What looks better to Cathay?

[junior_man]

Re: What looks better to Cathay?

Safety pilot cannot log PIC time, only SIC time.
An instructor can log PIC time, but if that is the concern ask pilots to separate PIC time from instuction given. I think AA used to ask that you not include flight time as an instructor in your PIC time, but listed it separately.

[BlueEagle]

Re: What looks better to Cathay?

Cripple7 - Don't think it makes much difference whose rules you operate under, the only person who can log PIC is the aircraft commander, nominated by the company and who signs all the necessary paperwork, he will be someone who has passed that company's command requirements and been appointed a captain, an FO can only log PIC/Under Supervision.

A check and trainer can log whatever the company tell him to do but if he sits on the jump seat and didn't sign the load sheet or tech log then the guy that did can legally log PIC.

The pilot in the right seat, if not the Pilot Flying, is the P2.

[Hellenic aviator]

Originally Posted by ccbull17

Does anyone know what weight CX places on military time or combat time from pilots in the US?
PS: I am a few years off from applying, so I will have to wait for the ultimate verdict.

I know quite a few guys here that are flying for our Freighter division, based out various domiciles throughout the U.S., who are ex military. Most flew fighters for the USN or USAF. Looks to me that Flight Crew Recruitment looks favourable on this experience...
Best of luck

[Cripple 7]

BlueEagle:

You are absolutely correct except that doesn't always apply in the US. I checked again and again. I am 100% sure that under FAA rules, if it is not a commercial flight (ie, not Part 121, 135, 125, etc but a Part 61, 91 or 141 flight) 2 pilots can both log PIC if one is rated and flying under the hood and the other is the instructor.

I just go by what I was told by my Yankee pals.

[junior_man]

That is correct, FARs permit both pilots to log PIC IF one of them is an instructor. But, he must also sign the other pilots logbook for dual given and must log the time not only as PIC but as dual given. Failure to log it as dual given and PIC would be an FAR violation. So, if this troubles anyone, you separate the PIC time from PIC as instructor time.

Now, if one pilot who isn't a CFI rides along as safety pilot, then he cannot log PIC time, only SIC time.

But, if you show up at and interview and you have many hours of PIC time (Pilot In Cabin) then it will show up quickly and you will not be hired or given a second chance.

I used to know some of the interviewers for a large US commuter airline. They were very experienced at analyzing logbooks. I am sure that the folks at CX are extremely good at this too.

[ANDRE25i]

qf>cx

Regardless of your specific intentions rd84; qf certainly looks better than cx. Tougher to get into? after all, airline with probs the best safety record

[Stereolab]

Originally Posted by Cripple 7

< 20 tonnes=light jet

Wondering what catagory the CRJ-700 or the E170 fits into. E170 weighs 82000lbs...hardly a "light jet"....

By the way...FAA considers anything less than 50000lbs to be a light jet...

[Lear70]

Originally Posted by Cripple 7

BlueEagle:
You are absolutely correct except that doesn't always apply in the US. I checked again and again. I am 100% sure that under FAA rules, if it is not a commercial flight (ie, not Part 121, 135, 125, etc but a Part 61, 91 or 141 flight) 2 pilots can both log PIC if one is rated and flying under the hood and the other is the instructor.
I just go by what I was told by my Yankee pals.

That's not the only situation in which this can happen.

When working at Flexjet it was common practice for the pilots to swap legs in the left seat or the Lear since both were typed and rated in the aircraft. Flexjet for many years (up to 1998 when I left) TRAINED its crewmembers to Part 135 requirements but OPERATED the company purely Part 91.

The pilot then in the right seat was the Company's appointed PIC, signed the logbook, and was therefore responsible for the flight and logged PIC time under Part 1 of the FAR's.

The pilot in the left seat was the Company's appointed SIC, but since he/she was the sole manipulator of the controls for the entire flight and was rated in the aircraft, he/she logged the time as PIC under Part 61.51(c).

The new fractional regs make that harder to do.

That said, I don't buy this as a reason U.S. pilots may not be looked upon as favorably as other countries. Especially with so many of us applying whose background is primarily part 121 where that combination of time logging is simply impossible.

In any eventuality, it's a simple matter to require U.S. applicants to include ONLY the time they were the Part 1 PIC, Aircraft Commander, who signed for the aircraft. As someone else pointed out, several U.S. airlines do this already.

Incedentally, at the BNA FSDO, the primary POI of the facility has long held that a safety pilot CAN log the time as PIC while another person is operating the aircraft under the hood if on a VFR flight plan operating in VMC conditions, as the safety pilot is responsible for ensuring traffic avoidance and therefore shares the responsibility for safety of flight. Don't shoot the messenger, I don't necessarily agree with it, just saying the interpretation of PIC logging for safety pilots can and WILL vary from FSDO to FSDO. Isn't the FAA great?

[Cripple 7]

hey guys!! I am a Canuck and before I came to Lantau, I have spent quite a few hours cruising the friendly skies in the US. Since then, I have flown with several colleagues from south of the border. They are competent and good pilots. That said, while I was doing the recruitment gig, I was simply told to discount some of the hours if they are not military or Part 121 hours. It's usually the hours between PPL and ATPL that's questionable. When we did the interview, we looked at the pilot's logbook and inquired the details of flights logged. Quite often, the guy will say he couldn't remember enough of the details as it was too long ago.

[RiddleDiddle84]

What about American Eagle?

