Minimum hours for widebody command
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 578
Likes: 2
From: Sutton
Minimum hours for widebody command
Searched the forums and cannot find which carrier has the lowest hour requirement for a Long Haul widebody command.
With BA I understand it is typically 15 years which at say 800 hours a year is 12,000 hours on 50 Ton plus jet equipment. I believe there are airlines offering commands with half this any one know of (or have a view on anything lower)?
With BA I understand it is typically 15 years which at say 800 hours a year is 12,000 hours on 50 Ton plus jet equipment. I believe there are airlines offering commands with half this any one know of (or have a view on anything lower)?
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 4
From: last time I looked I was still here.
I think you'll find the BA matter has to do with seniority not experience & competence. There are airlines that operate only wide-bodies. So in those companies it is another expectation entirely. 15 years of doing the same thing before command seems overly long. If you are in a wide-body company you should be able to learn the ropes much quicker.
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 578
Likes: 2
From: Sutton
A320baby is that 3,000 hours for a wide body/ dual aisle type.The lowest I have found is Qatar with 5,000 hours total time required for their 777 fleet. Of course The BA requirement is seniority based....but that is typical of many European and every US long haul carrier. The end result is the same that it is rare to see wide body aircraft being Comanded by guys with much less than 10,000 hours.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 654
Likes: 4
From: Dublin
With us it was you could be considered with over 6500 jet and 4000 command on jet medium but in reality I don't think you get a look in much below 10000 hrs and it was advertised two years ago with 11500 tt
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 4
From: last time I looked I was still here.
Flying a WB is no more difficult than a NB, just different. If the WB is operated on long-haul intercontinental routes then the BIG difference is management of the operation and all that such an operation - ATC- mother nature - politics- fuel planning - crew/pax issues - hotel/handling issues etc. etc can throw at you. This requires exposure and experience. It has absolutely nothing to do with flying hours. In companies who operate only WB's then 5-6 years might be enough to have seen the whole network and some of the problems. That's about 5000hrs, but it is 6 years relevant exposure. If you are in a mixed fleet company then 4-5 year short haul with easy options and ground assistance at hand, followed by another 4-5 years to learn the long-haul operation is reasonable. IMHO 4 years short-haul then 1 year long-haul might not be enough even if it = 4000hrs.
Just consider the dynamics: 5 years = 4000hrs, but you are still 26 years old. The purser is 40, all the cabin crew are >30, the F/O is 30. Would it be wise????? to be LHS? There are hours ands there are hours, but then there are years.
I flew WB long-haul charter for a couple of charter companies who were WB only, but not for too long, and as there was no expansion or retirement the issue of upgrades didn't raise in my time. Cathay has WB only. I know they have regional and then long-haul. What is their policy? IHMO taking a $200m a/c & 500pax and >15 crew to the other side of the world in all climates, both weather & political, would need 10 years exposure of aviation, most of it relevant. At least that would get you north of 30 years old.
Just consider the dynamics: 5 years = 4000hrs, but you are still 26 years old. The purser is 40, all the cabin crew are >30, the F/O is 30. Would it be wise????? to be LHS? There are hours ands there are hours, but then there are years.
I flew WB long-haul charter for a couple of charter companies who were WB only, but not for too long, and as there was no expansion or retirement the issue of upgrades didn't raise in my time. Cathay has WB only. I know they have regional and then long-haul. What is their policy? IHMO taking a $200m a/c & 500pax and >15 crew to the other side of the world in all climates, both weather & political, would need 10 years exposure of aviation, most of it relevant. At least that would get you north of 30 years old.
Last edited by RAT 5; 31st October 2015 at 22:41.
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 662
Likes: 3
From: Somewhere in time
If you look at the smaller airlines, charter airlines who operate widebodys you will find a lot of CPTs with less than 10.000h, or just take DHK, a few 767 CPTs have a lot less than 10.000h, same with the SunExpress on their new A330, same with Air Italy or Blue Panorama in Italy.
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 285
Likes: 1
From: bkk
WIDEBODY
I have spent most of the past 25 years upgrading pilots to the Left Seat of a wide-body.The only criteria with respect to hours has been laid down by the insurance company, and almost without exception these are 5,000 hours total time, can be virtually anything,including helicoptor time (factored at 50%), but at least some heavy turboprop or small jet preferred, all F/O is okay, plus around 1,000 hours on the wide-body type itself (to gauge the pilots suitability).I have upgraded a few with only 4,000 hours , but these were guys with exceptional skills and knowledge and the insurer had to be consulted/case put forward.Never seen any issues, but a lot of other ducks need to be lined up in a row to complete the exercise. Peter.....
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,777
Likes: 9
From: Blighty
Also, the insurers set a minimum. The industry norm is 2500 min for narrow bodies and 5000 for wide. Any variation tends to attract a premium increase.
Edit: Simultaneous post with Piratepete, although my post shows after his with a prior timestamp - must be a timezone thing.
Both my current and previous companies were upgrading wide-body pilots at 5000.
Edit: Simultaneous post with Piratepete, although my post shows after his with a prior timestamp - must be a timezone thing.
Both my current and previous companies were upgrading wide-body pilots at 5000.
