Rise air

[g4m8l3r91]

Just wondering if Rise Air offers PICUS for the king air fleet in La Ronge

[spruceair]

No. That being said, my understanding is that PICUS can only be attained on a Large Aircraft, being anything over 12,500lbs. So no King Air 200 operator will offer PICUS.

Better option would be to stick around and upgrade to the left seat of the King Air at 1500 hours. No ATPL required, and you’ll get some valuable experience from that will serve you well later in your career.

[DeathPencil]

No. That being said, my understanding is that PICUS can only be attained on a Large Aircraft, being anything over 12,500lbs. So no King Air 200 operator will offer PICUS.

Better option would be to stick around and upgrade to the left seat of the King Air at 1500 hours. No ATPL required, and you’ll get some valuable experience from that will serve you well later in your career.

Hey! You seem to know a thing or two about Rise Air. Can you shoot me a PM, got some questions about their Medevac side

[cdnavater]

It’s really, really, really sad that PICUS seems to be replacing ACTUAL PIC!
FFS, this really drives me nuts, go fly right seat and transition to the left seat of a 703 aircraft, get some actual experience and then you won’t need PICUS when you get to the airline level.
I would fully and wholeheartedly support the 1500 hour rule for 705!

[daedalusx]

It’s really, really, really sad that PICUS seems to be replacing ACTUAL PIC!
FFS, this really drives me nuts, go fly right seat and transition to the left seat of a 703 aircraft, get some actual experience and then you won’t need PICUS when you get to the airline level.
I would fully and wholeheartedly support the 1500 hour rule for 705!

705 PICUS is the biggest scam of Canadian air regulation. A FO with not even 500 hours on type/1000tt sitting next to a 20,000 hours line indoc trainer and according to transport Canada, the cadet is the pilot in command as if that was truly the case.
Give me a break. What a joke.

The FO doesn’t sit in the left seat or taxi or land on a narrow runway, etc. It also specifically says that the LTC delegates the PIC duties to the FO but … is ultimately in command of the flight. Well then who’s really in charge of decision making ?

I’d probably be a little less critical if the candidate had to pass a left seat PPC to the capt standards and actually operated from the left seat under supervision from a LTC - then I guess you could argue that he’s a PIC under supervision. But simply a first officer with some extra task of making sure the flight plan fuel is adequate, the MELs are complied with and the logbooks properly filled doesn’t make someone a PIC.

[cdnavater]

It’s really, really, really sad that PICUS seems to be replacing ACTUAL PIC!
FFS, this really drives me nuts, go fly right seat and transition to the left seat of a 703 aircraft, get some actual experience and then you won’t need PICUS when you get to the airline level.
I would fully and wholeheartedly support the 1500 hour rule for 705!

705 PICUS is the biggest scam of Canadian air regulation. A FO with not even 500 hours on type/1000tt sitting next to a 20,000 hours line indoc trainer and according to transport Canada, the cadet is the pilot in command as if that was truly the case.
Give me a break. What a joke.

The FO doesn’t sit in the left seat or taxi or land on a narrow runway, etc. It also specifically says that the LTC delegates the PIC duties to the FO but … is ultimately in command of the flight. Well then who’s really in charge of decision making ?

I’d probably be a little less critical if the candidate had to pass a left seat PPC to the capt standards and actually operated from the left seat under supervision from a LTC - then I guess you could argue that he’s a PIC under supervision. But simply a first officer with some extra task of making sure the flight plan fuel is adequate, the MELs are complied with and the logbooks properly filled doesn’t make someone a PIC.

That’s it, nail on the head, “to Captain standards”, maybe in order to be eligible for PICUS, you have to pass two PPCs to Captain standards. From your seat but held to Captain standards, at Jazz a Captain is allowed two 2 for any assessment, FOs are allowed 5 before automatic failure.
So until you can pass a PPC with only two 2s, you can’t apply for PICUS!
I with you though, I think it’s BS and shouldn’t exist but at least make it less accessible!

