PC12 UPGRADES TO BIGGER MACHINES

[Lost Lake]

I'm just curious about single engine pilots on PC12's who are looking to move on to bigger equipment. I see ad's where a pilot must have 5,000 hr total, so much command time and 1,500 MPIC hr. Will companies consider SPIC in a multi crew, EFIS environment equivalent? Isn't the real question for hiring companies, captain experience in multi-crew environments. I would think a captain with 1,000 hr experience on a pc-12 would rank higher than someone who has 1,000 in a 414 or ho, and equivalent to a cptn on a King Air.

[polar one]

first of all, the requirement might be an insurance requirement.
secondly, I expect they will have specifically qualified people apply so it will not be necessary to apply an equivlancy test.

which brings me to the question.. how did you come to rate the aircraft..time on a 404/pa 31 is not as valuable as time on a PC 12? PC 12 time is equivalent to king air time?
What makes you think so?

The fact is , with the type of experience you are using as an example, unless you get a resume from paper-whipping willie, the flying skills brought to the table are pretty much understandable. Employers, at least the good ones who are not looking for a warm body to fill the seat as cheaply as possible, are looking for character, maturity, honesty, and the ability to get along with others.

Unless you have really good backup for your determination of time quality, it might indicate an attiude that is not hiring friendly...just saying is all...

On the plus side, I would not send them a resume, but send an email indicating you have read the requirements and while you do not have the required multi time, you do have xxxxx hours on a PC 12, and ask them if they would consider resume....You might be surprised that they will. And, for what it is worth, I would not share with them your insight on how PC12 time is better than ho or Cessna twin time...Some CPs have thousands of hours on ho's and found them just fine as an experience platform.

good luck

goo

[teacher]

Less and less is MPIC a requirement these days as single engine turbine aircraft have become more and more widely used. I've known lots of folks to go from a PC12 to anything from a corporate jet to a 747. It never hurts to send in your resume, show interest and see where it leads you.

[jjj]

My two cents,

I rank the PC12 driver last behind the King Air and Navajo bunch.

I put more faith in a pilot that has a lot of experience without the advantage of all the magic and little cartoons that point to exactly where the runway of intended landing is.

I can put a Ho driver in a PC12 with a little training and a nicely ironed shirt and he'll do just fine. Putting a PC12 pilot into a Ho would take a little more work because he has to get used to getting along without the magic.

Unless you're starting to get long in the tooth, the transition into and advanced cockpit is less difficult than the transition out.


JJJ

[Brown Bear]

My time is better,
Mine is bigger.
Flight time equals an increase in knowledge. It's like a pissing match between tail wheel drivers and tricycle drivers. Sorry Cat Driver.
It's all about airmanship, and situational awareness.
Ho vs. PC12? It's a toss up. Other than in training...how may times have YOU brought it home with one feathered?
Time is time.
If I were operating 777's, I'd take the PC12 driver over the 'ho guy.
Toss the resume out there. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[polar one]

As it is two to one, the one being me, advising to toss the old resume in, I have to expand on my advice.

There are, in my opinion, only two reasons someone would send in a resume when they dont meet the minimu requirements set out in the ad.
1. they can not read and understand what is being asked for, or
2. they have such little respect for the employer they dont give a darn what the employer wants..its all about what they want.

So, to once again, add my advice. Send an email. Tell them you have read and understood the requirements, but you have xxxxx. hrs on a PC 12, and are hoping that would be the equivalent, and would they accept your resume.

shows
1. you can read and understand the requirments, and
2. it shows you respect their needs/wants, but are hoping they will give you a look.

I can not speak for all employers, but sending in a resume when you dont meet the stated requirements is on pretty much the same level...as phoning when it states please do not phone. companies like pilots who can read and understand instructions and will be part of the company team rather than thinking only about their own needs.

Lots of resumes in the "never hire" file where I work.

just my opinion though. best of luck whatever path you choose.

[PanEuropean]

Unless you're starting to get long in the tooth, the transition into and advanced cockpit is less difficult than the transition out.

I'm not so sure you are correct - this because I doubt that you are familiar with the FMS on the PC-12E (the newest version of the PC-12, with the Apex Avionics).

The FMS has the same functionality and is based on the same engine (the same software and hardware) as the FMS in the Gulfstream 450, 500, and 550, as well as the newer Falcons (7X et al).

I just finished teaching an Apex FMS course this week to a group of very experienced, very high time pilots, and I assure you, it is not a simple subject. Not overwhelming, but not simple either. If you are transitioning from a Gulfstream or Falcon to the new PC-12, it's a snap, you know 99% of it already. Likewise, if you are going from a PC-12E (or a Twin Otter Series 400 for that matter) to a Gulfstream or Falcon, you will already know how the FMS works.

Michael

[jjj]

PanEuropean,

I take nothing away from what you are trying to say - nor do I necessarily disagree.

