I'm sure there's been other posts on this but with the way the industry is currently I thought I'd get updated opinions.
So given the options for your first break into the industry right seat, which would be the better time to have...?
We'll say PC-12 vs. Navajo
Single Turbine vs. Multi Piston
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog
-
corporate joe
- Rank 8
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 8:18 am
- Location: the coast
My vote is take the turbine. This is my personal opinion, and is only a guess, but I think the trend of new personal single engine jets coming out will continue, and pave the way for the future. One engine means lower operating costs, lower fuel dependency and lower pollution and new technology has made single engine planes a possibility (just look at how many there are now, vs 10 years ago. Immagine in another 10 years...)
In the past, planes had more engines (because they were unreliable, and not powerful enough). But as technology advanced so did the engines and we moved from 8 to 4, then to 2 and someday we will break the psychological barrier and 1 engine will be accepted. It's only a matter of time before technology combined with economy (constant fuel price increase) makes them an "acceptable" risk
That's why, I think the employer of the future will look at the type of engine you were flying, rather than the number that were attached to the fuselage/wings.
Add to that the glass cockpit the pilatus most likely has and the navajo most likely doesn't, and the choice is a no brainer. The future is digital glass and efficiency.
In the past, planes had more engines (because they were unreliable, and not powerful enough). But as technology advanced so did the engines and we moved from 8 to 4, then to 2 and someday we will break the psychological barrier and 1 engine will be accepted. It's only a matter of time before technology combined with economy (constant fuel price increase) makes them an "acceptable" risk
That's why, I think the employer of the future will look at the type of engine you were flying, rather than the number that were attached to the fuselage/wings.
Add to that the glass cockpit the pilatus most likely has and the navajo most likely doesn't, and the choice is a no brainer. The future is digital glass and efficiency.
The 3 most important things to remember when you're old:
1) Never pass an opportunity to use a washroom
2) Never waste a hard on
3) Never trust a fart
John Mayer
1) Never pass an opportunity to use a washroom
2) Never waste a hard on
3) Never trust a fart
John Mayer
-
wallypilot
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1646
- Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:59 pm
- Location: The Best Coast
It's not as simple as that. Alot would depend on the company, since there are such a wide variety of PC12 and Navajo operators.
The PC12 is a great learning environment for the IFR world. It's a great introduction because it can get into so many different environments. It can cruise in the flight levels, it can get into short northern strips, and it's pressurized.
The Navajo is a great machine for learning how to manage turbo charged piston engines, and obviously for learning how to handle a twin, often in solid IFR environment, low down, where the world is less forgiving.
However, I would say in the current state of the industry, a PC12 will get you to twin turbo prop captain faster than a Navajo. Once you're left seat in a beech/jetstream/metro, it doesn't really matter what you did before that(within reason of course). So, from what I have seen of my friends making their way through their careers, the ones that went PC12 FO are way further ahead than the ones that went Navajo FO. Although the Navajo guys got to stay in their home towns.
Just my 2 cents from what I have seen....it's not my personal experience.
wp
The PC12 is a great learning environment for the IFR world. It's a great introduction because it can get into so many different environments. It can cruise in the flight levels, it can get into short northern strips, and it's pressurized.
The Navajo is a great machine for learning how to manage turbo charged piston engines, and obviously for learning how to handle a twin, often in solid IFR environment, low down, where the world is less forgiving.
However, I would say in the current state of the industry, a PC12 will get you to twin turbo prop captain faster than a Navajo. Once you're left seat in a beech/jetstream/metro, it doesn't really matter what you did before that(within reason of course). So, from what I have seen of my friends making their way through their careers, the ones that went PC12 FO are way further ahead than the ones that went Navajo FO. Although the Navajo guys got to stay in their home towns.
Just my 2 cents from what I have seen....it's not my personal experience.
wp
What Wally said. Also a lot of operators with Navajos have a whole bunch of Navajo's. A lot of operators have PC12's, King Air's, 1900's, etc. Once you're in, you're in...see where I'm going with this.