[goingnowherefast]

If PIC and PICUS is about decision making, why are we considering the PPC? That level of standard should be expected, and maybe just train to standard. Demonstrating the standard in a PPC to TC is QC, but serves no other purpose.

I'd argue a LOFT type scenarios and decision making training would be more appropriate to a PICUS candidate.

[flyinhigh]

It’s really, really, really sad that PICUS seems to be replacing ACTUAL PIC!
FFS, this really drives me nuts, go fly right seat and transition to the left seat of a 703 aircraft, get some actual experience and then you won’t need PICUS when you get to the airline level.
I would fully and wholeheartedly support the 1500 hour rule for 705!

705 PICUS is the biggest scam of Canadian air regulation. A FO with not even 500 hours on type/1000tt sitting next to a 20,000 hours line indoc trainer and according to transport Canada, the cadet is the pilot in command as if that was truly the case.
Give me a break. What a joke.

The FO doesn’t sit in the left seat or taxi or land on a narrow runway, etc. It also specifically says that the LTC delegates the PIC duties to the FO but … is ultimately in command of the flight. Well then who’s really in charge of decision making ?

I’d probably be a little less critical if the candidate had to pass a left seat PPC to the capt standards and actually operated from the left seat under supervision from a LTC - then I guess you could argue that he’s a PIC under supervision. But simply a first officer with some extra task of making sure the flight plan fuel is adequate, the MELs are complied with and the logbooks properly filled doesn’t make someone a PIC.

That’s it, nail on the head, “to Captain standards”, maybe in order to be eligible for PICUS, you have to pass two PPCs to Captain standards. From your seat but held to Captain standards, at Jazz a Captain is allowed two 2 for any assessment, FOs are allowed 5 before automatic failure.
So until you can pass a PPC with only two 2s, you can’t apply for PICUS!
I with you though, I think it’s BS and shouldn’t exist but at least make it less accessible!

It’s not a Jazz standard that Captains are only allowed 2 2’s. That’s a TC standard.

Scares me that an individual is asking about PICUS on a 703 machine. Just upgrade and get real PIC.

[daedalusx]

If PIC and PICUS is about decision making, why are we considering the PPC? That level of standard should be expected, and maybe just train to standard. Demonstrating the standard in a PPC to TC is QC, but serves no other purpose.

I'd argue a LOFT type scenarios and decision making training would be more appropriate to a PICUS candidate.

Make it both. At Jazz when you upgrade you have a pass a capt assessment LOFT which would be a bit of a helmet fire for your typical lesser experienced FO then you get recommended for the PPC that you’d have to pass with no more than 2 2s.

It’s an already an absolute joke that you can pass a check ride as an FO with 5 2s.

Anyhow it doesn’t matter, it is what it is …

[cdnavater]

705 PICUS is the biggest scam of Canadian air regulation. A FO with not even 500 hours on type/1000tt sitting next to a 20,000 hours line indoc trainer and according to transport Canada, the cadet is the pilot in command as if that was truly the case.
Give me a break. What a joke.

The FO doesn’t sit in the left seat or taxi or land on a narrow runway, etc. It also specifically says that the LTC delegates the PIC duties to the FO but … is ultimately in command of the flight. Well then who’s really in charge of decision making ?

I’d probably be a little less critical if the candidate had to pass a left seat PPC to the capt standards and actually operated from the left seat under supervision from a LTC - then I guess you could argue that he’s a PIC under supervision. But simply a first officer with some extra task of making sure the flight plan fuel is adequate, the MELs are complied with and the logbooks properly filled doesn’t make someone a PIC.

That’s it, nail on the head, “to Captain standards”, maybe in order to be eligible for PICUS, you have to pass two PPCs to Captain standards. From your seat but held to Captain standards, at Jazz a Captain is allowed two 2 for any assessment, FOs are allowed 5 before automatic failure.
So until you can pass a PPC with only two 2s, you can’t apply for PICUS!
I with you though, I think it’s BS and shouldn’t exist but at least make it less accessible!

It’s not a Jazz standard that Captains are only allowed 2 2’s. That’s a TC standard.

