why europe?
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No chance of a quick job on a heavy here! Best you'd get is 737-size. The CAA reckon, and I'd have to agree, that flying FO in a medium jet is less demanding than flying single-pilot in a simpler aircraft. Hence the absolute minimum 700 hours to operate single-pilot IFR public transport, commonly raised to 1000 hours by the terms of the AOC. That is why no-one in Europe flies air taxi to build hours.
I know someone with a command of a multi-crew N-reg jet without any significant previous multi-crew time. It isn't heavy, but still I know he was way out of his depth when he started, far too reliant on his FO. The whole point of keeping people away from command until they have some time in a similar environment is to avoid the Captain being in that situation, as far as I can see. I don't think a flight test could replace that.
I have 900 hours, including 300 instructing. I have flown some complicated machines, just as difficult as some multi-crew. I have flown a jet-transport sim (the real thing, BA's 767) and as an FO, with the normal training, I could do it with no problem. I would not like to command anything of that speed or complexity (and some bizjets are as involved to fly) without some fundamentally different experience behind me.
I know someone with a command of a multi-crew N-reg jet without any significant previous multi-crew time. It isn't heavy, but still I know he was way out of his depth when he started, far too reliant on his FO. The whole point of keeping people away from command until they have some time in a similar environment is to avoid the Captain being in that situation, as far as I can see. I don't think a flight test could replace that.
I have 900 hours, including 300 instructing. I have flown some complicated machines, just as difficult as some multi-crew. I have flown a jet-transport sim (the real thing, BA's 767) and as an FO, with the normal training, I could do it with no problem. I would not like to command anything of that speed or complexity (and some bizjets are as involved to fly) without some fundamentally different experience behind me.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey there Send Clowns,
Well just to burst your bubble a little.
FAA requirments to be PIC of air taxi are 750TT and not sure how much PIC for VFR operations.
For Air Taxi IFR:
Minimum of at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot,
including 500 hours of cross country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time, and 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time at least 50 hours of which were in actual flight.
They sometimes but not always require you to have an ATPL for insurance.
Not many VFR operations unless you do the Grand Canyon Tours.
The way you build time air taxi is by the same route as JAA I guess by being FO, getting your time up and getting command.
You usually start by being FO on a King Air or B-1900, after that you will then command a C-208B (usually single pilot cargo). Then when enough hours move back to King air or B-1900 for command and typing if required.
The regionals here are now hiring when you have about 1000TT and 100 multi. Then you would go to either a B-1900 Dash8, Saab 340 or RJ.
So I guess in that sense there is not alot of difference.
Still think that in the JAA there are too many people jumping into aircraft at 250hrs that should not be there.
I am not saying that these people should be instructors either as if someone doesn't want to do it then they should be able to do something else. Such as FO in air taxi, or pipe line or traffic reporting.
The only problem with this in the US is that it has led to Pay For Training (PFT). As people want to by-pass the hard work stage and buy their way out.
I personnally think that is prostitution and is letting down the industry as a whole. But I think that has been covered in depth elsewhere.
Anyways better get back to what I was doing
Do you know how the Single engine IFR regs are doing when I was back their in December they were still trying to get it all sorted out.
It may give people more options to get a job like here I guess.
Well have a good weekend one and all
-273
P.S You mention the one guy in command of the jet I think that would be the rare exception here. Unless it was a private company and there was some nepetism going on.
Well just to burst your bubble a little.
FAA requirments to be PIC of air taxi are 750TT and not sure how much PIC for VFR operations.
For Air Taxi IFR:
Minimum of at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot,
including 500 hours of cross country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time, and 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time at least 50 hours of which were in actual flight.
They sometimes but not always require you to have an ATPL for insurance.
Not many VFR operations unless you do the Grand Canyon Tours.
The way you build time air taxi is by the same route as JAA I guess by being FO, getting your time up and getting command.
You usually start by being FO on a King Air or B-1900, after that you will then command a C-208B (usually single pilot cargo). Then when enough hours move back to King air or B-1900 for command and typing if required.
The regionals here are now hiring when you have about 1000TT and 100 multi. Then you would go to either a B-1900 Dash8, Saab 340 or RJ.
So I guess in that sense there is not alot of difference.
Still think that in the JAA there are too many people jumping into aircraft at 250hrs that should not be there.
I am not saying that these people should be instructors either as if someone doesn't want to do it then they should be able to do something else. Such as FO in air taxi, or pipe line or traffic reporting.
The only problem with this in the US is that it has led to Pay For Training (PFT). As people want to by-pass the hard work stage and buy their way out.
I personnally think that is prostitution and is letting down the industry as a whole. But I think that has been covered in depth elsewhere.
Anyways better get back to what I was doing
Do you know how the Single engine IFR regs are doing when I was back their in December they were still trying to get it all sorted out.