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Exactly.cyyz wrote:What'll get you to the capt-n's seat the fastest? That's what it's all about.
I'd say most navajo jobs would get you left seat faster.
As for the comment about navajo operators not operating multi-turbine equipment - What are you smoking?
Sure there are LOTS of PA31s out there but off the top of my head in Alberta alone - Sunwest, North Cariboo, Airco, Bar XH, Air Mikisew, Airborne Energy, Alberta Central, Alta Flights, Slave Air and Swanberg all run Navajos AND have turbo-props, and in most cases +12500 machines and jets.
Considering insurance - many insurers require "X" hours turbine to insure on "whatever" Aircraft. I came across the problem with lots of time on Navajo, and moving into a King Air (in the same company). The insurance company wouldn't consider me because I didn't have the turbine. They didn't care how many turbine engines, plain and simple. So for insurance purposes I would say in general PC-12 would be better.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
The days of the piston engine airplanes are coming to an end, turbines are so much more reliable and easier to operate and fix...more expensive though.
As far as an instrument panel goes, the days of mechanical instruments are already gone....
...so all you new people wishing to become commercial pilots forget piston engines and mechanical instruments.....
..get time in pressurized turbines with glass cockpits.
I'm putting a glass instrument panel in my homebuilt Cub clone and if this Greek gig I'm involved in now turns out the way I hope it does I'm going to put a turbine in the Cub..
Cat
As far as an instrument panel goes, the days of mechanical instruments are already gone....
...so all you new people wishing to become commercial pilots forget piston engines and mechanical instruments.....
..get time in pressurized turbines with glass cockpits.
I'm putting a glass instrument panel in my homebuilt Cub clone and if this Greek gig I'm involved in now turns out the way I hope it does I'm going to put a turbine in the Cub..
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Yeah Altiplano, they have ONE or TWO navajos each. So each company hires one dude. Now how about the 100 guys looking for jobs right now.
Just throwing this out there. We have ten Pilatus and we're looking for a whole bunch of crews for them as are most of the other operators in the area. People who started with us as little as two months ago are on bigger machines already. And by the way, all the time they are getting is turbine and efis.
Just throwing this out there. We have ten Pilatus and we're looking for a whole bunch of crews for them as are most of the other operators in the area. People who started with us as little as two months ago are on bigger machines already. And by the way, all the time they are getting is turbine and efis.
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
bob sacamano
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1680
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:26 am
- Location: I'm not in Kansas anymore
They are talking about pc-12's, hence pressurized turbine, without the S. That's where the problem lies, and that's what the purpose of this thread is.Cat Driver wrote:..get time in pressurized turbines with glass cockpits.
Cat
Multi or single.
Personally, I never did the right seat thing until I got into the airliners, and I never did fly a pc-12. I did fly a navajo but it was SPIFR, and at that time, companies were considering me for f/o on the pc-12, so I obviously took the left seat navajo.
It's a tough call, but remember, where will you learn the most? where will you move to the left seat quicker? I personally don't know if one's better than the other. Make a decision, and 5 years down the road, come back and let us know how you made out
Either one, be greatfull you got a flying gig.
Although I have no experience in a PC 12 or Caravan, I do have a lot of single-engine time in addition to the "Ho and the King air plus I have hired pilots, fired pilots and trained pilot, and in my humble opinion, it is less the type of airplane one flies but rather the type of flying one does. Does a person have "quality" time or has one done the same trip one thousand times. Unfortunately, the insurance companies are not chief pilots nor are they former chief pilots so all they know is numbers in neat columns. One factor is the type of training and proficiency checks a pilot has and the AIR regs are so full of holes that many operators go with one "pilot" and a warm body in the other seat. I have seen it even in some of our most prestigious training organizations. Even the almighty Gulfstream chariots are designed for a pilot and a warm body. But I also have to agree completly with Cat Driver, piston engines and steam driven instrumentation are quickly becoming like the dodo bird.
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
How true:it is less the type of airplane one flies but rather the type of flying one does. Does a person have "quality" time or has one done the same trip one thousand times.