Scares me that an individual is asking about PICUS on a 703 machine. Just upgrade and get real PIC.

I had figured it was a T.C standard but wasn’t positive so I didn’t want to say that in case it wasn’t.
As for the poster and 703 PICUS, it almost made me mad but the reality is, this poster is probably trying to figure out if they can sit right seat for a year and still go to the airlines with enough PIC to get the ATPL without renting a 172

[goingnowherefast]

That’s it, nail on the head, “to Captain standards”, maybe in order to be eligible for PICUS, you have to pass two PPCs to Captain standards. From your seat but held to Captain standards, at Jazz a Captain is allowed two 2 for any assessment, FOs are allowed 5 before automatic failure.
So until you can pass a PPC with only two 2s, you can’t apply for PICUS!
I with you though, I think it’s BS and shouldn’t exist but at least make it less accessible!

It’s not a Jazz standard that Captains are only allowed 2 2’s. That’s a TC standard.

Scares me that an individual is asking about PICUS on a 703 machine. Just upgrade and get real PIC.

I had figured it was a T.C standard but wasn’t positive so I didn’t want to say that in case it wasn’t.
As for the poster and 703 PICUS, it almost made me mad but the reality is, this poster is probably trying to figure out if they can sit right seat for a year and still go to the airlines with enough PIC to get the ATPL without renting a 172

Agreed, 703 PICUS is a weird concept. There are no laws stopping a CPL holder from being the actual PIC in a 703 airplane and getting real PIC . Caviet being, I dont know of any 2-crew certified 703 size airplanes, so if there is one, then that's the exception.

I got all my PIC time for my ATPL in the 703 world, some of it single pilot. I also avoided companies with a primary customer requiring a ATPL for 703 captains. That ruled out lots of medevac and Contrails in Alberta. (Is that still a thing out there?)

[digits_]

Then again it is a bit silly that, for example, someone with 4000 hours right seat 737 time can't upgrade on said 737 because he's missing 100 hours C172 PIC time.

[Me262]

Then again it is a bit silly that, for example, someone with 4000 hours right seat 737 time can't upgrade on said 737 because he's missing 100 hours C172 PIC time.

This. cdnavater and daedalusx live in the dinosaur age just like TC. Meanwhile EASA, Asia, Canadian Air Force upgrade the FO's with no more than CPL hours (RCAF with as little as 5-7 PIC time). Having 1000hrs on type right seat will not make you any less skilfull to upgrade because you don't have 50hrs doing circuits and 100hrs doing 25NM "circuits" in a C150 to comply with TC. I also don't see any A320/B737 captains in Europe "sucking" because they got their EASA ATPL with only 100hr "true" PIC hours (CPL requirements)

[goingnowherefast]

Then where do we draw the line? If PICUS is okay in a 737, is it okay in a King Air? What about a Cessna Caravan? A 172?

[digits_]

Then where do we draw the line? If PICUS is okay in a 737, is it okay in a King Air? What about a Cessna Caravan? A 172?

Just drop that requirement. Or drop it if you have 3000 hours for example.

But add the requirement that you need to have 5 landings in the actual airplane on type rating courses when flying paying pax. That I find bonkers.

[cdnavater]

Then again it is a bit silly that, for example, someone with 4000 hours right seat 737 time can't upgrade on said 737 because he's missing 100 hours C172 PIC time.

This. cdnavater and daedalusx live in the dinosaur age just like TC. Meanwhile EASA, Asia, Canadian Air Force upgrade the FO's with no more than CPL hours (RCAF with as little as 5-7 PIC time). Having 1000hrs on type right seat will not make you any less skilfull to upgrade because you don't have 50hrs doing circuits and 100hrs doing 25NM "circuits" in a C150 to comply with TC. I also don't see any A320/B737 captains in Europe "sucking" because they got their EASA ATPL with only 100hr "true" PIC hours (CPL requirements)

I’m not against the 4000 hour FO upgrading at all!
The problem is back when dinosaurs roamed, your FO time counted for half, so if it was all FO time you would need around 3000 hours for the ATPL. The situation we have now is with PICUS, FOs get their ATPL around 1500 and then bid the upgrade when they are NOT ready!
As for military pilots, the selection process and training combined used to double the time, not sure about now but military pilots could get a civilian ATPL with 750 hours total time, I guarantee they don’t pass with five 2s.
If you want to use the PICUS program, your FO time should only count for half or raise the amount of “PIC” needed but something needs to change.
Me262, I’m not of the opinion because I’m stuck in the dark ages, I’m a trainer who sees the results of the new way of doing things!