It may give people more options to get a job like here I guess.
Well have a good weekend one and all
-273
P.S You mention the one guy in command of the jet I think that would be the rare exception here. Unless it was a private company and there was some nepetism going on.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have taught people who have FAA ATPL, and Canadian ATPL. Some are fine and excellent pilots. Not always been impressed though, and certainly they do not have the background knowledge of a CAA/JAA-trained pilot.
There's always good and bad pilots, EGHH is not a big deal for a US pilot who's on the ball and who has bothered to read up on local procedures, just like LA or Orlando should be achievable to a CAA pilot who's bothered to read about the FAA procedures. As far as 10hrs for conversion, I think this is an extreme case. I learned in LA, came back and did the 1½hr BFC checkout and was let free in the 172 straight away. I did another hour to convert to the PA28 (this was before I'd flown one before).
Neither the UK is better than the USA or the USA better than the UK, though the USA is by far cheaper, and more "friendly" to GA.
EA
Didn't think that there was a test for JAA ATPL. So not sure what Billiebob is on about.
JAR–FCL 1.295 Skill
(a) An applicant for an ATPL(A) shall have demonstrated the ability to perform, as pilot-in-command of an aeroplane type certificated for a minimum crew of two pilots under IFR (see Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.220 part B), the procedures and manoeuvres described in Appendices 1 and 2 to JAR–FCL 1.240 and 1.295 with a degree of competency appropriate to the privileges granted to the holder of an ATPL(A).
(b) The ATPL(A) skill test may serve at the same time as a skill test for the issue of the licence and a proficiency check for the revalidation of the type rating for the aeroplane used in the test and may be combined with the skill test for the issue of a multi-pilot type rating.
It would appear that -273 and Send Clowns have been talking through an orifice other than that beneath their respective noses.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Billiebob
There is no need to be rude and hostile.
As for what you posted I read it in my LASORS as well and all it seems to be talking about is the test for a type rating.
Maybe I am wrong but from all your other post it seems that all you do is quote from LASORS and add nothing productive to the thread in the progress.
You do not say that this is what you had to do so until you do I would rather stick with my experience of not having to to a flight test to get a pure ATPL single pilot only licence without any type ratings attached, which if you read Send Clowns and my own posts, was what we were discussing.
As my Mum said if you cant say anything nice dont say anything at all.
-273
There is no need to be rude and hostile.
As for what you posted I read it in my LASORS as well and all it seems to be talking about is the test for a type rating.
Maybe I am wrong but from all your other post it seems that all you do is quote from LASORS and add nothing productive to the thread in the progress.
You do not say that this is what you had to do so until you do I would rather stick with my experience of not having to to a flight test to get a pure ATPL single pilot only licence without any type ratings attached, which if you read Send Clowns and my own posts, was what we were discussing.
As my Mum said if you cant say anything nice dont say anything at all.
-273
Rude? Hostile? Moi?
When caught out talking absolute boll@cks, the ploy of invoking one's Mummy's advice is not exactly guaranteed to enhance one's credibility.
Let's consider the idea of
Under JAR it is not possible to get a 'single pilot' ATPL, so what, exactly, are you talking about?
To be completely accurate, I quote from JAR-FCL as well as LASORS and, since these are the requirements for pilot licensing, I would contend that my posts add something far more productive to the thread than the pure conjecture that you seem to favour.
Well, as it happens, I got my ATPL long before JARs were thought of and so I didn't have to 'do' it. However, I'm now in the enviable(?) position of having to inflict the ATPL Skill Test on others.
Since you clearly have little knowledge or experience of the JAA requirements for pilot licensing, I would advise caution. Should you elect to ignore this advice, you will undoubtedly prove yourself to be a bigger pr@t than you presently appear.
When caught out talking absolute boll@cks, the ploy of invoking one's Mummy's advice is not exactly guaranteed to enhance one's credibility.
Let's consider the idea of
I would rather stick with my experience of not having to to (sic) a flight test to get a pure ATPL single pilot only licence
Maybe I am wrong but from all your other post (sic) it seems that all you do is quote from LASORS and add nothing productive to the thread in the progress.
You do not say that this is what you had to do
Since you clearly have little knowledge or experience of the JAA requirements for pilot licensing, I would advise caution. Should you elect to ignore this advice, you will undoubtedly prove yourself to be a bigger pr@t than you presently appear.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh I think that I am going to cry, not.
Talking bollocks I think not, I asked if their was an ATPL skills test, to which I quite honestly did not believe that there was.
Someone from JAA-land also said that there was not.
Thank you for correcting me. I am wrong and I guess according to you and the LASORS you qouted there is an ATPL skills test, but when I was doing my JAA conversion there was no mention of one.
