Do you really want to be a pilot!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: london
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Most" 
But it gets easier to do that IR stuff with a bit of experience don't you agree
But it gets easier to do that IR stuff with a bit of experience don't you agree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In a country
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Philic,
'Well come on lets be serious here. Where are you honestly going to get 500hrs Multi pilot time before gaining employment with an airline? I can imagine some have done it but they will be in the minority'.
All over the world there are hundreds if not thousands of twin operators, you actually might have to leave the UK and really search for a job!
I did and thousands before and after me will, I don't think because it requires some effort and it is hard work that it should no longer be a requirement. In fact in my eyes someone who had the balls to go look and find a position in some way out place normally returns with good decision making and hand flying skills.
'Well come on lets be serious here. Where are you honestly going to get 500hrs Multi pilot time before gaining employment with an airline? I can imagine some have done it but they will be in the minority'.
All over the world there are hundreds if not thousands of twin operators, you actually might have to leave the UK and really search for a job!
I did and thousands before and after me will, I don't think because it requires some effort and it is hard work that it should no longer be a requirement. In fact in my eyes someone who had the balls to go look and find a position in some way out place normally returns with good decision making and hand flying skills.
This thread suffers from a lot of posters having a) very narrow field of view b) assumption that everything outside their FOV is exactly the same as that within it.
Bla Bla Bla, what Philc1983 was referring to is the fact that some CAAs do require at least 500 hrs in RHS of multi-pilot aeroplane for full ATPL and with them 10 000 hrs in seminole/aztec/seneca/DA42 won't thaw your fATPL. Guys with 500 hrs in RHS of SP Citations need not apply also.
Great post Juno78, something like that was written by BP Davies in "Handling the big jets".
Preface to second edition has very good and not much flattering explanation why we need SOPs that still rings true today, decades after it was written.
There are part of the world were general aviation is non-existent but airlines still have to fill in the cockpit seats so while "you-have-to-have-so-many-hours-before-flying-that-jet" rule can be enforced in USA/CAN/AUS, the rest of the world has occasionally to do with less than 200hrs pilots. Seemingly they're doing all right.
Do they perchance mention that reason for that is that automatics is infallible? Manual raw data flying is absolutely not a heroism but a part of the job any airline pilot has to be proficient in. If you can maintain your raw data/ manual skills by practicing in sim only, twice a year, good for you. But if you make mess of your R/D on sim check that qualifies as marginal standard and then, out of fear that you'll mess up in real life, cover your nether regions with SOP, you shouldn't be in that seat.
Massive - not, though some skills required to fly light piston are exactly the same needed to fly (mind you: I wrote "fly" and not "operate") the big jet. Neither people who cut their teeth on light twins do not automatically make good airline pilots nor people who never flew them are certain to be the lousy ones.
This calls fore some additional qualifiers. Pilots chosen are not "best" but rather "best available at the time" and "consent to terms and conditions offered". Whether this "best" can occasionally actually be "not good enough" - your guess is as good as mine.
People with half a brain can do it well on a sunny day when everything is working. Failures on stormy night require above average cognitive abilities. Experience that counts the most is other pilots' experience you've learned something from.
Well I have nurtured an ambition of becoming SLMG pilot for a quite long while. Sadly, my current career is not lucrative enough to make it come true. But, to paraphrase Paulo Coelho, if I really desire it, the market forces will conspire in helping me to achieve it.
Bla Bla Bla, what Philc1983 was referring to is the fact that some CAAs do require at least 500 hrs in RHS of multi-pilot aeroplane for full ATPL and with them 10 000 hrs in seminole/aztec/seneca/DA42 won't thaw your fATPL. Guys with 500 hrs in RHS of SP Citations need not apply also.
Great post Juno78, something like that was written by BP Davies in "Handling the big jets".
Originally Posted by BP Davies
Personal enthusiasm for the job is beyond value because it is built-in productive force, and those to have it do not have to be pushed into practice and search for knowledge.