[digits_]

Then again it is a bit silly that, for example, someone with 4000 hours right seat 737 time can't upgrade on said 737 because he's missing 100 hours C172 PIC time.

This. cdnavater and daedalusx live in the dinosaur age just like TC. Meanwhile EASA, Asia, Canadian Air Force upgrade the FO's with no more than CPL hours (RCAF with as little as 5-7 PIC time). Having 1000hrs on type right seat will not make you any less skilfull to upgrade because you don't have 50hrs doing circuits and 100hrs doing 25NM "circuits" in a C150 to comply with TC. I also don't see any A320/B737 captains in Europe "sucking" because they got their EASA ATPL with only 100hr "true" PIC hours (CPL requirements)

I’m not against the 4000 hour FO upgrading at all!
The problem is back when dinosaurs roamed, your FO time counted for half, so if it was all FO time you would need around 3000 hours for the ATPL. The situation we have now is with PICUS, FOs get their ATPL around 1500 and then bid the upgrade when they are NOT ready!
As for military pilots, the selection process and training combined used to double the time, not sure about now but military pilots could get a civilian ATPL with 750 hours total time, I guarantee they don’t pass with five 2s.
If you want to use the PICUS program, your FO time should only count for half or raise the amount of “PIC” needed but something needs to change.
Me262, I’m not of the opinion because I’m stuck in the dark ages, I’m a trainer who sees the results of the new way of doing things!

The ATPL is a minimum. If your company finds that pilots aren't ready for an upgrade at 1500 hours, then don't upgrade them. Don't make it harder on pilots who *are* ready at 1500 hours just because some are not.

[cdnavater]

This. cdnavater and daedalusx live in the dinosaur age just like TC. Meanwhile EASA, Asia, Canadian Air Force upgrade the FO's with no more than CPL hours (RCAF with as little as 5-7 PIC time). Having 1000hrs on type right seat will not make you any less skilfull to upgrade because you don't have 50hrs doing circuits and 100hrs doing 25NM "circuits" in a C150 to comply with TC. I also don't see any A320/B737 captains in Europe "sucking" because they got their EASA ATPL with only 100hr "true" PIC hours (CPL requirements)

I’m not against the 4000 hour FO upgrading at all!
The problem is back when dinosaurs roamed, your FO time counted for half, so if it was all FO time you would need around 3000 hours for the ATPL. The situation we have now is with PICUS, FOs get their ATPL around 1500 and then bid the upgrade when they are NOT ready!
As for military pilots, the selection process and training combined used to double the time, not sure about now but military pilots could get a civilian ATPL with 750 hours total time, I guarantee they don’t pass with five 2s.
If you want to use the PICUS program, your FO time should only count for half or raise the amount of “PIC” needed but something needs to change.
Me262, I’m not of the opinion because I’m stuck in the dark ages, I’m a trainer who sees the results of the new way of doing things!

The ATPL is a minimum. If your company finds that pilots aren't ready for an upgrade at 1500 hours, then don't upgrade them. Don't make it harder on pilots who *are* ready at 1500 hours just because some are not.

