OnTheRun

A Biz jet is a Biz jet. It does not really matter if you are flying a CJ4 or a GV. The jump to a 747 is so big anyway what is the difference? I know they also ask about Atlantic crossing. Will they hire you if you have none? I am guessing Atlas trains on these things either way. You will be flying with a Senior Captain who can maybe help out too. It seems like no operators want to be the first one to train people anymore. They want you to be born with a GV type rating and 2000 hours in type. Supply in demand for sure.

captainv

I wouldn't sweat it. They're hiring lots of RJ guys as well, and you're more likely to have an Atlantic crossing as a corporate guy. And the jump from an RJ to a 747 is just as big as from a G-IV...

dundem

I believe that many of these requirements just serve as a filter for HR and is directly related to supply and demand.

Flying is flying.

I've read posts on other boards from guys whining that “small aircraft” (their words, not mine) guys have a hard time transitioning to bigger airplanes and new areas of operations. There was even one guy that mentioned the lack of CPDLC experience for some new-hires. I watched the training captain use CPDLC one time and then like I do with every other new toy, I played around with it in-flight and figured it out. If you have the ability to learn, long-haul/wide-body flying is barely a transition.

I'm a former Part 135 GA aircraft guy, former turbo-prop, former RJ, former A320 and now A330/A340. My most difficult transition was from GA aircraft to the Dash-8. Every other transition was easier than the one before it. Using the HF radio and CPDLC for hours over the water is straightforward. After impacting the ground a few times, I learned to flare at 40’ instead of 20’. The real trick with long-haul flying is learning how to pace yourself in-flight and finding ways to fight off boredom.

forumname

For some airlines, sure. However, in the case of Atlas, not so much. But that's just based on my experience, the experience of those I know, as well as info gathered in the other Atlas thread.

Atlas has interviewed/hired pilots with corporate/domestic freight/RJ backgrounds who don't have any heavy time, nor any oceanic crossings. They've ALSO turned down pilots with said backgrounds.

Atlas has interviewed/hired pilots with heavy/widebody/int'l experience both in the civilian as well as military world. They've ALSO turned down pilots with said backgrounds.

I could be wrong, but I don't think so. I think it's pretty safe to say that the info Atlas requests is used to help tally the candidates overall "score" when selection criteria time comes. As well as the "thanks but no thanks" letters get mailed.

dundem

forumname,

I can't argue with your assessment of Atlas as you're on the inside.

However, the fact that Atlas asks about specific experience on the PAQ means that some consideration is given to your background. They even have a list of types that you can check if you've flown the type.

I think it is a plus that they hire from all over the spectrum, but it seems to me that they may have a preference for certain experience.

I believe that my post also applies to many other airlines and not just Atlas.

Thanks for your input.

forumname

Indeed, but Southwest ALSO have a multitude of aircraft types to check off, including the space shuttle. Also, the Atlas PAQ form ALSO has helo types. Now there's a reason they are on there, but those types of aircraft are slightly contrary to their type of flying.

744driver

Guys, there is more to Ocean Crossings than just the crossing and navigation checks...My opinion is that Atlas is using this type of question to establish the candidate's experience at the 1,001 things to consider when you are away from radar coverage, English-speaking controllers, unfamiliar weather systems, etc.

742Dash

+1.

I have flown with guys with excellent long haul resumes, at least on paper, whose only concern on the crossing seemed to be the catering. Give me a motivated, mentally engaged FO and I don't care what he was flying before. Airmanship is airmanship, and it can be learned in many ways. On the other hand there are heavy jet pilots out there with 1 hour of experiance several thousand times over.

Mink

Can I borrow that?

jetgo166

From my thousands of hours over Asia, let me tell you that you cannot understand the international flying, UNLESS YOU HAVE THOUSANDS OF HOURS OVER ASIA! Not only Asia, but S. America, Africa, Oceania, etc. What works in our great country, does not work overseas. You must be able to understand how these third world air traffic controllers operate. Yes, hopefully an f/o will learn how to handle situational awareness after several years of this type of work, but please do not think that the world wide ACMI business is anything like our domestic operations. I work for a scheduled 121 carrier in the vast Asian continent, and we spit out lots of guys that think things out here should be like the USA. It just doesn't work that way, and anyone thinking that they can hack a job at a major international freight-hauler should consider my advice. I personally work for a passenger carrier, you must carry a serious sense of humor to even show up to work. On the other hand, I love this work, and it pays lots of money. Nuff said.