There are part of the world were general aviation is non-existent but airlines still have to fill in the cockpit seats so while "you-have-to-have-so-many-hours-before-flying-that-jet" rule can be enforced in USA/CAN/AUS, the rest of the world has occasionally to do with less than 200hrs pilots. Seemingly they're doing all right.
if Airbus and my company tell me explicitly that the FDs, AP and A/THR should be on all the time, then that's what I'll do - I'll save the manual raw data heroism for the sim.
And I repeat my suggestion that knowing your stuff about flying a light twin piston VFR in marginal conditions really doesn't have a massive bearing on one's ability to operate a heavy jet.
My point is that whoever is in that R.H.S has been determined (probably by a 50 year old Chief Pilot who is part of the old-timers club ) that he/she is the best person for the job and has successfully met all criteria during the recruitment stages AND Type Rating. 250hour or 2500 hours I have always had confidence in the cadet and the Chief Pilot's decision to put them there.
Flying is not rocket science and most people with half a brain can do it well, but experience does and always will count.
Do you really want to be a pilot?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBB,
I really don't understand this crusade you are on that budding FOs should first experience flying pistons around the world and in doing so makes them better "decision makers and better hand flying skills".
I will understand if you are expressing an opinion but from your posts, you seem to be enforcing your opinion as the be all and end all. And that in itself is a large difference and an annoying one to readers here.
Let me give you some facts from the other side.
Singapore Airlines along with us at CX put 250hr cadets straight into 744s, 773s and A340s. Chief Pilots that have worked for these airlines have selected the best possible cadets each year and the pilots I fly with have confidence in their abilities. I have already mentioned that these poor sods have to go into the sim once a month compared to us regulars who do it every 6 months. It is something I would never want to do and I have 10 years behind me. Are you saying these Chief Pilots that have graced these large international carriers over the years are wrong? How about the likes of KLM and Lufthansa?
Closer to home as I said before, you have BA where in the past they have taken on 250hr cadets. fair enough they don't go straight into a 747 or 777 but like you say, its not what you fly, its how you fly it. I must say that I find the 744 a hell of a lot more forgiving to weather and my occasional sh!te flying compared to the 737 I flew at the start of my career.
Another example I can use is the MPL. This course puts FOs straight into the right hand seat with a lot more sim time and less hands-on time than the classic CPL/MEIR cadets. I believe 170 hours is the actual hands on flying time you get before you go onto the RHS of an A320 or a Dash 8!
The people that have though up the above (MPL', cadet sponsorship schemes straight on to 747s) can't all be wrong!
Like I said, I have the utmost confidence in the SO (flight monitors) in our airline. A sim test once a month means they are far more reactive and up to speed when an emergency occurs. A sim test once a month for 2 years! I'd lose all my hair with that stress.
I really don't understand this crusade you are on that budding FOs should first experience flying pistons around the world and in doing so makes them better "decision makers and better hand flying skills".
I will understand if you are expressing an opinion but from your posts, you seem to be enforcing your opinion as the be all and end all. And that in itself is a large difference and an annoying one to readers here.
Let me give you some facts from the other side.
Singapore Airlines along with us at CX put 250hr cadets straight into 744s, 773s and A340s. Chief Pilots that have worked for these airlines have selected the best possible cadets each year and the pilots I fly with have confidence in their abilities. I have already mentioned that these poor sods have to go into the sim once a month compared to us regulars who do it every 6 months. It is something I would never want to do and I have 10 years behind me. Are you saying these Chief Pilots that have graced these large international carriers over the years are wrong? How about the likes of KLM and Lufthansa?
Closer to home as I said before, you have BA where in the past they have taken on 250hr cadets. fair enough they don't go straight into a 747 or 777 but like you say, its not what you fly, its how you fly it. I must say that I find the 744 a hell of a lot more forgiving to weather and my occasional sh!te flying compared to the 737 I flew at the start of my career.
Another example I can use is the MPL. This course puts FOs straight into the right hand seat with a lot more sim time and less hands-on time than the classic CPL/MEIR cadets. I believe 170 hours is the actual hands on flying time you get before you go onto the RHS of an A320 or a Dash 8!