So, you want the companies to restrict pilots to a higher standard(cost) than T.C, good luck with that!
The recent bid memo from the union included a statement about pilots who bid the left seat and subsequently deciding they are not ready to consider this before bidding it. They basically said make sure you are ready before bidding it, otherwise there are potential consequences of pulling out half way through or simply not making it through, of being restricted from another attempt for 24 months.
The problem is and I’ve seen this many times over the years, pilots who are not ready don’t know they are not ready and if you try to tell them that, you are met with attitude and derision, like you don’t know what you’re talking about.
The company would rather train and hope they make it than restrict themselves to a higher standard, some companies have a matrix but I am willing to bet that is an insurance requirement to save cost.
What do you think the ratio of ready to command a 705 aircraft at 1500 hours is versus not ready, my guess is 2 out of ten or less!

[goingnowherefast]

Then where do we draw the line? If PICUS is okay in a 737, is it okay in a King Air? What about a Cessna Caravan? A 172?

Just drop that requirement. Or drop it if you have 3000 hours for example.

But add the requirement that you need to have 5 landings in the actual airplane on type rating courses when flying paying pax. That I find bonkers.

Drop the PIC time requirements for an ATPL, but substitute it with 2-crew aircraft experience? Maybe a this OR that type situation?
500 PIC or 1000 2-crew?

Then what qualifies as 2-crew time? Right seat in a PC-12, or a Dash-8? Any 2-crew operation, or a 2-crew certified airplane?

I'll argue if we're substituting 2-crew time for real PIC time, it needs to be 2-crew certified airplane, with the training standards and expectations that comes with it. Nothing against a PC-12 FO. They're just not given the same quality or quality of training, and the expectations are lower.

I'll agree with this, with the addition of the 1500hr rule. Come to the 705 world with 1500hrs and a CPL. 1000hrs in the right seat, now one qualifies for an ATPL and the upgrade.

[digits_]

So, you want the companies to restrict pilots to a higher standard(cost) than T.C, good luck with that!

Isn't that already happening in the industry? A lot of companies have a hiring or upgrade matrix that's significantly more restrictive than TC's ATPL requirements.

The recent bid memo from the union included a statement about pilots who bid the left seat and subsequently deciding they are not ready to consider this before bidding it. They basically said make sure you are ready before bidding it, otherwise there are potential consequences of pulling out half way through or simply not making it through, of being restricted from another attempt for 24 months.

That principle is fair I suppose, although 24 months might be a bit harsh. Then again, given the FO salaries at most companies, you could consider this failed upgrade course extra training, that might show the FO where their weak spots are. It's not just a bad thing.
Depending on the airline, it might result in the FO who failed the upgrade to quit before the 24 months are up, and try their luck somewhere else.

The problem is and I’ve seen this many times over the years, pilots who are not ready don’t know they are not ready and if you try to tell them that, you are met with attitude and derision, like you don’t know what you’re talking about.
The company would rather train and hope they make it than restrict themselves to a higher standard, some companies have a matrix but I am willing to bet that is an insurance requirement to save cost.

Maybe. Even with the potential consequences, I'm sure some pilots will try to wing it. I don't think that's only because they don't know they aren't ready, but mostly because the FO job at a lot of Canadian airlines sucks, mainly pay wise. I remember this discussion popping up in a Jazz topic a while ago. Even if a failed upgrade attempt would result in getting fired, a lot would still try it as soon as they can. Especially in the current hiring climate where you can quickly find another equally sucky job with 1500 hours. There's some improvements going on in that regard, but it's still all happening very slowly.

If, hypothetically, Jazz had a 'you fail your upgrade and you're out' policy, and AC would have the same policy. Do you think the percentage of 1500 hour pilots attempting the upgrade course would be the same in both companies?

What do you think the ratio of ready to command a 705 aircraft at 1500 hours is versus not ready, my guess is 2 out of ten or less!

Could be. I don't think those 2 should be held back because the other 8 aren't ready yet.

[goldeneagle]

The problem is back when dinosaurs roamed, your FO time counted for half, so if it was all FO time you would need around 3000 hours for the ATPL.

The right seat time counted for half, but, you still need half of the 1500 as PIC, so counting FO time the bare minimum was 750 PIC and 1500 FO. then if you really want to get the youngsters bent out of shape, can you remember when there were 6 exams for the ATPL. Can you imagine the screaming today if they had to do an exam, 100 questions, the only subject was weather.

