RW vs FW Drivers
Guest
Posts: n/a
RW vs FW Drivers
I have flown FW and RW, and know what I prefer - much to the amazement of my airline friends.
What is it that motivates pilots these days? I know from my airline friends that it is not the flying perse - it boils down to money and perks.
Are most helicopter pilots - particularly those who have been around a while - frustrated airline pilots?
Help restore my faith!
What is it that motivates pilots these days? I know from my airline friends that it is not the flying perse - it boils down to money and perks.
Are most helicopter pilots - particularly those who have been around a while - frustrated airline pilots?
Help restore my faith!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Frustrated airline pilot? wash your mouth out with soap and water!
The only kind of FW flying that ever appealed to me involved pointing your bum at the sky and watching sheep flash by over your head at 420 kts, but Mrs Windsor decided not to keep me in her flying club.
The only real appeal of the airlines is the potential earnings, which with time off would allow you to pursue some real flying too. At the moment I'm fortunate enough not to be giving half my earnings to Gordon Brown, so pay isn't a problem. No doubt in a few years I'll wish I'd gone FW, time will tell!
------------------
Another day in paradise
The only kind of FW flying that ever appealed to me involved pointing your bum at the sky and watching sheep flash by over your head at 420 kts, but Mrs Windsor decided not to keep me in her flying club.
The only real appeal of the airlines is the potential earnings, which with time off would allow you to pursue some real flying too. At the moment I'm fortunate enough not to be giving half my earnings to Gordon Brown, so pay isn't a problem. No doubt in a few years I'll wish I'd gone FW, time will tell!
------------------
Another day in paradise
Guest
Posts: n/a
Like many other civilian pilots, I started flying fixed wing, did a commercial licence, headed off to instructor land to build hours to qualify for the big iron. However, I had a revelation along the way and went into helicopters.
A few dual qualified friends have stated to me that they fly helicopters for the challenge and they fly the big iron for the pay cheque. However I've heard that some airlines have exclusivity policies that make this difficult since they won't allow their pilots to fly commercially for other revenue operations, but I'm only passing along this rumour since I don't have any firsthand knowledge on this... maybe someone out there can fill in a blank on that?
Too bad helicopter management are too busy cutting each other's throats in contract pricing and passing along the savings to the customer by paying a lower wage than our airline counterparts. There is, however a very fundamental difference between the basis of a scheduled airline and a contract as bid on by helicopter operators.
Just a thought, it seems that the more passengers you carry, the more you get paid, so maybe we should be supporting the development of a VTOL 747? Then we'd be in the big bucks!
There are lots of ways to make more money, I happen to enjoy my career of flailing about the sky in one of the most unique modes of transportation. I do it because I choose to, but if a primary consideration for employment is the pay cheque, stick to the airlines.
BTW, I haven't been PIC in a fixed wing in over 20 years now!
A few dual qualified friends have stated to me that they fly helicopters for the challenge and they fly the big iron for the pay cheque. However I've heard that some airlines have exclusivity policies that make this difficult since they won't allow their pilots to fly commercially for other revenue operations, but I'm only passing along this rumour since I don't have any firsthand knowledge on this... maybe someone out there can fill in a blank on that?
Too bad helicopter management are too busy cutting each other's throats in contract pricing and passing along the savings to the customer by paying a lower wage than our airline counterparts. There is, however a very fundamental difference between the basis of a scheduled airline and a contract as bid on by helicopter operators.
Just a thought, it seems that the more passengers you carry, the more you get paid, so maybe we should be supporting the development of a VTOL 747? Then we'd be in the big bucks!
There are lots of ways to make more money, I happen to enjoy my career of flailing about the sky in one of the most unique modes of transportation. I do it because I choose to, but if a primary consideration for employment is the pay cheque, stick to the airlines.
BTW, I haven't been PIC in a fixed wing in over 20 years now!
Guest
Posts: n/a
"..Just a thought, it seems that the more passengers you carry, the more you get paid, so maybe we should be supporting the development of a VTOL 747? Then we'd be in the big bucks!..."
Therein lies the problem; how can we justify earning more than our counterparts flying Twin Otters, Bandits, Jetstreams and the like? They also tend to operate in crap weather (can't get over it) and often equally unsociable hours. I'm not saying we shouldn't earn the same as the jet fraternity, far from it, I'm just saying that the commercial reality is difficult to justify.
Thankfully many of our colleagues in the UK are leaving in droves for the FW world where the grass is so green you need shades. Maybe things are going to change in the next few years (you can but hope!).
PS, just found this on the Brittania pay deal thread "..3.2% plus sector pay ( £12 capts/ £8 co's ) plus money for working on day's off plus other insignificant nonsense. All taxed at appropriate rates. Forget it ! "
Yeah, you tell em. BTW what's sector pay? if I got £12 a sector I'd be on about Basic plus £6000 a month. Tough life.
------------------
Another day in paradise
[This message has been edited by 212man (edited 23 March 2001).]
Therein lies the problem; how can we justify earning more than our counterparts flying Twin Otters, Bandits, Jetstreams and the like? They also tend to operate in crap weather (can't get over it) and often equally unsociable hours. I'm not saying we shouldn't earn the same as the jet fraternity, far from it, I'm just saying that the commercial reality is difficult to justify.
Thankfully many of our colleagues in the UK are leaving in droves for the FW world where the grass is so green you need shades. Maybe things are going to change in the next few years (you can but hope!).
PS, just found this on the Brittania pay deal thread "..3.2% plus sector pay ( £12 capts/ £8 co's ) plus money for working on day's off plus other insignificant nonsense. All taxed at appropriate rates. Forget it ! "
Yeah, you tell em. BTW what's sector pay? if I got £12 a sector I'd be on about Basic plus £6000 a month. Tough life.
