Beech 1900 versus Metroliner

No but the evidence exists when given constant high scores and good comments with 0 additional training required.
.

Which is true with 98% of pilots at airlines

I'm not a sky god but when all you have to do is plop what you want in the FMS and follow around a FD it makes everything stupid easy. Back it up with common sense learned from my T-prop experience and it helps clean up any FMS errors that we all tend to make.

I'm glass the transition was a joke for you. Some how, though, even though flying glass jets is a joke, there must be scores of incompetent people (even some who flew spifr 135!) since there are so many ASAP reports, FOQA events and letters of investigation.

Just some food for thought. While some tasks seem easier to you, there might be more unknown than known at this point. Was there any other time in your flying career similar to this? Where previous experience translated, but there were new skills and nuances to learn?
 
Which is true with 98% of pilots at airlines



I'm glass the transition was a joke for you. Some how, though, even though flying glass jets is a joke, there must be scores of incompetent people (even some who flew spifr 135!) since there are so many ASAP reports, FOQA events and letters of investigation.
I never said flying then jet was a joke, the transition was a joke.

Everyone makes mistakes. Many can be tied to the over-reliance on the FMS. Some are just plain stupid mistakes. It happens. That is why we have these programs to find the mistakes and try mitigate them.

Just some food for thought. While some tasks seem easier to you, there might be more unknown than known at this point. Was there any other time in your flying career similar to this? Where previous experience translated, but there were new skills and nuances to learn?
I'm always trying to learn. Every plane has it's differences. I have learned something new for every plane I have flown that I can apply elsewhere.

Every plane has its own character and yes you have to constantly be watching for the unknown. Learned that lesson from the metro. I scared myself a few times in that thing.

Here is the deal. We are talking about the requirement for FMS and glass in this thread. That requirement is the joke. The goal of the FMS is to increase safety and to make flying easier. As a result people rely on the automation too much in many cases and it ends up causing more problems at times.

Just flew with a check airman that told me not to do the math for descents in my head. Just use the VPI. I told him the FMS sometimes jacks up regardless of input so I back it up with math. Sure enough we get a split VPI and he can't figure out why my VPI shows us way high and his shows us way low. That is a huge problem on a CANPA style approach if you can not do it without the help of the FMS.

Every plane I have flown has given me something new to learn. Navajo flew just like the PA-23s I had been flying but AMF used more of an airline approach to training. Also learned how to properly use a truly high performance piston.

The BE99 felt almost exactly like the BE-76 I flew around while flight instructing. It was my first turbine equipment. Wasn't much faster than the Navajo. Mountain experience.

The Metro was its own beast with tons of stupid quirks. First time having to deal with V1 cuts. First time having to deal with a plane that truly sucks in ice. First time in the flight levels. I learned what fatigue really does to the body in this plane. First time I had to deal with speed limits.

The EMB-145 brings its swept wings into the picture, 2 extra crew members, and a change in the cargo being carried.
 
Let me (attempt) to help you here....Do you know @Polar742 background?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Obviously not 100%. How about you expand on it.

From what I could tell it seems he is in the training department or some sort. Yes he is a 747 guy at polar/atlas.

All I know is that he doesn't respond to me properly and comes over as a dick rather than someone trying to help.
 
Last edited:
Now, now.

Referee_hockey_ahl_2004.jpg
 
Hmmm, I'm awfully sure it doesn't exist in the 135 world.
Probably not, but don't tell me you haven't met those part 91 straight wing citation types that get 80k for 2 weeks of work a year, plenty of those types in Florida. It's not the 6 figures in 121, but it sure as hell is a lot more time off.
 
Probably not, but don't tell me you haven't met those part 91 straight wing citation types that get 80k for 2 weeks of work a year, plenty of those types in Florida. It's not the 6 figures in 121, but it sure as hell is a lot more time off.
....I resemble that remark.
 
Probably not, but don't tell me you haven't met those part 91 straight wing citation types that get 80k for 2 weeks of work a year, plenty of those types in Florida. It's not the 6 figures in 121, but it sure as hell is a lot more time off.

The 6 figures in 121 can take a decade. There are plenty of 91 and 135 gigs that pay very well.
 
Hey. I'm in South Florida slogging it out in 135 freight. How do I get to where you are? :)
Be old and former-military and find some folks with too much money that like old, former-military guys.

Some of the guys with great 91 gigs have responsibilities beyond just piloting (maintenance, compliance, making travel arrangements, etc.)

Actually, the flying I'm doing is 91-ish, being diplomatic flying in privately owned aircraft. I'm still waiting to tell an FAA guy that I don't need no stinking certs. It probably won't happen as most of my flying is in GCC countries.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KLB
I can promise you it does.
Ya, I know it's somewhere. I guess even I shouldn't bitch too much, I'm supposed to get 15 days a month off. Supposed to is the key, and all of our competitors pay 15k+ more.
I think I remember who you work for. Good to know there are a few good operators out there. The best jobs are never advertised.
 

There are some very reputable 135 operators. It usually depends on the size of the airplane too. 135 has more bottom feeding companies than the 121 world, but if you get on a really good company, and the aircraft is big enough, I would not be shocked to see somebody start close to the 6 figure level. After a couple of years, or you go into it a captain, then absolutely.
 
Obviously not 100%. How about you expand on it.

From what I could tell it seems he is in the training department or some sort. Yes he is a 747 guy at polar/atlas.

All I know is that he doesn't respond to me properly and comes over as a dick rather than someone trying to help.

@Polar742 was a check airman and all around bad ass at a very large regional when they were bringing on E-145s and E-170s. I know he did delivery and acceptance flight on those aircraft and trained a few hundred in that airplane. If anyone is qualified to speak on what it is like to make the transition from a round to glass cockpit it would be him.

Yes, the transition can be easy, glad it was for you, but some struggle on it. The requirement is the requirement. I don't necessarily agree with it, but no one asked me. Someone that has spent a lot of time in the training department of two airlines like Polar has probably has a much different view on it than we would, but I respect his view as he has seen the backgrounds (of round dial vs. glass) interact with the training regime more than I have.

Finally, the real richness in this thread is with @jhugz. It is always rich when he posts.
 
Back
Top