What looks better to Cathay?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What looks better to Cathay?
Hey guys,
I have been instructing for a while now and am getting ready to move on into the regional airline world. My future goal is to become a Cathay Pacific pilot. Would it be better to take a regional job with a short upgrade time in smaller turbo-prop aircraft (19 seat) and start logging PIC turbine, or would it be better to fly for a regional airline that has large turbo-prop and regional jet aircraft but the upgrade time is closer to five years. Once again the idea is to fly for the regional, get the best looking time on the resume, and move on to Cathay. Thanks in advance.
RD84
I have been instructing for a while now and am getting ready to move on into the regional airline world. My future goal is to become a Cathay Pacific pilot. Would it be better to take a regional job with a short upgrade time in smaller turbo-prop aircraft (19 seat) and start logging PIC turbine, or would it be better to fly for a regional airline that has large turbo-prop and regional jet aircraft but the upgrade time is closer to five years. Once again the idea is to fly for the regional, get the best looking time on the resume, and move on to Cathay. Thanks in advance.
RD84
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
All I can tell you is what I've been told by someone who used to conduct the interviews and has been at CX for a good while. Take it as you will but I make no claims that it's either gospel or good for everyone.
If you look at the numerous posts here on Pprune you'll find that the average time time for SO's is probably about 4500TT with at least 2000 Turbine. That's from US applicants. They have taken guys without jet time and with lower total time from Aus, Canada, Europe and SA but CX is a very technical company and they have a lot more respect for the ATPL's from those countries. I'm not going to get into the whole US vs JAR/CASA etc, thing but that's the way i've been told it is viewed. As a result US pilots require more time and hence PIC aswell. You also have to realise that things here in the US are about as sh!t as they possibly could be and with all the furloughs and Lay-offs (Comair. Mesaba, Indy, USAir, Delta, NWA, etc). Things are extremely competitive amongst those applying from the US. These guys have a tonne of time and CX offers one of the last remaining chances to actually fly for a decent airline.
You also have to take into account that as a US applicant you are in competition with Europeans who have been Captains on the A320/B737 and are prepared to work for CX as SO's. I have 3 mates at Ryanair that got on with CX as SO's with 6000TT and 5500 Turbine on the B737. It's hard to compete with that when you have just a 1000 on a CRJ. Not saying it hasn't happpened, it has but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from with this.
We all know CX is a one in a million compnay, otherwise we wouldn't be on Pprune trying to figure out the best way to get there but you have to think about the intervening time. As someone who's been furloughed, out of work and flown at 2 regionals in the US in the past 4 years my advice is to go to an airline where you'll be treated like a human being and fairly compensated. There aren't too many out there, I know but they are there if you look and have some patience. The bottom line is you don't know how long you'll be there and nothing is guaranteed in this industry.
Once again, this is simply what I've been told and don't worry I won't make any jokes about Riddle! I guess that's where you've been instructing from your user name? And if you are at Riddle you're probably talking about Gulfstream and the B1900, in which case don't even think about it!
PS, whatever you decide, good luck.
If you look at the numerous posts here on Pprune you'll find that the average time time for SO's is probably about 4500TT with at least 2000 Turbine. That's from US applicants. They have taken guys without jet time and with lower total time from Aus, Canada, Europe and SA but CX is a very technical company and they have a lot more respect for the ATPL's from those countries. I'm not going to get into the whole US vs JAR/CASA etc, thing but that's the way i've been told it is viewed. As a result US pilots require more time and hence PIC aswell. You also have to realise that things here in the US are about as sh!t as they possibly could be and with all the furloughs and Lay-offs (Comair. Mesaba, Indy, USAir, Delta, NWA, etc). Things are extremely competitive amongst those applying from the US. These guys have a tonne of time and CX offers one of the last remaining chances to actually fly for a decent airline.
