fATPL to 747-400
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Worcs UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fATPL to 747-400
I was wondering if this were a golden period of aviation recruitment would it be conceivable to get a job flying long haul on a 747 for example having just obtained aCPL/IR (fATPL) ?
cheers
MJR
cheers
MJR
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJR
I can't speak for other operators, but in BA it is a requirement to hold a full ATPL before converting onto the 747-400 or the 777. However, there will be some 737 plots (ex TEP) coming to the 747-400 this year with only two years in the company (assuming that they get their little green book in time).
Airclues
I can't speak for other operators, but in BA it is a requirement to hold a full ATPL before converting onto the 747-400 or the 777. However, there will be some 737 plots (ex TEP) coming to the 747-400 this year with only two years in the company (assuming that they get their little green book in time).
Airclues
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
I have heard some story about FATPL holders from OATS getting taken on by Cathay as 'cruise pilots' on the -400 on a short term contract, at some stage during the mid '90s ... 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJR - basically you are not going to go straight onto a 747 or any 2 crew longhaul ETOPS aircraft until you have unfrozen the ATPL in the UK at least with 1,500 hours. Certainly people who have spent 3-4 years within BA may have unfrozen their licence, but the fact is that to convert to the 747 is highly undesirable at that stage due to the poor position that such a person would have in the bidding for routes, due to low seniority.
People have often gone to other airlines that are usually Far Eastern as 'cruise pilots' that means that they are not main operating pilots but operate under supervision of another as a 'heavy' pilot, ie not performing takeoff or landing duties but only cruise midflight duties often on very long haul. These have been in the past those from highly though-of flying schools with low hours who were on BA sponsorship in the early 90s, but failed to gain employment in BA due to a block on recruitment.
People have often gone to other airlines that are usually Far Eastern as 'cruise pilots' that means that they are not main operating pilots but operate under supervision of another as a 'heavy' pilot, ie not performing takeoff or landing duties but only cruise midflight duties often on very long haul. These have been in the past those from highly though-of flying schools with low hours who were on BA sponsorship in the early 90s, but failed to gain employment in BA due to a block on recruitment.
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"basically you are not going to go straight onto a 747 or any 2 crew longhaul ETOPS aircraft until you have unfrozen the ATPL"
Not true Lucifer. BA allow non-ATPL pilots to fly the 767 on 2 crew ETOPS flights. The annual conversion bid, which has just been published, has pilots with less than two years in BA converting to the 747-400 just as soon as they can unfreeze their ATPL.
Airclues
Not true Lucifer. BA allow non-ATPL pilots to fly the 767 on 2 crew ETOPS flights. The annual conversion bid, which has just been published, has pilots with less than two years in BA converting to the 747-400 just as soon as they can unfreeze their ATPL.
Airclues
Captain Airclues - seems a bit anomalous that. Landing and takeoff in a 767-300 isn't particularly different from the same in a 747-400. They are both heavy iron with all that entails.
And if in an ETOPS environment I would have thought the twinjet is more of a 'handful' than a quadjet.
Not a comment either way, just a bemused observation.
MJR - basically forget it. The chances of you bypassing turboprops and the likes of 737s are very remote indeed at present.
To be honest most pilots think it advisable that you cut your teeth in the business flying lots and lots of high intensity sectors into lots and lots of airports. That means regional or short haul flying. Landing an aircraft once or twice a month when you have very little experience is not a good way of acquiring any.
Just as an aside - are you sure long haul is what you want? Many people find it isn't when they get a bit older. Its not like 20 years ago when a wife would stay at home and raise the kids as a career. Most partners of likely intelligence and background of interest to you will have a career of some sort of their own.
You waving cheerio for a week twice a month is incompatible with marriage and family making.
Personally I love being home every night and being able to go out at least once a weekend (even if you have to not drink). Staying in swish hotels with lovely cabin crew does sound nice. But a hotel is a hotel is a hotel and there is a lot of bravado about bedding the crew down route.
It suits some. Not others. Just wondering how you have arrived at your decision to pursue long haul.
Good luck,
WWW
And if in an ETOPS environment I would have thought the twinjet is more of a 'handful' than a quadjet.
Not a comment either way, just a bemused observation.
MJR - basically forget it. The chances of you bypassing turboprops and the likes of 737s are very remote indeed at present.
To be honest most pilots think it advisable that you cut your teeth in the business flying lots and lots of high intensity sectors into lots and lots of airports. That means regional or short haul flying. Landing an aircraft once or twice a month when you have very little experience is not a good way of acquiring any.
Just as an aside - are you sure long haul is what you want? Many people find it isn't when they get a bit older. Its not like 20 years ago when a wife would stay at home and raise the kids as a career. Most partners of likely intelligence and background of interest to you will have a career of some sort of their own.
You waving cheerio for a week twice a month is incompatible with marriage and family making.