[khedrei]

The problem is back when dinosaurs roamed, your FO time counted for half, so if it was all FO time you would need around 3000 hours for the ATPL.

The right seat time counted for half, but, you still need half of the 1500 as PIC, so counting FO time the bare minimum was 750 PIC and 1500 FO. then if you really want to get the youngsters bent out of shape, can you remember when there were 6 exams for the ATPL. Can you imagine the screaming today if they had to do an exam, 100 questions, the only subject was weather.

Technically there are 3 exams.

The current SARON/SAMRA exams are 80 questions each and one of them the only subject is weather.

So not 6 exams, but they are still real exams so I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

[careerpilot?]

I'm naive because I'm not in the airlines (yet), so my thoughts may not translate well.

But can't airlines just do what we do in the military - select based on merit?

Sit a board every quarter and go through the FOs that have the highest scores on their last (or last few) PPCs. Rank them, and offer the upgrades to the top performers first, and work down the list if they decide to decline (noone in the military declines, but I ack airlines have seniority to consider and not everyone may want to upgrade).

Once selected, we in the military put them through "PICUS," with a senior standards pilot, but with them making the decisions. Sounds a lot like PICUS. When they are ready, we run their upgrade checkride. Rarely do they not make it through.

Can't airlines do the same? Rank based on their performance, and those who are top performing, if they need PICUS, give it to them, and then upgrade?

[Tbayer2021]

I'm naive because I'm not in the airlines (yet), so my thoughts may not translate well.

But can't airlines just do what we do in the military - select based on merit?

Sit a board every quarter and go through the FOs that have the highest scores on their last (or last few) PPCs. Rank them, and offer the upgrades to the top performers first, and work down the list if they decide to decline (noone in the military declines, but I ack airlines have seniority to consider and not everyone may want to upgrade).

Once selected, we in the military put them through "PICUS," with a senior standards pilot, but with them making the decisions. Sounds a lot like PICUS. When they are ready, we run their upgrade checkride. Rarely do they not make it through.

Can't airlines do the same? Rank based on their performance, and those who are top performing, if they need PICUS, give it to them, and then upgrade?

I think this has the potential to work but it would require some serious union oversight to ensure management isn't taking advantage of it. One only needs to look at how many rampies are kept out of the flight line while the company hires OTS pilots ahead of them. I've even worked at places where those in training departments would wrongly evaluate potential upgrades on the poorer side, to have an excuse for denying them said upgrade. They would do this until they got to their buddy on the list and upgrade them.

I do agree that in a perfect world, it should be strictly merit based and seniority shouldn't play much of a role. But I do think the seniority based system makes it as fair as possible given the realities of life.

[digits_]

I'm naive because I'm not in the airlines (yet), so my thoughts may not translate well.

But can't airlines just do what we do in the military - select based on merit?

Sit a board every quarter and go through the FOs that have the highest scores on their last (or last few) PPCs. Rank them, and offer the upgrades to the top performers first, and work down the list if they decide to decline (noone in the military declines, but I ack airlines have seniority to consider and not everyone may want to upgrade).

Once selected, we in the military put them through "PICUS," with a senior standards pilot, but with them making the decisions. Sounds a lot like PICUS. When they are ready, we run their upgrade checkride. Rarely do they not make it through.

Can't airlines do the same? Rank based on their performance, and those who are top performing, if they need PICUS, give it to them, and then upgrade?

I think this has the potential to work but it would require some serious union oversight to ensure management isn't taking advantage of it. One only needs to look at how many rampies are kept out of the flight line while the company hires OTS pilots ahead of them. I've even worked at places where those in training departments would wrongly evaluate potential upgrades on the poorer side, to have an excuse for denying them said upgrade. They would do this until they got to their buddy on the list and upgrade them.

I do agree that in a perfect world, it should be strictly merit based and seniority shouldn't play much of a role. But I do think the seniority based system makes it as fair as possible given the realities of life.

^--- this, unfortunately.