The people that have though up the above (MPL', cadet sponsorship schemes straight on to 747s) can't all be wrong!
Like I said, I have the utmost confidence in the SO (flight monitors) in our airline. A sim test once a month means they are far more reactive and up to speed when an emergency occurs. A sim test once a month for 2 years! I'd lose all my hair with that stress.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In a country
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like you say its just an opinion, as is every posting on pprune. If its annoying, I apologise it was certainly not meant to be.
The problem with this site is that much information is misinterpreted and allot of people take what would be a friendly conversation in a pub a little bit to heart.
At the start of this thread I spoke about the level of interest and general knowledge of the industry with some new pilots. The discussion has changed some what into the traditional route vs the Direct entry route to a rhs. I have a great deal of respect for young guys/girls going straight into the airline, it must be quite hard at times. And as I also said earlier, if I had been offered that route at the very start I would probably have taken it but I can honestly say now I'm very happy that I didn't due to the experiences, fun, knowledge and friends you can gain on the way.
Happy flying
The problem with this site is that much information is misinterpreted and allot of people take what would be a friendly conversation in a pub a little bit to heart.
At the start of this thread I spoke about the level of interest and general knowledge of the industry with some new pilots. The discussion has changed some what into the traditional route vs the Direct entry route to a rhs. I have a great deal of respect for young guys/girls going straight into the airline, it must be quite hard at times. And as I also said earlier, if I had been offered that route at the very start I would probably have taken it but I can honestly say now I'm very happy that I didn't due to the experiences, fun, knowledge and friends you can gain on the way.
Happy flying
Last edited by Bla Bla Bla; 15th Aug 2009 at 00:57.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Birmingham
Age: 37
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zippy Monster
YOU DA MAN!
I fully agree with all you say on the subject.... this place can get totally addictive and simple discussions can turn into full blown insults haha.
I feel some of you may have misinterpreted my posts.
OF COURSE CAPTAINS WILL HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE AT THE PROCESS OF DECISION MAKING.. i'm prertty sure i said that.. (however my input will also be needed!)
Me saying about 'saving the day' was meant to show that..
Well, the general point trying to be discussed is low hour F/Os don't really have any experience of 'real flying' (indeed define real flying!), and these low hour pilots have no hands on experience, straight out of flying into the RHS. They go to pieces and totally lose all concentration if a problem faced them. I suppose trying to infere,.... Just sitting there, basically looking out of the window, when a problem arises the captain deals with it all, of course, he is more experienced than me isn't he?! And i'm sat in a nice big plane with a nice career not appreciating where i am?!
And the whole comment about 'I sound like a guy who no one would ever want to fly with??' .. uhh yea OK.?!
Wasn't the first question here do low hour F/Os deserve to be there wasn't it??!
Well, can someone tell me why I don't 'DESERVE' to be there or have the responsibility, because i have flown only a hand full of aircraft, i haven't done banner towing? Or piddling about in single engines at 100 quid an hour doing 'hours building' makes my experience level increase??!
And by the way people, the commercial world is TOTALLY different to GA, so why does so much GA matter?!
YOU DA MAN!
I fully agree with all you say on the subject.... this place can get totally addictive and simple discussions can turn into full blown insults haha.
I feel some of you may have misinterpreted my posts.
OF COURSE CAPTAINS WILL HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE AT THE PROCESS OF DECISION MAKING.. i'm prertty sure i said that.. (however my input will also be needed!)
Me saying about 'saving the day' was meant to show that..
Well, the general point trying to be discussed is low hour F/Os don't really have any experience of 'real flying' (indeed define real flying!), and these low hour pilots have no hands on experience, straight out of flying into the RHS. They go to pieces and totally lose all concentration if a problem faced them. I suppose trying to infere,.... Just sitting there, basically looking out of the window, when a problem arises the captain deals with it all, of course, he is more experienced than me isn't he?! And i'm sat in a nice big plane with a nice career not appreciating where i am?!
And the whole comment about 'I sound like a guy who no one would ever want to fly with??' .. uhh yea OK.?!
Wasn't the first question here do low hour F/Os deserve to be there wasn't it??!