Personally I love being home every night and being able to go out at least once a weekend (even if you have to not drink). Staying in swish hotels with lovely cabin crew does sound nice. But a hotel is a hotel is a hotel and there is a lot of bravado about bedding the crew down route.
It suits some. Not others. Just wondering how you have arrived at your decision to pursue long haul.
Good luck,
WWW
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
www.
i believe the reason that ba require an atpl for 744 and 777 is to ensure that all members of the crew can operate as pic i.e when skipper is in the bunk. its not an annomaly just a rostering issue. by ensuring that all 744 p2 have atpl's it prevents rostering from having to worry about which fo's fly as heavy crew etc. not a problem for the 757/767 fleet. its got nothing to do with handling, although i agree with your points completey.
flew an fo to new who had only ever flown the 747. went from pik to singapore and ended up at ba. not the norm i know but it happens.
nice to see your branching out into lifestyle and relationship advice now. i'm glad you enjoy flying for your outfit. it's my idea of truckie hell. thats the beauty mate, each to his own. i would suggest however that lots of lh pilots have wifes/husbands and kids that love them and enjoy a quite wonderful family life. i think you would find, if you ever decide to leave your no frills nirvana, that some of the perks of the lh lifestyle are pretty attractive, again each to his own.
i appreciate you are a pretty regular/important? figure here on pp but i think more good/impartial gen and less pontificating might be in order.
noody.
ps. if i was getting a large cheque as a result of being bought over i would be very happy as well.......enjoy.
i believe the reason that ba require an atpl for 744 and 777 is to ensure that all members of the crew can operate as pic i.e when skipper is in the bunk. its not an annomaly just a rostering issue. by ensuring that all 744 p2 have atpl's it prevents rostering from having to worry about which fo's fly as heavy crew etc. not a problem for the 757/767 fleet. its got nothing to do with handling, although i agree with your points completey.
flew an fo to new who had only ever flown the 747. went from pik to singapore and ended up at ba. not the norm i know but it happens.
nice to see your branching out into lifestyle and relationship advice now. i'm glad you enjoy flying for your outfit. it's my idea of truckie hell. thats the beauty mate, each to his own. i would suggest however that lots of lh pilots have wifes/husbands and kids that love them and enjoy a quite wonderful family life. i think you would find, if you ever decide to leave your no frills nirvana, that some of the perks of the lh lifestyle are pretty attractive, again each to his own.
i appreciate you are a pretty regular/important? figure here on pp but i think more good/impartial gen and less pontificating might be in order.
noody.
ps. if i was getting a large cheque as a result of being bought over i would be very happy as well.......enjoy.
Last edited by NOODY; 22nd Jun 2002 at 19:04.
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW
NOODY is correct. It is a JAA requirement that a co-pilot who is relieving the captain while he is in the bunk must hold an ATPL (App 1 to JAR-OPS 1.045(c)(1-6). It is purely a legal requirement and has nothing to do with handling or experience.
Airclues
NOODY is correct. It is a JAA requirement that a co-pilot who is relieving the captain while he is in the bunk must hold an ATPL (App 1 to JAR-OPS 1.045(c)(1-6). It is purely a legal requirement and has nothing to do with handling or experience.
Airclues
Captain Airclues thanks for the clarification.
Noody - I was interested in stearing the thread into a wider discussion of career paths as I feel that gets too little attention here.
As you say each to his own. The only thing I know for certain is that there is no perfect airline job - just different compromises.
Cheers,
WWW
Noody - I was interested in stearing the thread into a wider discussion of career paths as I feel that gets too little attention here.
As you say each to his own. The only thing I know for certain is that there is no perfect airline job - just different compromises.
Cheers,
WWW
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: South London
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I have heard and always understood to be aviation law, you cannot operate ETOPS with only a frozen ATPL. i.e you might be on the BA 757/767 fleet but you are not allowed to fly the 767s on ETOPS route (i.e over big oceans - so no NYC flights). This therefore rules you out of flying 777s until you unfreeze your licence. However, I thought 747s were not ETOPS by the mere definition of Extended range Twin engine OPerationS. 747s have 4 engines (pointing out the obvious), hence in theory you can fly them with a fATPL - not quite sure why you would want to though, wouldn't it be better to hours build and gains lots of experience doing shorthaul first.
Anyway, as I said, this is just what I understood to be the situation - I may well be, and probably am, wrong.
Anyway, as I said, this is just what I understood to be the situation - I may well be, and probably am, wrong.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Virgin we did try the cruise-pilot route for a little while, with fATPLs operating as SOs on A340s on Far East routes. However, the lack of employment flexibility of such pilots leads to huge problems for rostering, and the company decided to revert to its normal procedure of only employing pilots with 2500 or more hours - and a healthy amount of jet experience.
