Turboprop transition to jet?
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: I know where you live
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget also that TP's are flying at lower approach speeds and so you have more time to anticipate, prepare and correct while in a jet everyhting goes fast!
Guest
Posts: n/a
From what I know is that pilots where always moaning when they had to make an approach as number two behind a TP aircraft, because of the TP that really is going slow on the approach while the jet guys have to reduce to minimum speed and even will catch up the TP's. Yeah maybe you have the same speeds depending traffic flow until an IAF or something but once configuring it all changes.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bokkenrijder
During my multiple sector low cost days, I can say that I learned the most from the Belgian colleagues! These people really knew their aircraft and I hold their airmanship and common sense in very very high regard!
It must be right if you say it!
From what I know is that pilots where always moaning when they had to make an approach as number two behind a TP aircraft, because of the TP that really is going slow on the approach while the jet guys have to reduce to minimum speed and even will catch up the TP's.
never met any person who would love to go back from jet to TP... only vice versa.
I have seen quite a few (10-15) pilots unable to transition from TP to 737 but have no experience with people trying to go the other way.
Following the VNAV blindly is pretty dangerous, running a three times profile to cross check the VNAV is essential if you want to remain safe for more than a few years.
sabenaboy:
It was my pleasure to teach and examine a lot of Belgian pilots. They came from every background from cadets to ex-F16 pilots to old hairy's from previously failed Belgian airlines.
Most of the cadets had been through the SABENA Academy at Scottsdale AZ and they had all been well trained. In the beginning, one or two of them pointed out to me that they were eventually destined for SABENA main line, but such is the arrogance of youth (which I have been guilty of in the past).
I do not think that I ever had a problem with a Scottsdale student, so, whatever they did out there was pretty successful.
The big thing about Belgian pilots versus British pilots was that the Belgian pilots would almost devour a new manual whereas the lazy Brits would pick up just about the minimum information needed and then use the manual as a door-stop.
Most of my Belgians are now floating around the world in large aeroplanes.
Just for a bit of humour (and I am quite happy that the two pilots involved won't mind because they ended up as best friends).
One of them was ex-F-16
One of them was 1200 hours twin piston.
F-16 wants to touch everything.
1200 hours twin piston is not at all sure what he should touch.
After 30 minutes, I froze the simulator and told the twin piston pilot that if he saw the F-16 pilot's hand move across the centre of the overhead panel then he had my permission to break his arm!
It was my pleasure to teach and examine a lot of Belgian pilots. They came from every background from cadets to ex-F16 pilots to old hairy's from previously failed Belgian airlines.
Most of the cadets had been through the SABENA Academy at Scottsdale AZ and they had all been well trained. In the beginning, one or two of them pointed out to me that they were eventually destined for SABENA main line, but such is the arrogance of youth (which I have been guilty of in the past).
I do not think that I ever had a problem with a Scottsdale student, so, whatever they did out there was pretty successful.
The big thing about Belgian pilots versus British pilots was that the Belgian pilots would almost devour a new manual whereas the lazy Brits would pick up just about the minimum information needed and then use the manual as a door-stop.
Most of my Belgians are now floating around the world in large aeroplanes.
Just for a bit of humour (and I am quite happy that the two pilots involved won't mind because they ended up as best friends).
One of them was ex-F-16
One of them was 1200 hours twin piston.
F-16 wants to touch everything.
1200 hours twin piston is not at all sure what he should touch.
After 30 minutes, I froze the simulator and told the twin piston pilot that if he saw the F-16 pilot's hand move across the centre of the overhead panel then he had my permission to break his arm!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: bespin, the cloud city
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like rubbish to me. You can hold a much higher speed down final in a turbo prop than a jet because you can slow down very quickly.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Haha this became now a pro-belgian thread! Are You kidding me?! Well the good ones where from thd Sabena period which was reputated to be one of the best worldwide regarding training. Times have changed now and believe me there are a lot of horrible Belgians too out there. Every country, airline and ect... has it's good and less better pilots. The training of today given in belgian schools is rather poor in comparison with French, British and German schools. I've spoken to many Belgium FTO trained people and it was a joke! It seems they are also outstanding in beeing very arrogant, they think they are the top of the cream...