As easy as the magic makes things when you have a proper understanding - I've also seen the magic cause a lot of troubles.

Understanding the avionics suites you mentioned are more advanced than what you see on most big airliners and yes - it is no small feet mastering it.

To re-express my 2 points:

1 - I value a pilot that has a fair amount of experience with steam before his logbook thickens up to much. I - like you - can then show them the moves with the magic. I'm not some old dog but I feel that something is lost when a pilot has to depend on too much FMS etc. I don't even like the idea of pilots turning on a GPS until after they've completed their multi engine training.

2- When I mentioned transitioning - I was suggesting that it's more difficult for a PC12 pilot to move back into a steam world than vice versa. In one case you are asking someone to do a job and adding tools while in the other case you are taking away some very cherished tools. Despite the steep learning curve into the newest and best like you suggested, the PC12 driver moving back down into a HO will have a tougher time doing the same job with much less.

If I was doing the hiring, that is how I would rate the experience - HO wins over PC12. However, if I was doing the hiring then the PC12 guy could trump the 'HO driver with good character and a proper attitude.

Respectfully,

JJJ

[ILS26_Steep]

We have a lot of Captains from PC12's who have gotten a job at Porter and within a year and a bit are now Captain on the Q400. So, if you ask me, flying skills are flying skills. Secondly, the PC12 guy can probably figure out the avionics of the Q400 faster than the King Air or Ho driver. I came from a old steam driven gauge twin turbine to the Q400 and frankly had a little more difficulty figuring out the FMS, PFD scan, MFD, ARCDU, AHRS, etc. etc... than a PC12 driver does!

My two cents. If you got PIC on a PC12, your frankly just as qualified!

[Slats]

Shouldn't flying ability trump computer operating ability?

[Meatservo]

I don't think it really matters one way or the other. I guess if I was torn between a 1000-hr Navajo pilot and a 1000-hr Pilatus pilot, I'd try to figure out which one of them was most likely to keep his mouth shut and pay attention in groundschool, and hire that guy.

Anyway, in the original question, it's not clear which "bigger machines" we're talking about. There's a lot more flying around out there than just the ones that fly with keyboards and TV screens.

[The Hammer]

70% of my contracts require 500 MPIC as per customer- you lose every time PC-12 driver. The customer is always right.

[2.5milefinal]

I am going to guess that Thats the insurance company's demanding the 500 hrs.
To the new pilots out there. Get PIC time and try and get some twin turbine PIC.
Rightly or wrongly you need twin PIC time on your resume.
I agree with PanEuropean. I have seen guys with huge time have huge problems with the
new stuff, like the 12NG.

[Lurch]

You guys are putting too much emphases on electronics. With a few hours anybody can learn FMS, PFDs, and MFDs.

What's getting forgotten here is the mission both planes will be performing. The Ho driver is going to have a bigger foundation and well rounded experience then the PC12 driver.

The Ho is a harder plane to fly not due to the systems but where and how the plane flies. The PC12 gets to fly above the weather, fully automated and has little to no engine management where as the Ho driver is down in the weather dealing with 2 piston pounders that need a lot of attention and planning ahead, no or very basic autopilot, and probably not the best avionics. A lot of the Hos I know don't even have a GPS, or at least a certified one.

I've flown Pressurized known ice, un-pressurized known ice and un-pressurized Not known ice planes, on the same mission and the later is by far the hardest. Not because of the speed or systems but because the PDM is ten times harder and you better know your stuff. The Pressurised Known ice is so much easier to fly even though I fly it in worse weather then the others, only because I have a lot more options available to me. One of the hardest decisions involved in flying is when not to go, this gets easier with the level of aircraft/systems involved.

Now as to which one to hire, If insurance doesn't set the restriction, and their personalities are similar I'd hire the Ho driver everyday of the week.

Lurch

[Floyd]

I think all and all it depends on who is doing the hiring and what kind of operation it is for.
Lurch - by your rationale a PC-12 driver would be a better hire than a Q-400, 777, Lear, or any other glass, multi AC because they require less PDM because they don't have to worry about engine failures. So you are ranking a Ho driver above any other pilot. Plus you probably shouldn't be flying a plane in icing if it isn't rated for it, that's just stupid.

[Lurch]

by your rationale a PC-12 driver would be a better hire than a Q-400, 777, Lear, or any other glass, multi AC because they require less PDM because they don't have to worry about engine failures. So you are ranking a Ho driver above any other pilot. Plus you probably shouldn't be flying a plane in icing if it isn't rated for it, that's just stupid.

What? where did this you get this from?

Chances are the 777 or lear pilot flew a Ho or simular earlier in their career and already have that foundation. The discussion got to a Ho pilot versus a PC12 pilot for a job in a higher aircraft, not a Ho pilot versus at 777 pilot

Nowhere did I say I flew a plane not rated for icing into ice. Just that these are harder to fly because you have to stay out of it. Try flying IFR in the winter in these planes and let me know how your season goes, and how much you learned.

