PIC vs. SIC and its importance.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: world
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PIC vs. SIC and its importance.
I know PIC time is much more valuble then SIC time, but to what extent?
In the U.S, the way to the majors is by logging as much PIC time as possible in order to get an interview for a F/O position with one of the majors.
How is it elsewhere in the world? Europe, Asian countries, Africa, South America, Antarctica? Is PIC a MUST to get a job with a larger carrier, or is it not as big of a deal as it is in the U.S? Thanks for replies!
P.S - I was joking about Antarctica
In the U.S, the way to the majors is by logging as much PIC time as possible in order to get an interview for a F/O position with one of the majors.
How is it elsewhere in the world? Europe, Asian countries, Africa, South America, Antarctica? Is PIC a MUST to get a job with a larger carrier, or is it not as big of a deal as it is in the U.S? Thanks for replies!
P.S - I was joking about Antarctica
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US PIC time is king, and the rest is meaningless. The rest of the world is different, but even there PIC is very, very important. Don't forget that many airlines in Europe have their own Ab Initio training program which brings pilots into the cockpit with no time at all.
PIC is king. At least that has been my experience and I have worked in Europe and the US.
PIC is king. At least that has been my experience and I have worked in Europe and the US.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I often do evaluation of prospective new hires here in Argentina...
xxx
Pilot applicants product of the "North American" training environment, often stress PIC time in their CV/Resumes...
When you are out of a flight school, it is rather difficult, at that stage, to have much more than 100 hrs PIC, and this will all be on light aircraft. Other than PIC time... again on C-152, or Beech B-55, is only concerning the eligibility and issuance of CPL, IR and ATPL. Who will hire you (to get PIC time) other than instruction, air taxi, glider or banner towing, if you have only 300 hrs in your logbook...?
xxx
Then, personally, I look at "quality" SIC time rather than "quantity" PIC time. Pilot applicants with 500 hrs SIC bizjet experience, or who completed a 737 type rating training program (PIC or SIC) have my preference, as I am concerned that a pilot with 300 hours of light aircraft only, will be at odds in a class of new hires training for an airline new hire position on B-737 or MD-80...
xxx
Training a new airline co-pilot requires high budget money for an airline. A trainee who fails initial training, or who is succesful, account for nearly the same budget expense to my airline. Travel, hotel, meals, expense per-diem, partial training salary, transport, classroom training, simulator training, some personal tutoring, uniforms, medicals, insurances... all this for nearly 2 months... need to be accounted for.
xxx
Our initial classes are generally 24 trainees. We want all of them to complete the course succesfully. We rarely have achieved that goal. If only 16 are succesful, our books still show training expenses for... 24 trainees initially.
xxx
You might have 300 hrs PIC time, but if you fail initial 737 systems study, because you dont understand anything about electrical diagrams, or in the simulator, that jet engines reduced to idle do not slow you down for long (lack of propeller drag)... what can we do...? Did your ATPL studies include sufficient amount of FAR/JAR 25 performance, and to read charts...? We had trainees perfectly able to compute runway required for a given takeoff weight, yet unable to read maximum weight for takeoff given a runway length.
xxx
Finally, hiring captains, direct entry - is an entirely different ball game. There, PIC time counts and is primordial. A good yardstick is 1,000 hrs PIC on (any) jets, and 500 hrs PIC on type to be considered.
xxx
Happy contrails
xxx
Pilot applicants product of the "North American" training environment, often stress PIC time in their CV/Resumes...
When you are out of a flight school, it is rather difficult, at that stage, to have much more than 100 hrs PIC, and this will all be on light aircraft. Other than PIC time... again on C-152, or Beech B-55, is only concerning the eligibility and issuance of CPL, IR and ATPL. Who will hire you (to get PIC time) other than instruction, air taxi, glider or banner towing, if you have only 300 hrs in your logbook...?
xxx
Then, personally, I look at "quality" SIC time rather than "quantity" PIC time. Pilot applicants with 500 hrs SIC bizjet experience, or who completed a 737 type rating training program (PIC or SIC) have my preference, as I am concerned that a pilot with 300 hours of light aircraft only, will be at odds in a class of new hires training for an airline new hire position on B-737 or MD-80...
xxx
Training a new airline co-pilot requires high budget money for an airline. A trainee who fails initial training, or who is succesful, account for nearly the same budget expense to my airline. Travel, hotel, meals, expense per-diem, partial training salary, transport, classroom training, simulator training, some personal tutoring, uniforms, medicals, insurances... all this for nearly 2 months... need to be accounted for.
xxx
Our initial classes are generally 24 trainees. We want all of them to complete the course succesfully. We rarely have achieved that goal. If only 16 are succesful, our books still show training expenses for... 24 trainees initially.
xxx
You might have 300 hrs PIC time, but if you fail initial 737 systems study, because you dont understand anything about electrical diagrams, or in the simulator, that jet engines reduced to idle do not slow you down for long (lack of propeller drag)... what can we do...? Did your ATPL studies include sufficient amount of FAR/JAR 25 performance, and to read charts...? We had trainees perfectly able to compute runway required for a given takeoff weight, yet unable to read maximum weight for takeoff given a runway length.
xxx
Finally, hiring captains, direct entry - is an entirely different ball game. There, PIC time counts and is primordial. A good yardstick is 1,000 hrs PIC on (any) jets, and 500 hrs PIC on type to be considered.
xxx
Happy contrails
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
300 hours! Wow! 
Well, I had 260 when I was hired in Switzerland, so I know how it is.
Anyway, the PIC requirement here in the US is generally with regards to the major or Legacy carriers. They generally require anywhere between 500 and 1000 hours PIC on anything from a 152 to a turbine aircraft in the case of Soutwest.
US carriers who operate large aircraft generally do not hire pilots with less than 500 hours of some type of PIC.
Well, I had 260 when I was hired in Switzerland, so I know how it is.
Anyway, the PIC requirement here in the US is generally with regards to the major or Legacy carriers. They generally require anywhere between 500 and 1000 hours PIC on anything from a 152 to a turbine aircraft in the case of Soutwest.
US carriers who operate large aircraft generally do not hire pilots with less than 500 hours of some type of PIC.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: world
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all your replies guys.
So the way I read it is that PIC time when looking at a job as an F/O for the most part else where is not a huge deal? I asked this question originally because that is what I had speculated after following the European job market for a while.
How about Turbo-prop time vs. Jet time?? If I had a year experience flying a Dash-8 vs. a year experience flying a ERJ, would the employers look at both candidates equally? Or would the guy with the jet experience be prefered? If so, by how much?
Thanks!!
So the way I read it is that PIC time when looking at a job as an F/O for the most part else where is not a huge deal? I asked this question originally because that is what I had speculated after following the European job market for a while.
How about Turbo-prop time vs. Jet time?? If I had a year experience flying a Dash-8 vs. a year experience flying a ERJ, would the employers look at both candidates equally? Or would the guy with the jet experience be prefered? If so, by how much?
Thanks!!