There is a vast difference between 500 hours crop dusting and 500 hours watching an autopilot fly an airplane.
And there can also a be vast difference between individual pilots even though they have done the same type of flying.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Not meeting contrail requirements is a plus in my eyes. Your career will progress far quicker if you fly in places where your ability sets your advancement rather than some foolish insurance requirement.
As a side note, I find it absolutely hilarious that contrail lowered their minimums. I'd love to know what makes guys who weren't safe to fly rig pigs around last year safe now that there's not as many pilots.
As a side note, I find it absolutely hilarious that contrail lowered their minimums. I'd love to know what makes guys who weren't safe to fly rig pigs around last year safe now that there's not as many pilots.
Just rereading the original post and so everyones clear, he's talking about right seat in both cases, so it's not multi-PIC in question.
As far as contrail goes it's the same reason that companies can now insure Ho drivers with only 1500 hours total (or maybe less) and no Mpic time, rather than that stupid 500MPIC thing they use to have. 'Cause there's nobody left to fly them!!!
Having flown both the 12 and the Ho I would take the PC12 any day of the week!
As far as contrail goes it's the same reason that companies can now insure Ho drivers with only 1500 hours total (or maybe less) and no Mpic time, rather than that stupid 500MPIC thing they use to have. 'Cause there's nobody left to fly them!!!
Having flown both the 12 and the Ho I would take the PC12 any day of the week!
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
OK - so I'm not sure if I follow you here. Is the issue regarding the number of jobs out there? In which case I'd venture a guess that there are more PA31s in Canada than PC12s hence more PA31 jobs likely up for grabs.Cap'n P8 wrote:Yeah Altiplano, they have ONE or TWO navajos each. So each company hires one dude. Now how about the 100 guys looking for jobs right now.
Just throwing this out there. We have ten Pilatus and we're looking for a whole bunch of crews for them as are most of the other operators in the area. People who started with us as little as two months ago are on bigger machines already. And by the way, all the time they are getting is turbine and efis.
How long to left seat in a PC12 or one of the multi-turbines at your company if someone is hired with low time? You mention multi-pic (or at least pic) is not the issue, but it is, unless you want to sit right seat your whole career...
Don't get me wrong the PC12 is a more capable machine in many aspects and certainly a more technologically advanced machine than a PA31 - you will get you into a whole different class of experiences, BUT how long until you are getting PIC? Which I think is the main class of experience that employers are looking for if you want to progress in this business...
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Lets look at this in another way:
If we seperate the type of flying one aspires to the best point of seperation would be below or above FL180.
With that in mind the modern single engine turbine powered device wins hands down for the learning curve compared to the non pressurized piston pounding device..
With sufficient exposure to the environment above FL180 in a modern turbine glass cockpit single engine device the change over to flying with more engines bolted to the device is a no brainer.
Then again maybe I'm just an old has been who can not see the future?
If we seperate the type of flying one aspires to the best point of seperation would be below or above FL180.
With that in mind the modern single engine turbine powered device wins hands down for the learning curve compared to the non pressurized piston pounding device..
With sufficient exposure to the environment above FL180 in a modern turbine glass cockpit single engine device the change over to flying with more engines bolted to the device is a no brainer.
Then again maybe I'm just an old has been who can not see the future?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Oh I don't know, I would certainly think that at present less than two years. What I implied with in my post, is that for the most part companies that operate PC12's generally operate a lot of them...as well as operating a lot of bigger stuff as well, usually all turbine.
The way it works here, after right seat in the 12, they either go captain on the Caravan, or right seat in a 1900 or 748. After that they can pretty much go where they want in the company. Multi-pic isn't a huge deal to go captain on a twin here either. Experience is.
I had about 250 total multi when I went captain on the 1900 here, the guy after me had 50. Granted we both had over 4000 hours of single but whatever. The guys that have started here with relatively low time have all progressed rapidly.
We had a few people recently start here at the 1000 hour mark right seat in the pilatus and within 2 months they were right seat in the 1900.