Hey guys,
Thanks for the info. What do you think about American Eagle as a regional. I want to hang out down in the Bahamas for a couple years to get the Cathay time and I think Eagle would be a descent place to do it. Thanks, RD84.

[Macgyver]

Riddle,

Try asking that question at www.flightinfo.com or www.clear-and-a-million.com. These are both American message boards and frequented by many regional pilots.

[usualsuspect]

RiddleDiddle84-
Eagle is good for stability and benefits, but upgrade is obsolete.

I've got over 1000hrs SIC in the jet there but now I'm looking at some corporate jobs where I might possibly get some PIC. I dont care if its tubroprop or jet PIC, just any PIC I assume is better than being a pilot at eagle for a couple more years with only SIC time to my name.

So my question is: should I venture into the corporate side of things for PIC?
I know CX would love to see jet PIC from an air carrier, but is it ok if it comes from corporate flying? I don't see any upgrade on the horizon at my current job, but that seems like the only thing wrong with it so it makes it kinda hard to leave.
Advice? Suggestions?

Thanks-

[Start4&3]

Originally Posted by RiddleDiddle84

Hey guys,
Thanks for the info. What do you think about American Eagle as a regional. I want to hang out down in the Bahamas for a couple years to get the Cathay time and I think Eagle would be a descent place to do it. Thanks, RD84.

You won't get any CX time if you want to stay in the Bahamas as an Eagle FO. Eagle only operates ATRs in the Bahamas/Carribean area. CX is looking for at least 1000 jet time.

[Start4&3]

Originally Posted by usualsuspect

RiddleDiddle84-
So my question is: should I venture into the corporate side of things for PIC?
I know CX would love to see jet PIC from an air carrier, but is it ok if it comes from corporate flying? I don't see any upgrade on the horizon at my current job, but that seems like the only thing wrong with it so it makes it kinda hard to leave.
Advice? Suggestions?

Thanks-

I had 2500 jet time SIC and no PIC time when CX called me for an interview. I know CX is not particular about PIC time especially for SO applicants, but PIC time is nice to have and you're right about not getting it from AE because I didn't get any after 7 years.

[mayday911]

I left AE after 3 years and would still be a 7 year RJ FO if I had not resigned. I gambled on leaving and it has worked out for me (currently an RJ captain), but I can't say the same for some of my buddies that have also left for "greener" pastures.

That being said....when I applied to CX for the first time in 12/04 I had 0 turbine command time and only a CPL. I was called 2 months later for a DEFO interview. The only thing that I could see that got me the interview, was all of the total turbo jet time that I got at AE plus a little from my current job. I just upgraded to Captain but I already had the successful letter from CX on the fridge when that happenned.

Mayday
"Anxiously awaiting a DEFO course date"

[Start4&3]

Originally Posted by CommitedToStay

Start4&3- with your location stating ´midwest´, you currently apppear like an F/O on an outbase.
Just out of curiosity:

That was a DEFO interview then ?

It was for SO interview and no I didn't pass the final interview. I'm an FO for a national carrier of Taiwan and I'm commuting to/from the Midwest.

[confirm-finals?]

What about 727 time? No EFIS = no joy?

[rogerover]

Pertaining to the previous posts about the total time CX looks for, I think it's not very consistent. I've heard of guys with less 3000 hrs getting called for an interview while some guys with 7000+ hours not even being considered. For DEFO or DESO, I don't think PIC really matters. Just get your total turbine or jet time up there. Cathay "overlooks" the fact that your jet time is light, medium, or heavy. However, having medium or heavy jet time can't hurt one bit. I think it's safe to say that the majority of the candidates called for DESO/DEFO interview had 5000+ total time - with turbine or jet time being a big chunk. And not necessarily with a lot of PIC time. As for Eagle, yeah the upgrade time kinda sucks because of the previous acquisition of Business Express and mainline American flowback pilots. But there are people who go straight into the jet upon hiring nowdays. Another note worth mentioning is, try to build up your hours with a 121 carrier (look at the profiles and majority of the U.S. pilots called for int. are from 121 carriers and a few military, but not much corporate) and enjoy the ride regardless of who you fly for - whether it be smooth or rough. Because in the end, your dues will pay off one way or the other. Good luck.

[TruBlu351]

Originally Posted by ANDRE25i

Regardless of your specific intentions rd84; qf certainly looks better than cx. Tougher to get into? after all, airline with probs the best safety record

ANDRE25i...........

QF seems on the bow wave of some real uncertainty at the moment so I find your statement a little hard to believe.

QF is all about reshaping and cutting costs at the moment to remain competitive in this tough business............guess who cops it?

A few quotes from various sources...........

"QANTAS pilots are lodging an appeal and launching Federal Court action after yesterday failing in their first bid to stop a new Jetstar agreement that they claim undercuts industry wages and conditions."

and

"But Qantas pilots say the deal, which pays Jetstar international pilots up to $100,000 a year less than their mainline counterparts, lowers industry salary levels and conditions."

All new S/O's now face the high probability of being sent to Singapore....you think you'll be on a CX Honk Kong 15% good tax deal? Survey says......!! No CX housing allowance, schooling bennefits, medical etc.

With the new aquisition of QF's 787....who gets them first? Jetstar. The elcheapo flying pay rates etc on this type will be set and when QF mainline gets them, what are the chances of being able to increase pay etc???

There's an uncertain future ahead with QF and IMHO. CX first option.

[RiddleDiddle84]

Thanks

Hey guys,
Thanks for all the info. I just sent some resumes in today so we'll see what turns up with that.

RD