View Poll Results: Type rating?
Bought Type rating - got the job
4
66.67%
Bought Type rating - told "need time on type"
1
16.67%
You were told buy the type and get the job - but did not get a job offer anyway
1
16.67%
Voters: 6. This poll is closed
Type Rating - which type, where, why pay etc?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You realize you are paying for something a company that employs you should be paying for, right? Maybe you could offer to pay for the fuel while you are in training. Come to think of it, tell them you shouldn't be paid while in training, since you are just training after all. That aught to get you the job. Here's a novel idea.... Do some instruction, fly some cargo, do some air tours, earn your job!!! Don't pay for it!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very easy to say: "don't pay because of this or that.....".
Everybody is saying "it is getting better" and so on. So if it is getting better, why am i and my colleagues still on the ground after those few hundred application letters???
So PROFE if you have the money and you lack about ethics, go for it!!!!
good luck
Everybody is saying "it is getting better" and so on. So if it is getting better, why am i and my colleagues still on the ground after those few hundred application letters???
So PROFE if you have the money and you lack about ethics, go for it!!!!
good luck
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 38
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont pay for a type rating, put your money to a good cause and pay for my CPL / IR!
Help another pilot out! We all look out for each other......dont we....?, hello...anyone hear me? damn PTT button again...hello?
Help another pilot out! We all look out for each other......dont we....?, hello...anyone hear me? damn PTT button again...hello?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that you should not pay for a rating.
Put that money towards paying for your instructors rating. An employer will see hours as a greater asset than a rating with no hours.
Working off a bond is a better way, that way you get both.
Having a couple of hundred hours is always going to be hard, but there are jobs because there is movement, start at the bottom.
A 300 hr pilot with an A320 rating is worth nothing, a 1000 pilot without a rating is worth more because he knows more.
Put that money towards paying for your instructors rating. An employer will see hours as a greater asset than a rating with no hours.
Working off a bond is a better way, that way you get both.
Having a couple of hundred hours is always going to be hard, but there are jobs because there is movement, start at the bottom.
A 300 hr pilot with an A320 rating is worth nothing, a 1000 pilot without a rating is worth more because he knows more.
quote: "A 300 hr pilot with an A320 rating is worth nothing, a 1000 pilot without a rating is worth more because he knows more."
correction: a friend has just got a job with a well known charter operation and paid for his own type rating (A320 etc.) with roughly the hours (300) as stated above - by my calculations he's now worth approx. 30-50k per annum - guess he turned out to be worth something after all !!
correction: a friend has just got a job with a well known charter operation and paid for his own type rating (A320 etc.) with roughly the hours (300) as stated above - by my calculations he's now worth approx. 30-50k per annum - guess he turned out to be worth something after all !!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, sure and if you believe that then go and do the same thing, and further to that, just please let me know which airline is hiring 300 hr pilots so I know who not to fly with.
In an emergency with an incapacitated captain, at night in thunderstorms and windshear when you low on fuel, who would you rather have sitting up front?
Personnel opinion, I would want the guy who has flown 1000 hrs of contract or charter sitting there.
In an emergency with an incapacitated captain, at night in thunderstorms and windshear when you low on fuel, who would you rather have sitting up front?
Personnel opinion, I would want the guy who has flown 1000 hrs of contract or charter sitting there.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimbus,
If youre so smart you would have read that the captain is incapacitated.
But then thats why I said I would have the 1000hr pilot, because you dont seem to look at the whole picture.
By the way, just for info sake, you cant always tell windshear and turbulance, but then 1000hr pilots know stuff like that
PS, By the way I am a Captain
If youre so smart you would have read that the captain is incapacitated.
But then thats why I said I would have the 1000hr pilot, because you dont seem to look at the whole picture.
By the way, just for info sake, you cant always tell windshear and turbulance, but then 1000hr pilots know stuff like that
PS, By the way I am a Captain
Guest
Posts: n/a
I did read the whole thing. Sounds like what you're saying is that after your Captain became incapacitated, you flew the plane into a thunderstorm or windshear. No you don't always know where the windshear is, but there are a few good clues and the 300 hour guy and the 1000 hour guy both know to avoid them. As for low fuel, never should happen in the first place and most likely won't with a good two man crew checking each other and backing up, no matter how many hours they have.
My main point is that if you want to argue the guy with 1000 hours is really better, at least pick a reasonable example. Give me an example where a guy with 300 hours ran low on fuel and show how his lack of experience set him up for it (and explain how the Captain let it happen since presumably he was at full capacity when they topped the tanks up before departure). But when your argument is a red herring, don't get upset when someone calls you account for it.
By the way, I would hope the guy with 1000 hours has zero hours experience extricating an airplane from either windshear or thunderstorms
My main point is that if you want to argue the guy with 1000 hours is really better, at least pick a reasonable example. Give me an example where a guy with 300 hours ran low on fuel and show how his lack of experience set him up for it (and explain how the Captain let it happen since presumably he was at full capacity when they topped the tanks up before departure). But when your argument is a red herring, don't get upset when someone calls you account for it.
