If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Type Rating
Hello Newsgroup Pilot's
I'm looking to get type rated in a buiseness jet such as CJ Citation Lear or Hawker because of the requirement to be "Jet Typed" for succsessful processing of a pilot application at several airlines or crew leasing agencys. Some have the requirement to be typed in a jet aircraft even when not operating corporate jets in the lower size class. I would appreciate information on training for such type ratings in small schools or under part 61 outside of the big training organisations like Flight safety , Simuflite, Simcom, pan am etc. thanks Ron |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Elmer wrote:
I'm looking to get type rated in a buiseness jet such as CJ Citation Lear or Hawker because of the requirement to be "Jet Typed" for succsessful processing of a pilot application at several airlines or crew leasing agencys. Some have the requirement to be typed in a jet aircraft even when not operating corporate jets in the lower size class. Before you spend money on a type rating make sure that you understand what they're actually looking for. Most companies won't even look at your resume unless you have a type rating AND (emphasis strongly added) actual flying time in type as either SIC or PIC. Just the type rating won't get you anywhere especially if it's in an airplane they don't even operate. Southwest for instance, _requires_ a 737 type for candidates. BUT they also require something like 1000 hrs. Jet PIC. I would recommend to talk to your prospective companies and find out IF a type rating will actually improve your chances of getting hired, and if yes, what kind of type rating would do. Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Jens Krueger" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... Ron Elmer wrote: I'm looking to get type rated in a buiseness jet such as CJ Citation Lear or Hawker because of the requirement to be "Jet Typed" for succsessful processing of a pilot application at several airlines or crew leasing agencys. Some have the requirement to be typed in a jet aircraft even when not operating corporate jets in the lower size class. Before you spend money on a type rating make sure that you understand what they're actually looking for. Most companies won't even look at your resume unless you have a type rating AND (emphasis strongly added) actual flying time in type as either SIC or PIC. Just the type rating won't get you anywhere especially if it's in an airplane they don't even operate. Southwest for instance, _requires_ a 737 type for candidates. BUT they also require something like 1000 hrs. Jet PIC. I would recommend to talk to your prospective companies and find out IF a type rating will actually improve your chances of getting hired, and if yes, what kind of type rating would do. Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. Hello Jens, i do reserch for jobs since my professional flying career started 4 yars ago. You are sure to check for what companys are actually looking for. Most of them look for rated pilots in the aircraft they operate. My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Ron |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Elmer wrote:
My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
When I got my first type rating in a jet, it HAD to be done in an airplane.
I don't know if that has changed. But my class was going to go for 5 days. At the last minute United Airlines threw in 3 guys that were upgrading to captain in a 757. United was not going to use one of their real 757s for training so these guys were getting their first rating in a Citation. Then they could get the 757 rating in a simulator. This threw a whole dimension into the training, since these guys needed to go to the sim the NEXT day. So all four of us had a crash type rating school that lasted into the night. "Examiner on staff" took on a whole new meaning. I was dangerous when I got out that night. Probably still am! Karl "Jens Krueger" wrote in message ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Jens Krueger" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? That means I look forward to upgrade into jet aircraft. Escaping means not that I am on the run or that I dont like turboprop flying, in fact it is very valuable flight time regarding to experience with weather short field ops etc. but now I got the opportunity to transition to jets so why not taking it. As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? They operate the whole Boeing line on ACMI lease contracts to Airlines all over the world under the FAR's of the respective country and SOP's of the operator where they leased to. Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... The reason is just that they dont have the aircrafts sitting on the ramp like flight schools the 150's to do a flight training they have the aircraft to pull out of revenue service, much more to loose as a few dollars on fuel and tires. The case for me to do a quick cheap rating in any jet aircraft because it will be my first jet rating all further ratings can then be completed in the simulator thats the way. Do you know a place where I can take such a rating??? Ron Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Jens Krueger" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? That means I look forward to upgrade into jet aircraft. Escaping means not that I am on the run or that I dont like turboprop flying, in fact it is very valuable flight time regarding to experience with weather short field ops etc. but now I got the opportunity to transition to jets so why not taking it. As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? They operate the whole Boeing line on ACMI lease contracts to Airlines all over the world under the FAR's of the respective country and SOP's of the operator where they leased to. Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... The reason is just that they dont have the aircrafts sitting on the ramp like flight schools the 150's to do a flight training they have the aircraft to pull out of revenue service, much more to loose as a few dollars on fuel and tires. The case for me to do a quick cheap rating in any jet aircraft because it will be my first jet rating all further ratings can then be completed in the simulator thats the way. Do you know a place where I can take such a rating??? Ron Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hi kage ,