You also have to take into account that as a US applicant you are in competition with Europeans who have been Captains on the A320/B737 and are prepared to work for CX as SO's. I have 3 mates at Ryanair that got on with CX as SO's with 6000TT and 5500 Turbine on the B737. It's hard to compete with that when you have just a 1000 on a CRJ. Not saying it hasn't happpened, it has but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from with this.
We all know CX is a one in a million compnay, otherwise we wouldn't be on Pprune trying to figure out the best way to get there but you have to think about the intervening time. As someone who's been furloughed, out of work and flown at 2 regionals in the US in the past 4 years my advice is to go to an airline where you'll be treated like a human being and fairly compensated. There aren't too many out there, I know but they are there if you look and have some patience. The bottom line is you don't know how long you'll be there and nothing is guaranteed in this industry.
Once again, this is simply what I've been told and don't worry I won't make any jokes about Riddle! I guess that's where you've been instructing from your user name? And if you are at Riddle you're probably talking about Gulfstream and the B1900, in which case don't even think about it!
PS, whatever you decide, good luck.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lantau
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Why we require more hours from US applicants? The answer is simple. They can have one guy flying and one guy sleeping but both can legally log PIC time.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
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.
PS: I am a few years off from applying, so I will have to wait for the ultimate verdict.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Guahan
Age: 65
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Originally Posted by Cripple 7
Why we require more hours from US applicants? The answer is simple. They can have one guy flying and one guy sleeping but both can legally log PIC time.
Last edited by robiemartin; 11th Jan 2006 at 16:38.
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Guys,
Lets not let this turn into FAA vs Others bash fest. Let's agree that diiferent countries have different certification/licensing criteria and leave it at that.
My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment
Lets not let this turn into FAA vs Others bash fest. Let's agree that diiferent countries have different certification/licensing criteria and leave it at that.
My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment
Last edited by Kenny; 12th Jan 2006 at 19:24.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Guahan
Age: 65
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Originally Posted by Kenny
Lets not let this turn into FAA vs Others bash fest. Let's agree that diiferent countries have different certification/licensing critera and leave it at that.
My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment
My point to the original poster was that nothing is certain and we should all work for airlines that pay us what we're worth and treat us like valued employees. To join an airline based on Upgrade/command time generally leads to disappointment
RE: The original question: Which is better? Tprop PIC or RJ SIC.
I don't think there is an answer. PIC is good, Jet time is good. Jet PIC is better. In line with the above point, my advice is join the best company. IE: best pay, best benefits, most opportunities you can get.
BTW, the CX application breaks out Light Jet and Medium Jet time w/o any reference to MAUW. Any insights on where current a/c such as CRJs fit?
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Unless they've changed the App, It should also say 2 engined business jets are considered "light" jets. So I guess that covers the CRJ
Although where do 170's and CRJ700/900's fit in? The line's starting to get blurred in more than one way.
Although where do 170's and CRJ700/900's fit in? The line's starting to get blurred in more than one way.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: traveling
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
The CRJ is considered "light jet". You can call either Carol D. or Kelly C. @ CX to confirm this.
I would agree with the above as well. Go to the better company in terms of treatment and quality of life.
Good luck.
I would agree with the above as well. Go to the better company in terms of treatment and quality of life.
Good luck.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Long Beach, CA USA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
The only thing I would caution you about in terms of your next career move is that, in my opinion, the rj boom in the US is coming to a close. DL is having rj's parked. NW is trying to get larger rj's but that is probably to eventually replace the DC-9's. My point with this is that if you get on with an RJ operator right now, you may be stuck in the right seat for a loooong time. CX will interview you without the turbine PIC time, but that's about it. Granted CX is the best opportunity out there, one still does not want to be backed into a corner should that door not open up. I'm not necessarily advocating that you go fly an 1900 for a shady outfit. I'm just trying to point out that the rj fo gig may backfire. That said, after your first year with any quality (I understand that quality is a relative term when discussing US regional airlines) regional, you will be able to feed yourself as an RJ FO for as long as it takes to move up. Good luck and I'll put my soapbox away now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Hey guys,
Thanks for the tips. I guess my next question might be, what US regionals might be the best with regard to QOL and enjoyment. Any that you might stay away from?