Well, can someone tell me why I don't 'DESERVE' to be there or have the responsibility, because i have flown only a hand full of aircraft, i haven't done banner towing? Or piddling about in single engines at 100 quid an hour doing 'hours building' makes my experience level increase??!
And by the way people, the commercial world is TOTALLY different to GA, so why does so much GA matter?!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Birmingham
Age: 37
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a great deal of respect for young guys/girls going straight into the airline, it must be quite hard at times. And as I also said earlier, if I had been offered that route at the very start I would probably have taken it but I can honestly say now I'm very happy that I didn't due to the experiences, fun, knowledge and friends you can gain on the way
but now you have turned around from the other end of the field saying 'ahh, all these inexperienced pilots dont deserve to be there', when you would have been in the same boat as me, being a low hour F/O on a RHS jet??!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I see it is this. My airline wouldn't let me be in that seat unless they were thoroughly satisfied that I was safe to be there. There is still much about the Airbus I don't know - I learn something new about it pretty much every time I go to work. As do some of the captains I fly with. In the politest possible way, I don't have to justify my position in the right hand seat of the aircraft to people with thousands of hours worth of bush flying in the third world, who are a bit jealous they haven't got their big break. If I wasn't up to the job, my airline wouldn't let me do it.
What a load of rubbish, you and I both know you can buy your way into an Airbus seat.
your ignorance and inexperience shows by the above statement, If you don't think that experience counts for anything, be it bush flying in the third world, military or any other form that YOU don't have, you are sadly misguided. People that do bush flying as a way to build time, do just that, build time and then move on. People that have THOUSANDS of hours bush flying as you put it, probably want to be there, and don't want to sit in the RH seat of an Airbus.
Who do you think you are that people are should be jealous of your RH seat in an Airbus? Get a grip man, anybody with a peanut for a brain and a bit of cash can do that!!!! Its not a big break.
What a load of rubbish, you and I both know you can buy your way into an Airbus seat.
your ignorance and inexperience shows by the above statement, If you don't think that experience counts for anything, be it bush flying in the third world, military or any other form that YOU don't have, you are sadly misguided. People that do bush flying as a way to build time, do just that, build time and then move on. People that have THOUSANDS of hours bush flying as you put it, probably want to be there, and don't want to sit in the RH seat of an Airbus.
Who do you think you are that people are should be jealous of your RH seat in an Airbus? Get a grip man, anybody with a peanut for a brain and a bit of cash can do that!!!! Its not a big break.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Singapore Airlines along with us at CX put 250hr cadets straight into 744s, 773s and A340s. Chief Pilots that have worked for these airlines have selected the best possible cadets each year and the pilots I fly with have confidence in their abilities. I have already mentioned that these poor sods have to go into the sim once a month compared to us regulars who do it every 6 months. It is something I would never want to do and I have 10 years behind me. Are you saying these Chief Pilots that have graced these large international carriers over the years are wrong? How about the likes of KLM and Lufthansa?
Cmon, tell the truth now, cause this is only half the truth, they don't go onto those aeroplanes as First Officers, they go in as boy pilots, why, to get the required experience. Now, tell me how long it takes those cadets to become a Captain on a 777? By the time they get there, they deserve to be there. They will not be an F/O on a 777 before they have 1500hrs total time, thats just about guaranteed.
Cathay have 2nd officers with 3000+hrs, because they lack the jet, long haul, heavy etc time to move up, but they will move up WHEN THEY HAVE THE EXPERIENCE.
It is all about experience guys.
Cmon, tell the truth now, cause this is only half the truth, they don't go onto those aeroplanes as First Officers, they go in as boy pilots, why, to get the required experience. Now, tell me how long it takes those cadets to become a Captain on a 777? By the time they get there, they deserve to be there. They will not be an F/O on a 777 before they have 1500hrs total time, thats just about guaranteed.
Cathay have 2nd officers with 3000+hrs, because they lack the jet, long haul, heavy etc time to move up, but they will move up WHEN THEY HAVE THE EXPERIENCE.