By the way, I would hope the guy with 1000 hours has zero hours experience extricating an airplane from either windshear or thunderstorms
You know what B200Drvr, i agree totally that there is absolutely no substitute for experience aka the scenario's you've painted so eloquently in your posts, but we all have to start somewhere - i presume you managed to get your 1000 hrs+ by flying charter, contract or wherever and whatever else as you mention these in your post ? - bully for you, i agree that in these particular situations you may well have that "extra" something over and above the 300 hr. guy but it still remains that this guy has completed a recognised course of training, approved by the relevant authorities i might add, and has then gone on to complete a multitude of company SOP's and emergency procedures in the simulator - and if both the CAA and the company concerned are happy, then i see no reason to doubt the 300 hr. guys ability, given time in the job he/she will soon acrue the all to valuable time that we all need and desire to make us more competent and better pilots and meet standards that people such as yourself would demand in your fellow pilot. Remember, we all start somewhere and he/she is just starting in a different way to you, doesn't make it wrong because it doesn't fit in with the pattern you may have followed in your career path.
As for avoiding this company because they may have employed someone who doesn't match your requirements, hey, that's your perogative, but i happen to know the company has an excellent safety record within the industry and i'm more than willing to mail the name to you should you like to then go and check the figures with the CAA to prove this statement.
As for avoiding this company because they may have employed someone who doesn't match your requirements, hey, that's your perogative, but i happen to know the company has an excellent safety record within the industry and i'm more than willing to mail the name to you should you like to then go and check the figures with the CAA to prove this statement.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
You are missing my point entirely.
Toltol, Firstly I dont look down my nose at anybody and as an instructor I realise that everybody has to start somewhere, you just dont start on an A320.(my opinion to which I am entitled)
The scenario I pointed out did not happen to me or anybody I know or have heard of. The point I was trying to make is that at 300 hrs there are very few people in history that have the experience to handle multiple emergencies in a machine as complex as the one you are descibing. If you think a 300 hr pilot has experience then you have alot to learn because pilots with 20 X's the hours are still learning every flight every day.
There is a difference between "better" & "more experienced" I never said a 1000 hr pilot was better, I simply said more experienced.
You are missing my point entirely.
Toltol, Firstly I dont look down my nose at anybody and as an instructor I realise that everybody has to start somewhere, you just dont start on an A320.(my opinion to which I am entitled)
The scenario I pointed out did not happen to me or anybody I know or have heard of. The point I was trying to make is that at 300 hrs there are very few people in history that have the experience to handle multiple emergencies in a machine as complex as the one you are descibing. If you think a 300 hr pilot has experience then you have alot to learn because pilots with 20 X's the hours are still learning every flight every day.
There is a difference between "better" & "more experienced" I never said a 1000 hr pilot was better, I simply said more experienced.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You realize you are paying for something a company that employs you should be paying for, right? Maybe you could offer to pay for the fuel while you are in training. Come to think of it, tell them you shouldn't be paid while in training, since you are just training after all. That aught to get you the job. Here's a novel idea.... Do some instruction, fly some cargo, do some air tours, earn your job!!! Don't pay for it!
Anyway, you do end up paying for the TR whatever you do. Either through lower salary and bonding or somhow else. My mate flies the Airbus, he got his TR paid for but for 6 months he earns £1000 per month, then £31000 until 1000 hours on type then £39,000..........Oh and this was after instructing for several years and the hours thaty go with it.
If I wanted to fly Boeings or Airbuses I'd do it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
B200drvr's original post here recommended to get an instructor rating and build hours rather than buy a type rating. I must state that I do agree one should not buy a speculative type rating, though I do think it's fine to pay for a TR if you have a conditional job offer requiring that. The only exception to that opinion would be getting a speculative TR from GECAT, but their selection criteria is very, very high. If you pass their selection though, you can be about 99% sure of ending up with a job after their TR course.
One thing you should be aware of when building hours as an instrcutor is that many airlines apply a factoring system to instructor hours, wherein you get credit for these hours on a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio. This means to get credit for 1000 hours instructor time, you might have to build 2000 or 3000 hours depending on which airline you apply to. This might seem unfair, but the point is that when you are instructing, you are not normally on the controls the whole time so some airlines prorate your time by factoring.
I don't post this to change the debate to one about the pros and cons of factoring, or the relative value of instructor experience, rather merely to point out that factoring exists as those considering the instructor hour building route need to be aware of this policy.
Finally, the last guy I know who bought a speculative type rating took two years to find his first job in type. If he'd added an instructor rating, he would have at least been getting paid to fly during those two years instead of begging, borrowing and stealing to stay current. (The latter is not far from the truth either as he was logging off the financial books 737 sim time through rather dubious means!)