RD84
Thanks for the tips. I guess my next question might be, what US regionals might be the best with regard to QOL and enjoyment. Any that you might stay away from?
RD84
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Skywest is a high-quality, all round classy regional airline. My brother is there right now, while I'm at Mesa. His QOL after four months is better than mine after 4 years.
Upgrade at Skywest is at about a year in the Brasilia EMB-120 and a 1.5 years in the CRJ (as of now, subject to change).
Good luck with the decision.
Just remember to enjoy the path, and not focus too much on the destination.
CS.
Upgrade at Skywest is at about a year in the Brasilia EMB-120 and a 1.5 years in the CRJ (as of now, subject to change).
Good luck with the decision.
Just remember to enjoy the path, and not focus too much on the destination.
CS.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Long Beach, CA USA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
I know first hand that OO is a great place to work. However, upgrades are going to be slowing WAY down unless we get some more airplane orders. Right now we have about 10 CR7's to be delivered between now and the end of May. After that the horizon is empty. Also, from the looks of the new training schedule that management published, there are no new hires forecasted for the 1st quarter of this year and only about 40 upgrades; that includes both EM2 and CRJ. That being said, staff planning accuracy over here seems to be slightly less on target than an 8 ball if you know what I mean. Also, right now it seems we are having 8-10 pilots a month move on to bigger and better things so we will need newhires eventually. Hopefully I'll be joining that rank in due course. Good luck in deciding your next career move.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lantau
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Originally Posted by robiemartin
Would you elaborate? Are you talking about augmented crews? Don't have my FAR's handy but there is only one PIC in 121 domestic ops as far as I know.
I am not talking about Part 121 operation. I am talking about newly licenced pilots building time to get to their ATP. I was involved with recruitment awhile back and this is what I was told about the US. A instrumented rate pilot can fly in simulated instrument condition (e.g under the hood) and logs PIC time. The safety pilot/instructor logs PIC as well.
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
Originally Posted by Cripple 7
No bashing intended.
I am not talking about Part 121 operation. I am talking about newly licenced pilots building time to get to their ATP. I was involved with recruitment awhile back and this is what I was told about the US. A instrumented rate pilot can fly in simulated instrument condition (e.g under the hood) and logs PIC time. The safety pilot/instructor logs PIC as well.
I am not talking about Part 121 operation. I am talking about newly licenced pilots building time to get to their ATP. I was involved with recruitment awhile back and this is what I was told about the US. A instrumented rate pilot can fly in simulated instrument condition (e.g under the hood) and logs PIC time. The safety pilot/instructor logs PIC as well.
And you know what's even worse about that? There's a certain, fairly large flight school over here that will put 2 students in the front of a twin in the same situation as you've described above and an instructor in the BACK, who's loggin PIC and Dual given!!
Nobody ever said the FAA was smart.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lantau
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: What looks better to Cathay?
This is what I got from a friend in the US.
The three-pilot scenario:
1. The instrument student logs PIC because he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft he is rated for. 61.51(e)(1)(I)
2. The pilot in the right seat is the acting as PIC and performing safety pilot duties under 91.109(b)*. He logs PIC as he is PIC in a flight operation that requires more than one pilot. 61.51(e)(1)(iii).
3. The CFI-I who gives instruction logs PIC 61.51(e)(3).
Each person in the airplane has a rule that sepcifically alows him to log the time.
The three-pilot scenario:
1. The instrument student logs PIC because he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft he is rated for. 61.51(e)(1)(I)
2. The pilot in the right seat is the acting as PIC and performing safety pilot duties under 91.109(b)*. He logs PIC as he is PIC in a flight operation that requires more than one pilot. 61.51(e)(1)(iii).
3. The CFI-I who gives instruction logs PIC 61.51(e)(3).
Each person in the airplane has a rule that sepcifically alows him to log the time.