventing RTOs offering gas turbine aeroplanes for units of competencies such as AVIY5023 Operate a multi-engine aeroplane and for trainee pilots to use the student-loans schemes for getting gas-turbine experience. May not help out Sierra at the moment, but the fact that Sierra is asking seems to indicate there is a potential market for it.
No, I don’t think there is a market for it. Why do we need to be introducing student loans for completely unnecessary training?
We could argue that doing an aviation degree for flying an aeroplane is also 'unnecessary'. But there are students wanting an aviation degree and so there is a market for it.
Hence it's not much of a stretch to say that getting experience in a gas turbine aeroplane is unnecessary, but there are students wanting the experience of flying a gas-turbine engine aeroplane and so there is a market for it.
Because by the time you’re getting to turbine aircraft, it should be up to the operator to provide the appropriate training. Not the tax payer!
Lets be honest, it is such a minuscule cost to the operator, so there’s no excuse for needing pilots who went and got the training at flight school. What’s next, we start getting student loans for A320 type ratings because we might need them one day?
With the experience that this guy has, he barely knows how to work a piston, let alone a turbine. And even if he got it, it’s going to be a while until he can use it, so he will have forgotten half of it by then.
The student loan system should be only for the most basic of requirements. Ie. a license and an instrument rating. After that, go and earn it.
morno
Lets be honest, it is such a minuscule cost to the operator, so there’s no excuse for needing pilots who went and got the training at flight school. What’s next, we start getting student loans for A320 type ratings because we might need them one day?
With the experience that this guy has, he barely knows how to work a piston, let alone a turbine. And even if he got it, it’s going to be a while until he can use it, so he will have forgotten half of it by then.
The student loan system should be only for the most basic of requirements. Ie. a license and an instrument rating. After that, go and earn it.
morno
Because by the time you’re getting to turbine aircraft, it should be up to the operator to provide the appropriate training. Not the tax payer!
Lets be honest, it is such a minuscule cost to the operator, so there’s no excuse for needing pilots who went and got the training at flight school. What’s next, we start getting student loans for A320 type ratings because we might need them one day?
With the experience that this guy has, he barely knows how to work a piston, let alone a turbine. And even if he got it, it’s going to be a while until he can use it, so he will have forgotten half of it by then.
The student loan system should be only for the most basic of requirements. Ie. a license and an instrument rating. After that, go and earn it.
morno
Lets be honest, it is such a minuscule cost to the operator, so there’s no excuse for needing pilots who went and got the training at flight school. What’s next, we start getting student loans for A320 type ratings because we might need them one day?
With the experience that this guy has, he barely knows how to work a piston, let alone a turbine. And even if he got it, it’s going to be a while until he can use it, so he will have forgotten half of it by then.
The student loan system should be only for the most basic of requirements. Ie. a license and an instrument rating. After that, go and earn it.
morno
It should only be up to the operator to pay for training on expensive to operate aircraft on personal that are willing to abide by their word, and stay for an "x" duration period - not use an employer to upgrade their skills at the employers cost then bugger off for greener grass - often not even giving correct notice period.
You also know it is a loan? not a gift from tax payers.
Most new aircraft coming to Australia (non RA rego) seem to be turbine and I am sure there are many operators that no longer use piston and that number is growing.
Again most turbine aircraft engine operation is much easier then a piston.
So we end up with most basic doctors also?
The Student Loans are capped, what one intends to study should not be limited other than the cap amount.
Job outcome is what is desired for these schemes - I recall my pre-apprenticeship course was axed because of numbers only 10 in the class compared to 45 for the motor mechanics. 8 of us passed and finished the course compared to 32 motor mechanics. All 8 of us got jobs within our trained industry, only 5 got jobs as motor mechanics by the same time. The motor mechanic course was expanded due to its success!
Morno, (similar to Bend a lot) are you aware of the Air Force's training program? Piston engine for flight screening then straight into gas-turbine propeller aeroplanes. So your assumption that one absolutely must learn all about pistons before moving to turbines is highly dubious.
If we were to take the other part of your argument to its logical conclusion then trainee pilots should only be getting their commercial license through an airline scholarship program.
Where do we draw the line?
Like Bend a lot is saying I suspect you have confused a 'loan' for a 'gift'. All we are doing is giving students the scope to follow their talents.
If we were to take the other part of your argument to its logical conclusion then trainee pilots should only be getting their commercial license through an airline scholarship program.
Where do we draw the line?
Like Bend a lot is saying I suspect you have confused a 'loan' for a 'gift'. All we are doing is giving students the scope to follow their talents.
All we are doing is giving students the scope to follow their talents.
The ‘turbine path’ in the Air Force is somewhat different to the GA path.
If you’re not happy with poverty you need a higher earning backup job with flexible hours as you build up your flying experience.
Wow. With such an attitude, please don’t come to Darwin looking for work! We don’t want you.
Some of us are proud of the work we do in GA - and if you work at it (like most things in life), you’ll do okay in GA.
Otherwise, if you’re on a pathway to airlines, embrace and value the experience you’ll get from GA, have fun, learn lots and try not to kick sand in the faces of the rest of us when you finally get the airline opportunity that GA facilitated for you.
Age of entitlement...
Some of us are proud of the work we do in GA - and if you work at it (like most things in life), you’ll do okay in GA.
Otherwise, if you’re on a pathway to airlines, embrace and value the experience you’ll get from GA, have fun, learn lots and try not to kick sand in the faces of the rest of us when you finally get the airline opportunity that GA facilitated for you.
Age of entitlement...