CRJ or ERJ or Prop?
07-31-2009, 03:48 AM
#32
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: CRJ200, CRJ700, CRJ900, Left Seat
Posts: 71
Stepping Up to A Regional Turboprop or Jet?
If you are stepping up from a single-engine piston or multi- to a regional airline airplane (jet or turboprop), it is all about your preparation before you got there.
If you have learned the basics solidly, both systems and flying, then you should have no trouble taking the next step.
Yeah, a turbo prop's systems and a jet's systems are more complicated but they are just more complex than what you have been flying. It is all based on the same premise.
The flight deck is more complicated but that is because the system's are more complicated.
No matter which airplane you fly, if you take the fact that one has an approach speed of around 140 kts and the airplane you have been flying was 80 kts, the site picture basically looks the same.
As for airplane's flows and procedures, your dedication to learning them and abiding by them is what will make you successful. It seems to be what messes up most people. Arm chair flying is what is going to help you succeed here. Practice, practice, practice.
Finally, different airlines have different training techniques. Some are better than others but whoever you fly for you will have to completely emerse yourself in THEIR training. If you are coming from a different airline, don't compare your new airline to your old school/airline. Remember what you learned but it is a new day, new procedures. Accept it.
Regards,
Jeffrey
P.S. And before you go to ground school, pick up a systems book on the airplane you will be flying and start going over it, but do not go to a school that offers to teach you how to fly that airplane. You will just be wasting your money. Your new company will take care of all your training needs for you. For now, keep your resume, cover letter, logbook, and skills up-to-date.
If you have learned the basics solidly, both systems and flying, then you should have no trouble taking the next step.
Yeah, a turbo prop's systems and a jet's systems are more complicated but they are just more complex than what you have been flying. It is all based on the same premise.
The flight deck is more complicated but that is because the system's are more complicated.
No matter which airplane you fly, if you take the fact that one has an approach speed of around 140 kts and the airplane you have been flying was 80 kts, the site picture basically looks the same.
As for airplane's flows and procedures, your dedication to learning them and abiding by them is what will make you successful. It seems to be what messes up most people. Arm chair flying is what is going to help you succeed here. Practice, practice, practice.
Finally, different airlines have different training techniques. Some are better than others but whoever you fly for you will have to completely emerse yourself in THEIR training. If you are coming from a different airline, don't compare your new airline to your old school/airline. Remember what you learned but it is a new day, new procedures. Accept it.
Regards,
Jeffrey
P.S. And before you go to ground school, pick up a systems book on the airplane you will be flying and start going over it, but do not go to a school that offers to teach you how to fly that airplane. You will just be wasting your money. Your new company will take care of all your training needs for you. For now, keep your resume, cover letter, logbook, and skills up-to-date.
07-31-2009, 04:55 AM
#33
Flying Farmer
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
Posts: 3,160
That is funny, I told all of my students to answer checkride questions like that without being on the verge of being blatantly arrogant to the examiner. Start very small and vague, if he wants more he will ask.
"Tell me about the engine on the 172?" It is a lycoming IO 360.
"Tell me about the engine on the 172?" It is a lycoming IO 360.
07-31-2009, 08:06 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: DHC-8 CA Furloughed
Posts: 305
In this profession we often do not have real control over the equipment that we fly. When expressing a preference, many flying and non-flying factors should be considered. Non-flying factors include the difference between bases, equipment seniority, and schedule of the various types in a company's fleet.
For me, the non flying factors tipped the balance toward the DHC8-200. I also prefer it because I feel that we do a type of flying that is getting harder to find at large regionals. We fly to challenging mountain airports, we execute circling approachs, we fly procedure turns and holding patterns in a non radar environment. These are less common in jet flying.
The Dash provides an opportunity to gain great experience. The avionics are old school. In half of our fleet we must calculate our own crossing restrictions all the time. At a max altitude of FL250, we must dodge thunderstorms enroute that the jets will just go over. Ditto for icing.
A few airlines insist on pure jet experience. If one of those is your target, keep that in mind.
The -200 is a lot of fun to fly. It lands and takes off in very short distances, is comfortable on steep approaches. Oh, and my last three reasons for preferring the Dash; Part 121 jets do not execute the NDB-A at MMGM, they do not land on 04 at KGJT (runway is 10' narrower than wingspan) and they do not land at KTEX.
The Dash Whisperer
For me, the non flying factors tipped the balance toward the DHC8-200. I also prefer it because I feel that we do a type of flying that is getting harder to find at large regionals. We fly to challenging mountain airports, we execute circling approachs, we fly procedure turns and holding patterns in a non radar environment. These are less common in jet flying.
The Dash provides an opportunity to gain great experience. The avionics are old school. In half of our fleet we must calculate our own crossing restrictions all the time. At a max altitude of FL250, we must dodge thunderstorms enroute that the jets will just go over. Ditto for icing.
A few airlines insist on pure jet experience. If one of those is your target, keep that in mind.
The -200 is a lot of fun to fly. It lands and takes off in very short distances, is comfortable on steep approaches. Oh, and my last three reasons for preferring the Dash; Part 121 jets do not execute the NDB-A at MMGM, they do not land on 04 at KGJT (runway is 10' narrower than wingspan) and they do not land at KTEX.
The Dash Whisperer
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