It is all about experience guys.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Birmingham
Age: 37
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^
ouch,, a bit harsh i feel! He wasn't making out standing bold as brass that people should be 'jealous' of him..
It's more, because he's in the RHS that he 'feels' like people could be jealous of him...
HAHAHAHA Isn't this WHOLE THREAD flawed then if you say that??!
All these people with loads of hours can buy their type's and fly in the RHS and there would be no need for a debate about it
SIMPLES
ouch,, a bit harsh i feel! He wasn't making out standing bold as brass that people should be 'jealous' of him..
It's more, because he's in the RHS that he 'feels' like people could be jealous of him...
What a load of rubbish, you and I both know you can buy your way into an Airbus seat.
HAHAHAHA Isn't this WHOLE THREAD flawed then if you say that??!
All these people with loads of hours can buy their type's and fly in the RHS and there would be no need for a debate about it
SIMPLES
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eire/HK
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People here assume that if you disagree with the fact that you should be able to jump straight into an Airbus or Boeing out of flight school, that you must be either jealous, flying pistons, inexperienced or all three.
In aviation, be very wary of what you assume, as there will always be someone in the room with more experience than you. Just a warning from someone with a little experience.
In aviation, be very wary of what you assume, as there will always be someone in the room with more experience than you. Just a warning from someone with a little experience.
I REALLY SHOULDN'T BE HERE
dbriglee,
I can't help but feel that with some more experience under your belt, you will develop a different perspective on the matter.
Good training goes a long way but generally it is experience (as I am sure you are aware) which adds capacity, improves problem solving skills and the ability of anticipate problems. Yes, the logistics and technicalities of operating a light twin are quite different to a medium tp or jet but I do not doubt that someone with decent light twin experience brings a lot of knowledge with them to the rhs of a shiney boeingembraerdierbus that the minimum hours cadet does not.
I may be oversimplifying the matter but I think its fair to say that the CPL/IR teaches you how fly an aircraft but it is commercial flying that teaches you how to operate an aircraft.
sr
I can't help but feel that with some more experience under your belt, you will develop a different perspective on the matter.
Good training goes a long way but generally it is experience (as I am sure you are aware) which adds capacity, improves problem solving skills and the ability of anticipate problems. Yes, the logistics and technicalities of operating a light twin are quite different to a medium tp or jet but I do not doubt that someone with decent light twin experience brings a lot of knowledge with them to the rhs of a shiney boeingembraerdierbus that the minimum hours cadet does not.
I may be oversimplifying the matter but I think its fair to say that the CPL/IR teaches you how fly an aircraft but it is commercial flying that teaches you how to operate an aircraft.
sr
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Birmingham
Age: 37
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Full agree mate!!!
nice way to put it indeed.....
although it's still somewhat a variant of the answer to this question/debate....
I totally agree captains can predict things even before i have started to think them.... with indeed their much greater experience level.
I learn things every single day, off captains, but also my own back of learning for myself too. But indeed, no one can teach me experience, i will learn it myself in the job. (and not in an unsafe way either)
But the actual debate is.. the starting block 'total time' and experience you are viewed upon as being sufficently 'suitable' for a RHS position.....
And comparing people of low hours to high hours, saying only unfrozen guys should be allowed, is totally unjustified
(in my opinion of course)
nice way to put it indeed.....
although it's still somewhat a variant of the answer to this question/debate....
I totally agree captains can predict things even before i have started to think them.... with indeed their much greater experience level.
I learn things every single day, off captains, but also my own back of learning for myself too. But indeed, no one can teach me experience, i will learn it myself in the job. (and not in an unsafe way either)
But the actual debate is.. the starting block 'total time' and experience you are viewed upon as being sufficently 'suitable' for a RHS position.....