Paid up
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my personal feeling is that this is one of those 'if I pay OATS [insert name of any lrg FTO] enough money, can I avoid the less glamorous areas within the sphere of aviation?' - type threads. I think and I really hope. that the answer is NO!
I honestly believe that the wannabe level of aviation is spoit by the number of rich twats that think this way.
I honestly believe that the wannabe level of aviation is spoit by the number of rich twats that think this way.
Last edited by Gin Slinger; 23rd Jun 2002 at 22:39.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Ginny,
I have found that the "less glamorous" areas of aviation has the best and most interesting flying.
Pity there isn't more of it in this country. It's hard work but a lot of fun.
That's why I learnt to fly. I want to enjoy my "work".
I have found that the "less glamorous" areas of aviation has the best and most interesting flying.
Pity there isn't more of it in this country. It's hard work but a lot of fun.
That's why I learnt to fly. I want to enjoy my "work".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Worcs UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gin Slinger,
I'm not rich and I have a never been to OATS or in fact any other FTO that provides an integrated course. I have a big passion for the 747 and I'm just starting out on the route to find that "first job". Because I'm an old git I have less thatn 23 years to pursue a career from PA34-200T to 747-400, hence the original question.
is that OK!
I'm not rich and I have a never been to OATS or in fact any other FTO that provides an integrated course. I have a big passion for the 747 and I'm just starting out on the route to find that "first job". Because I'm an old git I have less thatn 23 years to pursue a career from PA34-200T to 747-400, hence the original question.
is that OK!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
www
"waving cheerio for a week twice a month IS incompatible with marriage and family life"
sorry old boy thought that sounded more like a statement than an attempt to explore the issue. rather difficult to hold this opinoin as fact until you've tried it i would have thought.
if you want to start a thread about the relative lifestyle merits of s/h gucci style (ba), s/h no frills style (from a crew perspective) and l/h i would be very interested in hearing what was said and may prove very useful for wannabes trying to pick a path.
mjr.
mate i wish you well but i would guess your chances off getting onto the big fella out of flight school are almost zero. i've must agree with www that the best plan would be to get your atpl asap flying multi sectors with whoever will pay for you rating and then apply to ba/virgin when we a) all get sacked when we strike or b)the companys realise that not recruting for a year means we face a huge pilot shortage within the next 2 years.
good luck.
alphacharlie
can you read mate. capt airclues and myself both work for a company that does let fatpl pilots fly etops. we've both posted why. we are not making it up.
noody.
"waving cheerio for a week twice a month IS incompatible with marriage and family life"
sorry old boy thought that sounded more like a statement than an attempt to explore the issue. rather difficult to hold this opinoin as fact until you've tried it i would have thought.
if you want to start a thread about the relative lifestyle merits of s/h gucci style (ba), s/h no frills style (from a crew perspective) and l/h i would be very interested in hearing what was said and may prove very useful for wannabes trying to pick a path.
mjr.
mate i wish you well but i would guess your chances off getting onto the big fella out of flight school are almost zero. i've must agree with www that the best plan would be to get your atpl asap flying multi sectors with whoever will pay for you rating and then apply to ba/virgin when we a) all get sacked when we strike or b)the companys realise that not recruting for a year means we face a huge pilot shortage within the next 2 years.
good luck.
alphacharlie
can you read mate. capt airclues and myself both work for a company that does let fatpl pilots fly etops. we've both posted why. we are not making it up.
noody.
noody - I learnt a long time ago here that the best way to draw in expert opinion to a thread is to make a bold contestable statement. Someone reads it and steams in to shoot it down.
A lively informed debate ensues. Thanks for steaming in
Just about every long haul pilot I know (only half a dozen or so) are divorced or getting divorced. Its just something I have noticed.
How does one manage a wife with a career and a two year old and you being in Hong Kong for another coupld of days and shes on the phone having a rant about her crappy day and having to mow the lawn again?
I don't know. Not married, no kids and never done long haul. But it looks like a tough proposition to me. Perhaps BA is easier due to Bidline.
I think every Wannabe at some point wants to fly a Jumbo. I know for me that is something I no longer want. Sods law dictates that within a couple of years I'll now end up on an A380 somewhere and noody will be around to point out the irony!
Cheers,
WWW
A lively informed debate ensues. Thanks for steaming in
Just about every long haul pilot I know (only half a dozen or so) are divorced or getting divorced. Its just something I have noticed.
How does one manage a wife with a career and a two year old and you being in Hong Kong for another coupld of days and shes on the phone having a rant about her crappy day and having to mow the lawn again?
I don't know. Not married, no kids and never done long haul. But it looks like a tough proposition to me. Perhaps BA is easier due to Bidline.
I think every Wannabe at some point wants to fly a Jumbo. I know for me that is something I no longer want. Sods law dictates that within a couple of years I'll now end up on an A380 somewhere and noody will be around to point out the irony!
Cheers,
WWW