thanks for the posting thats is the way I have to do it. I am not in that hurry like you at the time but should complete it this year. Could you tell me a place for a crash type rating?? you email me directly if you dont want to post it on the net: Thanks Ron "kage" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... When I got my first type rating in a jet, it HAD to be done in an airplane. I don't know if that has changed. But my class was going to go for 5 days. At the last minute United Airlines threw in 3 guys that were upgrading to captain in a 757. United was not going to use one of their real 757s for training so these guys were getting their first rating in a Citation. Then they could get the 757 rating in a simulator. This threw a whole dimension into the training, since these guys needed to go to the sim the NEXT day. So all four of us had a crash type rating school that lasted into the night. "Examiner on staff" took on a whole new meaning. I was dangerous when I got out that night. Probably still am! Karl "Jens Krueger" wrote in message ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Hi kage ,
thanks for the posting thats is the way I have to do it. I am not in that hurry like you at the time but should complete it this year. Could you tell me a place for a crash type rating?? you email me directly if you dont want to post it on the net: Thanks Ron "kage" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... When I got my first type rating in a jet, it HAD to be done in an airplane. I don't know if that has changed. But my class was going to go for 5 days. At the last minute United Airlines threw in 3 guys that were upgrading to captain in a 757. United was not going to use one of their real 757s for training so these guys were getting their first rating in a Citation. Then they could get the 757 rating in a simulator. This threw a whole dimension into the training, since these guys needed to go to the sim the NEXT day. So all four of us had a crash type rating school that lasted into the night. "Examiner on staff" took on a whole new meaning. I was dangerous when I got out that night. Probably still am! Karl "Jens Krueger" wrote in message ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ron,
I don't have a Trade-a-Plane handy, but there are always several quickie type rating schools advertised there. KG "Ron Elmer" wrote in message ... Hi kage , thanks for the posting thats is the way I have to do it. I am not in that hurry like you at the time but should complete it this year. Could you tell me a place for a crash type rating?? you email me directly if you dont want to post it on the net: Thanks Ron "kage" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... When I got my first type rating in a jet, it HAD to be done in an airplane. I don't know if that has changed. But my class was going to go for 5 days. At the last minute United Airlines threw in 3 guys that were upgrading to captain in a 757. United was not going to use one of their real 757s for training so these guys were getting their first rating in a Citation. Then they could get the 757 rating in a simulator. This threw a whole dimension into the training, since these guys needed to go to the sim the NEXT day. So all four of us had a crash type rating school that lasted into the night. "Examiner on staff" took on a whole new meaning. I was dangerous when I got out that night. Probably still am! Karl "Jens Krueger" wrote in message ... Ron Elmer wrote: My former employer looked for FO's with less than 1000 total time only for the reason that more experienced where more difficult to adapt company procedures. Captains where upgraded only from own FO's. This system made a high degree of standarisation possible. That's certainly true at some operators. The reason for my posting is just that I have got the opportunity to escape the turboprop if I show a Jet rating which one is not important. What do you mean by "escaping" the Turboprop? As far I was told is the reason therefore to save the touch and goes on the rating for the aircrafts these company operates, because the simulator is company paid. That sounds a little fishy... So you are saying that they want you to pay for a type rating, so that they can waive t&g's on your IOE? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me... What kind of equipment are they operating and where? Do they operate 121, 135 or 91? Thats why I look for such a rating quality training or not just cheap I dont use the rating later in that class afterwards. Why would you want to pay for something that you are not utilizing, just to save the company some dollars for fuel and tires... Doesn't sound like this company has a very high regard for crew training/proficiency. If they treat new hires like that, what do you think how this company operates the line, let alone recurrent training and so on... I don't think I would want to work for such a company. I know, times are tough... Cheers, Jens -- I don't accept any emails right now. Usenet replys only. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
Wanted to Buy/Trade: CTH Bayonet Type Probes | aRKay | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 14th 04 03:40 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
Logging again | Doug | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | September 17th 03 02:38 AM |
Enlisted pilots | John Randolph | Naval Aviation | 41 | July 21st 03 02:11 PM |