And comparing people of low hours to high hours, saying only unfrozen guys should be allowed, is totally unjustified
(in my opinion of course
)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R.E the subject/initial few posts
To add a perspective from a young aviator:
I love aviation. I try and learn as much as I can about it, before, during and after flight. It takes up a lot of my spare time, reading documentation, studying media, reading forums (of course!), listening, and doing a little virtual stuff as well. If I see a plane cross the sky, I am intruiged as to where it's going, who they are talking to, the purpose of the flight. It takes up a big chunk of my life, but I'm not unhappy for it. I aspire to aviation, not for any kind of salary glory, or social status. The joy I get from the limited exposure I have is enough to ensure I will try my best to ensue a career in the field. Whenever I pass an airport, I wonder what it must be like to go through the crew section, or up the tower to start a working day.
I read a thread here many months ago, but one post stuck with me. It was from a supposed ATC, who claimed that he had no aviation in interest whatsoever, yet he did it because he was "damn good at controlling." It struck me as very sad at the time. A man completely devoid of passion for his job.
I know I'm not there yet, but I'd be in work everyday if I was in aviation
I love aviation. I try and learn as much as I can about it, before, during and after flight. It takes up a lot of my spare time, reading documentation, studying media, reading forums (of course!), listening, and doing a little virtual stuff as well. If I see a plane cross the sky, I am intruiged as to where it's going, who they are talking to, the purpose of the flight. It takes up a big chunk of my life, but I'm not unhappy for it. I aspire to aviation, not for any kind of salary glory, or social status. The joy I get from the limited exposure I have is enough to ensure I will try my best to ensue a career in the field. Whenever I pass an airport, I wonder what it must be like to go through the crew section, or up the tower to start a working day.
I read a thread here many months ago, but one post stuck with me. It was from a supposed ATC, who claimed that he had no aviation in interest whatsoever, yet he did it because he was "damn good at controlling." It struck me as very sad at the time. A man completely devoid of passion for his job.
I know I'm not there yet, but I'd be in work everyday if I was in aviation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In a country
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dbriglee,
When you have found my statement that these low hour F/O's don't deserve there RHS position, let me know as I did not write this.
Attention to detail is everything in this industry, so I suggest you read what is written not what you think is written!
Detail detail detail, may save your arse one day.
When you have found my statement that these low hour F/O's don't deserve there RHS position, let me know as I did not write this.
Attention to detail is everything in this industry, so I suggest you read what is written not what you think is written!
Detail detail detail, may save your arse one day.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Over There
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we should respect the people who have had to go the long way through GA before getting into that RHS. Their experience is invaluable and I think that has an impact on the way they fly the bigger jets. They will be able to anticipate situations that young guns fresh out of flying school wont. Experience is vital in the cockpit of a modern airliner. However I dont think that gives them the right to fire at Low-Hour pilots who have had the chance to get into the RHS straight away. You have to keep in mind that these low-hour guys mustve been really good(and lucky of course) to be handed the RHS so early, so its not only luck and I dont think that the 'battle-hardened' pilots have the right to talk about low hour guys like that because I think that they would also have been in that RHS early themselves had they had the chance! You also have to keep in mind that going the long way isnt always possible for everyone. It implies paying for your own studies and possibly your own Type ratings. I wouldnt mind at all going that way as I love flying and whatever I fly ill be happy...be it a Caravan or a 747. However this route is way too expensive and I live in a country where studying part-time while woirking is not possible as I would have to leave the country to get my training and the banks arent as generous as they are abroad. To get the loan I required they said that the net income in the house would have to be 3 times what it currently is. Thats why my only chance is a cadet program and if i make it through its not because I am lucky and rich or whatever stupid reason ive seen previously, its because im good enough. So im finding this Experienced vs inexperienced pretty useless. You each have your merits in your own ways and some respect for each other, for your FELLOW PILOTS, would really help us all enjoy and concentrate on what we love doing the most: FLYING! And also, shooting down low-hour pilots for experienced GA pilots just because there wont be enough stories to tell in the cockpit...is...well...honestly... Come on...
And back to what the topic was initially about, I think that having that passion for flying is essential, especially nowadyas during those tough times. Becoming a pilot just for money and glory is not what its all about. So many people are doing it without any knowledge of aviation, which shows their lack of interest. Even if at the start theyre clueless, they should show their interest little by little and eventually theyll get that 'virus'. I know some guys who had no clue what was going on when they started training but eventually loved it and were really keen to learn what aviation is all about. That is the right attitude in my opinion. Those are the ones who will become best!