The way it works here, after right seat in the 12, they either go captain on the Caravan, or right seat in a 1900 or 748. After that they can pretty much go where they want in the company. Multi-pic isn't a huge deal to go captain on a twin here either. Experience is.
I had about 250 total multi when I went captain on the 1900 here, the guy after me had 50. Granted we both had over 4000 hours of single but whatever. The guys that have started here with relatively low time have all progressed rapidly.
We had a few people recently start here at the 1000 hour mark right seat in the pilatus and within 2 months they were right seat in the 1900.
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
ScudRunner
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3239
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:58 am
How long to left seat in a PC12 or one of the multi-turbines at your company if someone is hired with low time?
At my Company a memo was recently circulated amonst the F/O's that said to write your ATPL's if you have 1000TT and 9 months flying with the company. Basically be ready for the call to go Captain if you are recomended for it.
So alot of guys that worked ramp for less than a year are now flying and after 9 months online doing almost 100 per month should be around the 1000TT mark. (ATPL's written is an insurance thing for Captains)
Of course this is always based on the pilots ability and needs strong recomends from there Captains.
Recently they have also been hireing 1000 hour instructors for right seat for quick upgrade, usally if they are proficient it only takes a few months.
-
tofo
- Rank 6
- Posts: 484
- Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:21 pm
- Location: fired for posting bullshit on avcanada
the future is deffinitly the glass cockpit, Insurance demands that you have multi engine. I'd look to insurance requirments when your low time.
fully loaded on a ho, 12 if an engine fails your going to be landing. I'd rather make that decision from fl250 than 10 000. but the options after 1000 mpic can be spotted in the wj forum asking about this exact topic.
what do you want to do.
better plane now or later?
P.S. does NAC have a MPIC requirment for their King air captians?
fully loaded on a ho, 12 if an engine fails your going to be landing. I'd rather make that decision from fl250 than 10 000. but the options after 1000 mpic can be spotted in the wj forum asking about this exact topic.
what do you want to do.
better plane now or later?
P.S. does NAC have a MPIC requirment for their King air captians?
-
Dark Helmet
- Rank 6
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 6:59 pm
Bingo. rightt there. Reearch the companies offering you the job. Fleet, advancement, conditions, etc. Never mind the airplanes. If company A has PC-12, king Airs, B1900's, etc, and has hired a ton of guys due to people leaving for better things. and Company B only has Navajo's, and has hired a handfull of guys. Then the choice is obvious. As for experience they are both good to have. You kinda need both (Turbine and Multi) to move up in the industry.wallypilot wrote:It's not as simple as that. Alot would depend on the company, since there are such a wide variety of PC12 and Navajo operators.
Good luck
I think the fact that there is no consensus on this says a lot.
Personally I would take the PC12 because companies that operate them have to fly the bag off them in order to make the payments.
Everyone I know that flew them made a lot of hours very shortly.
Although multi pic is gold there are drawbacks to the 'ho.
-Unpressurised: you are down in the crap most of the day.
-Someone else mentioned the crappy avionics.
-Managing a turbocharged engine is a pain; especially going into a busy controlled airport where one guy is telling you to slow down and the next says speed up. Give me a turbine anyday.
Single engine time is not really the drawback it used to be. There is a guy at my company that has only PC12 time (and some right seat 1900) and he just had an inteview with AC.
I have lots of 'Ho time.
Personally I would take the PC12 because companies that operate them have to fly the bag off them in order to make the payments.
Everyone I know that flew them made a lot of hours very shortly.
Although multi pic is gold there are drawbacks to the 'ho.
-Unpressurised: you are down in the crap most of the day.
-Someone else mentioned the crappy avionics.
-Managing a turbocharged engine is a pain; especially going into a busy controlled airport where one guy is telling you to slow down and the next says speed up. Give me a turbine anyday.
Single engine time is not really the drawback it used to be. There is a guy at my company that has only PC12 time (and some right seat 1900) and he just had an inteview with AC.
I have lots of 'Ho time.