Well Belgian airlines are famous for their raw-data ''drop the pants'' checks and handflying. But it's very rare you see some Belgian plane making a smooth touchdown and why? Because they are that programmed of beeing afraid and getting sacked when they will float just a little bit even if the runway is like 4000 meters. Some are very rough with the controls as well and horrible farmer accents on the freq.
Then you have that famous method of departing without FD's manually on a SID with the hand on the throttle until they reach like FL300 or something, which is even illegal to do in RVSM airspace. But they consider that really rich to their training while there is nothing special about following a straight magenta line and keeping the same pitch.
I'm not British but I think this nonsenses should stop, You have good and bad everywhere.
Well Belgian airlines are famous for their raw-data ''drop the pants'' checks and handflying. But it's very rare you see some Belgian plane making a smooth touchdown and why? Because they are that programmed of beeing afraid and getting sacked when they will float just a little bit even if the runway is like 4000 meters. Some are very rough with the controls as well and horrible farmer accents on the freq.
Then you have that famous method of departing without FD's manually on a SID with the hand on the throttle until they reach like FL300 or something, which is even illegal to do in RVSM airspace. But they consider that really rich to their training while there is nothing special about following a straight magenta line and keeping the same pitch.
I'm not British but I think this nonsenses should stop, You have good and bad everywhere.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: gashbag
Age: 52
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"but is it the same with a fokker or ATR?"
Yes it is. All turboprops can use those props as dirty great airbrakes. Seems you missed that part of a pilots education.
Yes it is. All turboprops can use those props as dirty great airbrakes. Seems you missed that part of a pilots education.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: another place
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking of speed, ever got stuck behind an Easyjet on a fuel saving 250kt descent? Used to drive me crackers going into my old home base. Or is this the standard Airbus method or just to give the cadets more time to think? 
But is it the same with a Fokker or ATR??? I'don't think so!
Believe what you want from me,
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyerguy, you`re correct with regards to the wake vortex categories. Although the ATR 42 is light in the UK but Medium elsewhere (ICAO).
The term heavy in this context (career paths) is just to differentiate light turboprops (King Air + Jetstreams) with the heavy glass cockpit passenger service TP`s (Dash 8 Q400 + ATR 72-600), i.e greater than 20 tonnes. Funny enough some pilots can get caught out flying a heavy ATR 72-500/600 (6 bladed props) which can be difficult to slow down if not anticipated correctly leading to unstable approach and go-around. Introduce even heavier TP's such as the ATR 92 (if it eventually gets the go ahead from Airbus), increased blades, swept wings, winglets etc. These nextgen TP's will actually be closer to a geared turbofan.The point I`m making here is that the gap between the nextgen TP's and turbofans is actually reducing now that TP's are really back in business.
The term heavy in this context (career paths) is just to differentiate light turboprops (King Air + Jetstreams) with the heavy glass cockpit passenger service TP`s (Dash 8 Q400 + ATR 72-600), i.e greater than 20 tonnes. Funny enough some pilots can get caught out flying a heavy ATR 72-500/600 (6 bladed props) which can be difficult to slow down if not anticipated correctly leading to unstable approach and go-around. Introduce even heavier TP's such as the ATR 92 (if it eventually gets the go ahead from Airbus), increased blades, swept wings, winglets etc. These nextgen TP's will actually be closer to a geared turbofan.The point I`m making here is that the gap between the nextgen TP's and turbofans is actually reducing now that TP's are really back in business.
Tell a jet pilot to do my job of manually flying an NDB approach into a short runway with minimal weather, and 30+ knots of very gusty crosswind and most of them will probably fail miserably until they've tried a bunch of times.
Tell me to do a jet pilots job of programming the FMS and autoflight systems in all the right sequences and procedures to do a nice CATIII or RNP approach, and I will fail miserably until I've tried a bunch of times.
People who claim one thing is harder than the other have a need to feel superior I guess. It's just different challenges, and until someone gets a shot you will not find out whether they are up to it or not.
As a TP driver I also feel there should be a bit more value attached to our experience, but then again, who am I to say that I will be so much more proficient than that cadet fresh out of training? I hope I will be with a couple of thousand of sectors of manual flying in all weather situations under my belt, but maybe I'd have a hard time adjusting to the different challenges on a jet.
Tell me to do a jet pilots job of programming the FMS and autoflight systems in all the right sequences and procedures to do a nice CATIII or RNP approach, and I will fail miserably until I've tried a bunch of times.