Respect to all you guys out there, experienced, inexperienced and wannabees like me!
And back to what the topic was initially about, I think that having that passion for flying is essential, especially nowadyas during those tough times. Becoming a pilot just for money and glory is not what its all about. So many people are doing it without any knowledge of aviation, which shows their lack of interest. Even if at the start theyre clueless, they should show their interest little by little and eventually theyll get that 'virus'. I know some guys who had no clue what was going on when they started training but eventually loved it and were really keen to learn what aviation is all about. That is the right attitude in my opinion. Those are the ones who will become best!
Respect to all you guys out there, experienced, inexperienced and wannabees like me!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B200drvr,
I don't quite understand the point of your post or why you quoted me to make that point (whatever it is).
It is no secret that cadet pilots at CX remain a SO for circa 2 years and only act as flight monitors during that time. Also, no one here is arguing that you need to have experience to move up to FO and Captain? That's obvious.
You seem to quote one paragraph that seems to back up your opinion, but fail to quote anything else I wrote i.e CX is not the only airline that has this scheme and BA actually puts 250hr pilots into A320s/737s when they recruited previously. The fact that 250hr pilots are not placed into a 777/747 is neither here nor there. They are still placed into the RHS.
I really don't get some of the arguments here and I feel like I have lost track about what is being argued about. There is no problem voicing opinions but the way posters are writing, it is like they think they have the winning argument.
My opinion was that the legacy carriers around the world that have cadet pilot schemes and the Chief Pilots that place 250hr cadets into the RHS or the flight monitoring seat of a 747 can't all be wrong. Can they?
From what I can see from these 4 pages, there seems to be a clear divide on this thread between those guys who went straight into an airline (either via a cadet programme or buying a rating) and those who flew countless TPs around the world. The argument being that those with GA experience make better pilots, make better decisions and therefore this should be the ONLY 'respected' route into the airlines.
Next time I have lunch with a good friend of mine (Group Captain btw), I'll tell him that placing 20+ year olds in Tornado's after a year in a Grob is a big mistake and that they should recruit 5 year experienced TP pilots to the RAF - more experience, better hand flying skills, better decision making.
I don't quite understand the point of your post or why you quoted me to make that point (whatever it is).
It is no secret that cadet pilots at CX remain a SO for circa 2 years and only act as flight monitors during that time. Also, no one here is arguing that you need to have experience to move up to FO and Captain? That's obvious.
You seem to quote one paragraph that seems to back up your opinion, but fail to quote anything else I wrote i.e CX is not the only airline that has this scheme and BA actually puts 250hr pilots into A320s/737s when they recruited previously. The fact that 250hr pilots are not placed into a 777/747 is neither here nor there. They are still placed into the RHS.
I really don't get some of the arguments here and I feel like I have lost track about what is being argued about. There is no problem voicing opinions but the way posters are writing, it is like they think they have the winning argument.
My opinion was that the legacy carriers around the world that have cadet pilot schemes and the Chief Pilots that place 250hr cadets into the RHS or the flight monitoring seat of a 747 can't all be wrong. Can they?
From what I can see from these 4 pages, there seems to be a clear divide on this thread between those guys who went straight into an airline (either via a cadet programme or buying a rating) and those who flew countless TPs around the world. The argument being that those with GA experience make better pilots, make better decisions and therefore this should be the ONLY 'respected' route into the airlines.
Next time I have lunch with a good friend of mine (Group Captain btw), I'll tell him that placing 20+ year olds in Tornado's after a year in a Grob is a big mistake and that they should recruit 5 year experienced TP pilots to the RAF - more experience, better hand flying skills, better decision making.
Last edited by betpump5; 17th Aug 2009 at 14:22.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: london
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do RAF pilots go striaght from a Grob to a Tornado then??? I don't know, so would be interested in how they deal with the transition straight from single engine piston to fast twin engine fighter jet!!
or is there some experience of other types needed before they get into that Tornado
or is there some experience of other types needed before they get into that Tornado