I asked a JAA instrutor and they also said this.
So when I can be bothered to get my JAA ATPL I will make sure that I read the LASORS again.
One thing is for certain when I need to do the test, it will not be with someone of your disposition.
So anyways back to other things for me.
Oh you asked why we were talking about single pilot ATPL, if you had read the post it was because the topic had drifted onto some of the differences between JAA and FAA.
Happy flying one and all
-273
Talking bollocks I think not, I asked if their was an ATPL skills test, to which I quite honestly did not believe that there was.
Someone from JAA-land also said that there was not.
Thank you for correcting me. I am wrong and I guess according to you and the LASORS you qouted there is an ATPL skills test, but when I was doing my JAA conversion there was no mention of one.
I asked a JAA instrutor and they also said this.
So when I can be bothered to get my JAA ATPL I will make sure that I read the LASORS again.
One thing is for certain when I need to do the test, it will not be with someone of your disposition.
So anyways back to other things for me.
Oh you asked why we were talking about single pilot ATPL, if you had read the post it was because the topic had drifted onto some of the differences between JAA and FAA.
Happy flying one and all
-273
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-273
I think you have actually answered your own point about the quality of UK training, in agreement with me. You believe there are too many 250-hour pilots FO of large aircraft. That is in your experience of the people put out by the US training system with 250 hours. Yet the safety record here is almost identical for these operations. In fact our largest traditional user of pilots starting on type-rating courses with typically only 170 hours from a UK integrated course is BA (not now, as they don't sponsor, but for the period relevant to accident statistics) which has always, and even more so in the last 18 years, had an excellent safety record. The CAA and European airlines and their insurers are far more qualified to judge the output of European schools than either you or I are. They allow these pilots to fly.
That suggests to me that the UK system trains very good pilots who make safe FOs. The training received on the job is always what makes a good Captain. You don't expect that of your training system, I do of the one of which I am part, as do the regulators and airlines. Suggests to me which is better.
As one of my students said, "I've got an Aussie CPL. That's about like a UK PPL".
Hardly really an ATPL skills test, BB, even if it is described as that at one point. If you read what you quote it is generally just the revalidation test for a multi-crew type, a regular event for the FO of such an aircraft. Hence there is no real, specific ATPL test. Not an accurate description of a test equally applicable to a CPL holder who wishes to retain privileges as FO of such an aircraft.
P.S. I can suggest a couple of good CRM instructors. You need the training.
I think you have actually answered your own point about the quality of UK training, in agreement with me. You believe there are too many 250-hour pilots FO of large aircraft. That is in your experience of the people put out by the US training system with 250 hours. Yet the safety record here is almost identical for these operations. In fact our largest traditional user of pilots starting on type-rating courses with typically only 170 hours from a UK integrated course is BA (not now, as they don't sponsor, but for the period relevant to accident statistics) which has always, and even more so in the last 18 years, had an excellent safety record. The CAA and European airlines and their insurers are far more qualified to judge the output of European schools than either you or I are. They allow these pilots to fly.
That suggests to me that the UK system trains very good pilots who make safe FOs. The training received on the job is always what makes a good Captain. You don't expect that of your training system, I do of the one of which I am part, as do the regulators and airlines. Suggests to me which is better.
As one of my students said, "I've got an Aussie CPL. That's about like a UK PPL".
Hardly really an ATPL skills test, BB, even if it is described as that at one point. If you read what you quote it is generally just the revalidation test for a multi-crew type, a regular event for the FO of such an aircraft. Hence there is no real, specific ATPL test. Not an accurate description of a test equally applicable to a CPL holder who wishes to retain privileges as FO of such an aircraft.
P.S. I can suggest a couple of good CRM instructors. You need the training.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there Send Clowns
Think is just like I said before many ways to skin a cat. I am sure that neither country would allow people who are unsafe to fly.
I just like the system in the US and Canada with working your way up, seems to give you a broader view of aviation. Guess it is what you get used to.
Anyways safe flying one and all,
Back to the oven that is AZ.
-273
You mention the Oz guy, personally when I did my JAA CPL I found it no harder than my Canadian PPL.
I guess everybody finds different things hard, funny thing about flying it is a great leveller.
I found the Gen Nav exam hard, but alot of that was due to the restricted time.
Think is just like I said before many ways to skin a cat. I am sure that neither country would allow people who are unsafe to fly.
I just like the system in the US and Canada with working your way up, seems to give you a broader view of aviation. Guess it is what you get used to.
Anyways safe flying one and all,
Back to the oven that is AZ.
-273
You mention the Oz guy, personally when I did my JAA CPL I found it no harder than my Canadian PPL.
I guess everybody finds different things hard, funny thing about flying it is a great leveller.
I found the Gen Nav exam hard, but alot of that was due to the restricted time.