------------------
Another day in paradise
[This message has been edited by 212man (edited 23 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is What-ho, reinvented as Mr Bernoulli because of a system problem involved with logging in that I can't resolve. Easier to reinvent.
So what you guys are saying is that flying helicopters is still is a good job, but the industry really doesn't look after the drivers? Is there a federation of helicopter pilots?
I agree too that the Chieftan, Bandit and King Air drivers of the world should be paid more too. The enormous gulf between airline pay and every other job is amazing. With regard to helicopter pay, there must be some scope for appropriate pay based on the type and number of engines?
So what you guys are saying is that flying helicopters is still is a good job, but the industry really doesn't look after the drivers? Is there a federation of helicopter pilots?
I agree too that the Chieftan, Bandit and King Air drivers of the world should be paid more too. The enormous gulf between airline pay and every other job is amazing. With regard to helicopter pay, there must be some scope for appropriate pay based on the type and number of engines?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don't you think that once all the training is done, flying helicopters is actually easier in most ways than flying fixed wing?
None of those pain in the arse balanced field length requirements; landing on wet runways with horrendous x winds etc. There are obviously other challenges in flying helicopters, but helo flying certainly seems more intuitive to me.
None of those pain in the arse balanced field length requirements; landing on wet runways with horrendous x winds etc. There are obviously other challenges in flying helicopters, but helo flying certainly seems more intuitive to me.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I too have been on both planks and angry palm trees, and I must say that there's a kind of magic about rotary wing flying that you don't get elsewhere.
Tilt rotor, yes I could go for that!
Mr Bernoulli, a question for you:
re your pay tiers for skills idea, do you think you should get more or less money for more engines?
I agree it's often a more complex world when you've got more than one engine, but when you've only got the one, you need to work pretty hard to make sure you've got a good chance of always ending up in a nice paddock (preferably near a pub) when it stops!
Tilt rotor, yes I could go for that!
Mr Bernoulli, a question for you:
re your pay tiers for skills idea, do you think you should get more or less money for more engines?
I agree it's often a more complex world when you've got more than one engine, but when you've only got the one, you need to work pretty hard to make sure you've got a good chance of always ending up in a nice paddock (preferably near a pub) when it stops!
Guest
Posts: n/a
(The ex Mr Bernoulli)
Arm otw (the huey drivers disease); sure, when you have one engine, you have only one option, but that can make things simpler. The saying in light (plank) twins (particularly piston) is that the second engine after an engine failure is there to carry you to the scene of the accident. Because of the second engine in a helicopter, it makes things more complex, and your options less defined. Therefore more training is needed, and better situational awareness lest you fly the oei beast into the ground.
I understand that the pay for a pilot in an s76 on aeromed is better than someone doing joyflights in a Robbo, but this difference seems to be company based. Is this correct? For example, what if you are a freelance pilot? What happens there?
I'd genuinely like to know what goes on.
Arm otw (the huey drivers disease); sure, when you have one engine, you have only one option, but that can make things simpler. The saying in light (plank) twins (particularly piston) is that the second engine after an engine failure is there to carry you to the scene of the accident. Because of the second engine in a helicopter, it makes things more complex, and your options less defined. Therefore more training is needed, and better situational awareness lest you fly the oei beast into the ground.
I understand that the pay for a pilot in an s76 on aeromed is better than someone doing joyflights in a Robbo, but this difference seems to be company based. Is this correct? For example, what if you are a freelance pilot? What happens there?
I'd genuinely like to know what goes on.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Harry, having flown both multiengined FW & RW I have to say I'd much rather be in a helicopter.
The main reason is that you don't have to go thru the 5 degree AOB into the failed engine with half a skid ball out manual dexterity routine when flying RW. Also when it comes to loss of power the cumulative result on a plank is far more than a 50% I have forgotten but I think the figure is about 80%.
With a helicopter you don't have all the assymetric hassle and handling characteristics remain unchanged.
Legislative requirements (pax charter) dictate that that you gotta have varying levels of OEI performance at LSALT IFR or VFR. So all things being equal you shouldn't be in a powered glide to the impact point aka light twins. Personally I think you have more options because as AOTW says you want to be landing somewhere close to a calming ale.
I dont think pay should be based on the number of engines per se but more as a result of the planning complexities and considerations the pilot is required to cover, that come with having to reach the ground safely when you lose one.
Pays do vary between companies and also within the company. Differences in pay may not be solely based on type but role based as well. If you are required to hold instrument ratings or ATPL or other quals this may also vary pay levels regardless of type.
Hope this helps
The main reason is that you don't have to go thru the 5 degree AOB into the failed engine with half a skid ball out manual dexterity routine when flying RW. Also when it comes to loss of power the cumulative result on a plank is far more than a 50% I have forgotten but I think the figure is about 80%.
With a helicopter you don't have all the assymetric hassle and handling characteristics remain unchanged.
Legislative requirements (pax charter) dictate that that you gotta have varying levels of OEI performance at LSALT IFR or VFR. So all things being equal you shouldn't be in a powered glide to the impact point aka light twins. Personally I think you have more options because as AOTW says you want to be landing somewhere close to a calming ale.
I dont think pay should be based on the number of engines per se but more as a result of the planning complexities and considerations the pilot is required to cover, that come with having to reach the ground safely when you lose one.
Pays do vary between companies and also within the company. Differences in pay may not be solely based on type but role based as well. If you are required to hold instrument ratings or ATPL or other quals this may also vary pay levels regardless of type.
Hope this helps