People who claim one thing is harder than the other have a need to feel superior I guess. It's just different challenges, and until someone gets a shot you will not find out whether they are up to it or not.
As a TP driver I also feel there should be a bit more value attached to our experience, but then again, who am I to say that I will be so much more proficient than that cadet fresh out of training? I hope I will be with a couple of thousand of sectors of manual flying in all weather situations under my belt, but maybe I'd have a hard time adjusting to the different challenges on a jet.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Everyplace
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell a jet pilot to do my job of manually flying an NDB approach into a short runway with minimal weather, and 30+ knots of very gusty crosswind and most of them will probably fail miserably until they've tried a bunch of times.
Tell me to do a jet pilots job of programming the FMS and autoflight systems in all the right sequences and procedures to do a nice CATIII or RNP approach, and I will fail miserably until I've tried a bunch of times.
People who claim one thing is harder than the other have a need to feel superior I guess. It's just different challenges, and until someone gets a shot you will not find out whether they are up to it or not.
As a TP driver I also feel there should be a bit more value attached to our experience, but then again, who am I to say that I will be so much more proficient than that cadet fresh out of training? I hope I will be with a couple of thousand of sectors of manual flying in all weather situations under my belt, but maybe I'd have a hard time adjusting to the different challenges on a jet.
Tell me to do a jet pilots job of programming the FMS and autoflight systems in all the right sequences and procedures to do a nice CATIII or RNP approach, and I will fail miserably until I've tried a bunch of times.
People who claim one thing is harder than the other have a need to feel superior I guess. It's just different challenges, and until someone gets a shot you will not find out whether they are up to it or not.
As a TP driver I also feel there should be a bit more value attached to our experience, but then again, who am I to say that I will be so much more proficient than that cadet fresh out of training? I hope I will be with a couple of thousand of sectors of manual flying in all weather situations under my belt, but maybe I'd have a hard time adjusting to the different challenges on a jet.
Lets be honest. A plane is a plane. You pull the yoke and the plane goes up, puss the yoke and the pane goes down. And if you pull the yoke to much the plane fist goes up up up and the goes down very fast.
Ph: I will take a TP pilot any time to fly jets. No doubt.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in my country
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went from ATR to B737NG, trust me the medium/heavy turboprop is much more work on board and do require more "pilot" skills (climb sequence, eng flame out after V1, icing, landing, non RNAV hold pattern, non precision approach with a lot of mental math to do, etc). The only reason why airlines take only young teens with no experience is because today's modern jet are very automatic and reliable and today's pilots are just there to press buttons and take selfies during cruise with their smartphone. Sad but true.
And there it is, the chip on the shoulder of all TP drivers: jet drivers can't actually fly. If you can't fly a NP approach I crosswinds up to the limit of your aircraft, you've no business being in a cockpit.
It's an inane generalisation. I flew TPs without autopilot or FMS. In fact, my first 3,500 hours were all hand flown, 1,500 on TP. A large percentage of my instrument approaches were NDB approaches. A good pilot remains current with all aspects of flying and should be able to carry out a NP approach as and when required. Request it next time.
I use autopilot as and when the situation requires. High density airspace? Autopilot, ease the workload off the pilot monitoring, for instance. On the flip side, hand flying a visual is much less taxing than hand flying an IFR approach. Try descending in the stack in Manchester, with ATC speed control frequently changing, level changes, etc... It requires a lot of concentration to maintain precise speed throughout when flown manually, and this is exactly where AP usage can expand the overall capacity of a crew.
No one wins by propagating bitter falsehoods, at the very least it shows a ignorance of automation and its benefits.
It's an inane generalisation. I flew TPs without autopilot or FMS. In fact, my first 3,500 hours were all hand flown, 1,500 on TP. A large percentage of my instrument approaches were NDB approaches. A good pilot remains current with all aspects of flying and should be able to carry out a NP approach as and when required. Request it next time.
I use autopilot as and when the situation requires. High density airspace? Autopilot, ease the workload off the pilot monitoring, for instance. On the flip side, hand flying a visual is much less taxing than hand flying an IFR approach. Try descending in the stack in Manchester, with ATC speed control frequently changing, level changes, etc... It requires a lot of concentration to maintain precise speed throughout when flown manually, and this is exactly where AP usage can expand the overall capacity of a crew.
No one wins by propagating bitter falsehoods, at the very least it shows a ignorance of automation and its benefits.