Lurch

[Lost Lake]

Let me qualify my original question. A pilot has 5,000 hr on a variety of single engine and multi engine aircraft. He(she) has no MPIC but has a lot of experience in a lot of different environments. Due to fate, this individual gets his first 2 crew captain job on a PC-12. The pilot has more experience that most. This is not a discussion about Ho drivers busting bad weather in remote areas. This is about a high time ATPL pilot, turbine experience, multi crew experience looking to move up. Lots of openings that want a pilot to have multi time. Will companies penalize a pilot who has proved he can fly, in a single engine (captain) or 2 crew environment (f/o)?

[bcflyer]

If its an insurance requirement you're buggered. Plain and simple. If its not, then they'll hire the pilot they think will be the best employee. I've flown alot of different aircraft in alot of different situations and flying turbine powered, pressurized, EFIS and FMS equipped aircraft is about the easiest job out there.

You can teach anyone to fly any kind of aircraft. You can't teach everyone to be a good employee!!

[teacher]

If its an insurance requirement you're buggered. Plain and simple. If its not, then they'll hire the pilot they think will be the best employee. I've flown alot of different aircraft in alot of different situations and flying turbine powered, pressurized, EFIS and FMS equipped aircraft is about the easiest job out there.

You can teach anyone to fly any kind of aircraft. You can't teach everyone to be a good employee!!

+1!!!!!!!!!

Lets face it, we all send out 100s of resumes and HOPE one company calls to interview you. We pilots rarely pick our jobs, they pick us. I flew a PC12, I know guys that have flown them and twin turboprops and there is NO difference. If you flew glass and FMS and you get a job flying glass and FMS YES your training will be easier. Likewise if you flew steam instruments and you get another job flying steam well guess what ? The transistion in either direction just takes a little more training and time.

Let's all put our "johnsons" back in our pants eh

[PanEuropean]

Would someone please tell me what the heck a 'Ho' is? Is this some kind of aircraft?

Michael

[cdnpilot77]

Would someone please tell me what the heck a 'Ho' is? Is this some kind of aircraft?

Michael

 
Ho 1 The symbol for the element holmium.

Ho 2. Bible Hosea

ho 1  (h). Used to express surprise or joy, to attract attention to something sighted, or to urge onward: Land ho! Westward ho!

ho 2  (h) n. pl. hos Slang A prostitute.
[African American Vernacular English, alteration of whore.]

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Also slang for a Navajo, twin engine aeroplane

[trey kule]

bcflyer wrote:

You can teach anyone to fly any kind of aircraft. You can't teach everyone to be a good employee!!

Truer words were never written.

My origianl comments were simply intended to convey the message that one should not make the assumption that one type of flying is better, or worse, than another when applying for a job.

but I could not agree more with BC flyer. flying skills can be learned. And most companies make hiring decision based on meeting the minimum aviation experience and qualifications, and then on other factor that they, or their customers need/want.

[Hawkerflyer]

Computers are the future people. I watched many senior guys drop out of the Falcon Easy program because of there lack of understanding and willingness to learn the Easy system.
The fact is most jets are glass these days. I flew a PC12 back in the day and went straight to a multi engine jet glass cockpit. I would prefer PC12 time over ho time but the individual also makes the difference for the hire.

[Meatservo]

Computers are the future people. I watched many senior guys drop out of the Falcon Easy program because of there lack of understanding and willingness to learn the Easy system...

By this, do you mean to say that computers are the "people" of the future, as in: "computers will someday be self-aware, and will inevitably enslave and ultimately do away with their flesh-and-blood predecessors?

Or do you mean to say that computers represent the way we, the people of today, are accomplishing more and more of our goals, i.e. flying aeroplanes, meeting members of the opposite sex, and raising our children?

It is to be hoped that our electronic masters/servants (as the case may be) in your version of the future will be able to take a better part in helping us express ourselves using spelling and grammar, and thereby avoid potentially disastrous misunderstandings like this one!

[Hawkerflyer]

Computers are the future people. I watched many senior guys drop out of the Falcon Easy program because of there lack of understanding and willingness to learn the Easy system...

By this, do you mean to say that computers are the "people" of the future, as in: "computers will someday be self-aware, and will inevitably enslave and ultimately do away with their flesh-and-blood predecessors?

Or do you mean to say that computers represent the way we, the people of today, are accomplishing more and more of our goals, i.e. flying aeroplanes, meeting members of the opposite sex, and raising our children?

It is to be hoped that our electronic masters/servants (as the case may be) in your version of the future will be able to take a better part in helping us express ourselves using spelling and grammar, and thereby avoid potentially disastrous misunderstandings like this one!

I can now sleep easy knowing a fellow such as yourself is prowling AvCanada to correct my grammar mistakes. I thank you good sir!!
PS get a life!