One thing you should be aware of when building hours as an instrcutor is that many airlines apply a factoring system to instructor hours, wherein you get credit for these hours on a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio. This means to get credit for 1000 hours instructor time, you might have to build 2000 or 3000 hours depending on which airline you apply to. This might seem unfair, but the point is that when you are instructing, you are not normally on the controls the whole time so some airlines prorate your time by factoring.
I don't post this to change the debate to one about the pros and cons of factoring, or the relative value of instructor experience, rather merely to point out that factoring exists as those considering the instructor hour building route need to be aware of this policy.
Finally, the last guy I know who bought a speculative type rating took two years to find his first job in type. If he'd added an instructor rating, he would have at least been getting paid to fly during those two years instead of begging, borrowing and stealing to stay current. (The latter is not far from the truth either as he was logging off the financial books 737 sim time through rather dubious means!)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it's a good idea to get to much time doing instruction if you want to make progress towards the airlines. It's good for a while to build hours but it just becomes a rut after a bit. At the end of the day you're not flying the plane! I have given about 500hrs of instruction myself so I do have some idea what I'm talking about.
I do agree with B200 driver that a 1000hr pilot is more qualified to fly an A320/B737 than a 300hr pilot. Varied general aviation experience and some turbo hours would make a very good pilot indeed. Some of the 300hr guys seem to lose sight of the fact that more hours would make them better flyers than just a TR. The problem is that many of the airline recruitment people seem to have lost the plot as well. Given the choice between an experienced none rated flyer and a 300hr guy with a TR many seem to be taking the type rated pilot. If you can afford the TR with some line time to back it up then go for it. I'm very tempted to buy a TR myself even though I know I shouldn't. I'd go for the 737NG; should make you employable for years to come; if you pass with low hours!
I do agree with B200 driver that a 1000hr pilot is more qualified to fly an A320/B737 than a 300hr pilot. Varied general aviation experience and some turbo hours would make a very good pilot indeed. Some of the 300hr guys seem to lose sight of the fact that more hours would make them better flyers than just a TR. The problem is that many of the airline recruitment people seem to have lost the plot as well. Given the choice between an experienced none rated flyer and a 300hr guy with a TR many seem to be taking the type rated pilot. If you can afford the TR with some line time to back it up then go for it. I'm very tempted to buy a TR myself even though I know I shouldn't. I'd go for the 737NG; should make you employable for years to come; if you pass with low hours!
Last edited by Fair_Weather_Flyer; 21st Dec 2005 at 20:28.
Have to say that your absolutely right fair weather flyer - your comments certainly sound reasonable to me - i equally agree with B200Drvr's comments about a 1000hr+ guy being more suitable for certain situations that may arise over and above the 300hr+ guy's experience. My main gripe was (and still is) the way in which many, many people here on the forum are completely and utterly hell bent on jumping from a great height on anyone who may dare to utter the words "anyone recommend a good TRTO ?" etc., etc. - just seems completely unfair to me ! (and i'm sure that most of the guys asking these types of question are under no illusions and would agree that the more hours and experience you gain, the more proficient a pilot you'll become). I agree that the thinking within the airline world with regard to recruitment these days may have a lot more to do with financial aspects than years previous but markets have changed and they will adapt to maintain a competitive edge in a fierce marketplace, this being one method of cost-cutting at their disposal should a TR'ed candidate make the grade at interview level - not defending the situation, just the way it is at the moment as i see it and we all want the best for ourselves don't we ?.
Have to admit i also wonder about some peoples' point of view with regard to SSTR's when they're admonished about enquiring about SSTR's and informed they're "jumping the queue" (admittedly not on this thread but i've seen it on others) - i wasn't aware of any official queue or right to be employed by an airline given a certain time served in the air, i thought it was a case that like all other jobs, you have to prove yourself as a suitable and worthy candidate for the position - please correct me if i'm wrong on this point and i'll gladly wait my turn in line.
Lastly, apologies if i appear a "grumpy sod" - i'm not, just feel the need to address a situation as i see it at the moment - and i sincerely hope that all of us (high or low hours) eventually gain the position we all work so damned hard for and spend are hard earned money on sooner rather than later.
Have to admit i also wonder about some peoples' point of view with regard to SSTR's when they're admonished about enquiring about SSTR's and informed they're "jumping the queue" (admittedly not on this thread but i've seen it on others) - i wasn't aware of any official queue or right to be employed by an airline given a certain time served in the air, i thought it was a case that like all other jobs, you have to prove yourself as a suitable and worthy candidate for the position - please correct me if i'm wrong on this point and i'll gladly wait my turn in line.
Lastly, apologies if i appear a "grumpy sod" - i'm not, just feel the need to address a situation as i see it at the moment - and i sincerely hope that all of us (high or low hours) eventually gain the position we all work so damned hard for and spend are hard earned money on sooner rather than later.
