Single pilot jets

Hacker15e said:
I rather enjoyed the high-workload of the single-pilot jet. Not just in the weather, but when things were getting shot back at us, too.
osw_02_small.jpg
Click to expand...
If me, you and another guy are hanging out, and I fart, I'm gonna blame you. Just sayin...
 
averettpilot said:
It's a Phenom 100. Generally speaking, it's not a high workload aircraft by any means, as I'm sure all who have flown it can attest. I have 3300 hours 3150 of which is single pilot in quite a few different capacity, single pilot freight being one of them, so I know that this aircraft compared to others is quite easy. Probably just the missions I carry out from time to time. 3 am departure to a max range destination sometime getting back after midnight "same" day.

I do the job well, I don't really have a problem SP jet in general, but there are moments where I think to myself "gee this is getting pretty busy up here and I could easily screw something up if I don't bring my A game." All while transporting some important people. I guess my whole half asleep thought pattern was why would the people in the back want to have just one person up front. I have 150 hours of flying in a crew and that is so much more preferable for me. We were flying the Phenom as a crew and the all around operation was much more efficient with division of labor in all aspects, preflight, flight, and postflight. I'm not saying SP isn't safe, if it wasn't I probably wouldn't do it. Just think it's safER with two up front. I'm happy to be proven wrong, and I appreciate the thoughts out there.

Fly safe people.
Click to expand...
I found your problem.
Not only is that not safe, it's arguably illegal. Regardless of the fact 91 does not have duty time limits.
And barring the discussion on any of that, it's just stupid.
 
T/O w/FSII said:
This is generally wrong. When is the last time you have flown 91/corporate?

I do it everyday.

Tons of work right now for the 91/corporate guys.
Click to expand...

Right before I went to the airlines was the last time, so about 4 years ago. There are two types of true corporate gigs. There are the ones who own airplanes, and then there are the ones who operate flight departments. You are probably lucky, and work for the latter. There are more gigs that treat guys like crap on the 91/135 side than ones that treat people good. YMMV, but I was 2 for 3 135 for crappy jobs, and the corporate gig I had, completely turned me off to it.

As for the "there is tons of work for corporate guys", I don't deny that. In fact, that's kind of what I am alluding to. Replacements are easy to find. There is always someone willing to do it for less, or how the company wants it done, however unsafe it may be.
 
averettpilot said:
I guess you'd also have to define a "true single pilot aircraft." I get your point if we're talking about a Caravan or something like that.
Click to expand...

A "True" single-pilot aircraft IMO is one that is not only certified for single pilot, but one that was originally designed and intended to be flown single pilot. I get your situation, not wanting to be run out on 20 hour duty days, to me it seems like you're looking more for a second pilot to come on and relieve you at some point, which definitely would make sense if it can be worked out.
 
mshunter said:
Right before I went to the airlines was the last time, so about 4 years ago. There are two types of true corporate gigs. There are the ones who own airplanes, and then there are the ones who operate flight departments. You are probably lucky, and work for the latter. There are more gigs that treat guys like crap on the 91/135 side than ones that treat people good. YMMV, but I was 2 for 3 135 for crappy jobs, and the corporate gig I had, completely turned me off to it.

As for the "there is tons of work for corporate guys", I don't deny that. In fact, that's kind of what I am alluding to. Replacements are easy to find. There is always someone willing to do it for less, or how the company wants it done, however unsafe it may be.
Click to expand...
If that's how they view their pilots you can only imagine what an irritant maintenance is. They can't imagine why the airplane that they flew in safely requires any inspections. There are people out there that will blindly sign off work from home without actually touching the plane for a fee. And when the airplane breaks for real and is going to cost a metric poop ton of money to fix they lose their minds and sometimes the airplane, leaving their flight crew in a very bad spot. I hate those people with the kind of hate reserved for a person that would kick my dog. Some day I might tell the story of an international circus and a trio of AS355's out of KBUR.
 
gotWXdagain said:
A "True" single-pilot aircraft IMO is one that is not only certified for single pilot, but one that was originally designed and intended to be flown single pilot. I get your situation, not wanting to be run out on 20 hour duty days, to me it seems like you're looking more for a second pilot to come on and relieve you at some point, which definitely would make sense if it can be worked out.
Click to expand...

Having a so called "relief pilot" would be huge, but to me that's not even the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage of a crew is having someone sitting right next to you checking your work. Even if that pilot runs zero checklists, doesn't talk on the radio, and presses zero buttons, you're still coming out ahead.
 
Like anything in aviation, including the flight departments and the airlines, if its cheaper to help or protect you, they'll do it. If its cheaper to kill you or risk doing so, they'll do it.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
Having a so called "relief pilot" would be huge, but to me that's not even the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage of a crew is having someone sitting right next to you checking your work. Even if that pilot runs zero checklists, doesn't talk on the radio, and presses zero buttons, you're still coming out ahead.
Click to expand...

At the end of a 16+ hour duty day is that person really "checking your work" or just contributing their own variation of fatigue-induced moronery to the cockpit environment?
 
gotWXdagain said:
At the end of a 16+ hour duty day is that person really "checking your work" or just contributing their own variation of fatigue-induced moronery to the cockpit environment?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Two tired people are still better than one tired person. It's still possible, but it takes both of you to screw up the same thing at the same time to run into a problem.
 
I've never understood SP jets. Some one pays for (even in part 23 jets) multiple redundant systems. Two engines, driving separate hyd/elec/air systems. Yet the human up front has a major medical issue and you're done. Lose an engine? Prob ok. Lose the pilot. Not so much. If it's owner flown I kinda get it. It's no different than any other single pilot plane. When you're sitting in the back paying a lot to be there in operating costs. Why not add a second layer of redundancy?
 
mshunter said:
Right before I went to the airlines was the last time, so about 4 years ago. There are two types of true corporate gigs. There are the ones who own airplanes, and then there are the ones who operate flight departments. You are probably lucky, and work for the latter. There are more gigs that treat guys like crap on the 91/135 side than ones that treat people good. YMMV, but I was 2 for 3 135 for crappy jobs, and the corporate gig I had, completely turned me off to it.

As for the "there is tons of work for corporate guys", I don't deny that. In fact, that's kind of what I am alluding to. Replacements are easy to find. There is always someone willing to do it for less, or how the company wants it done, however unsafe it may be.
Click to expand...

This. This a million times, this.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
Having a so called "relief pilot" would be huge, but to me that's not even the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage of a crew is having someone sitting right next to you checking your work. Even if that pilot runs zero checklists, doesn't talk on the radio, and presses zero buttons, you're still coming out ahead.
Click to expand...
DISAGREE!!

Flying with someone like this (and I did for a couple of years) is, what I like to call, "Single Pilot Minus". When flying with a lead chunk like this, I spent more time verifying the buttons he pushed rather than pushing them myself. AND, If the right seater is as you've described above, then there is NO way I would trust or rely on them to "check my work".

If you're next to someone that is nothing more than dead weight, you're better off using the empty seat for a great place to lay out your lunch!!
 
dustoff17 said:
DISAGREE!!

Flying with someone like this (and I did for a couple of years) is, what I like to call, "Single Pilot Minus". When flying with a lead chunk like this, I spent more time verifying the buttons he pushed rather than pushing them myself. AND, If the right seater is as you've described above, then there is NO way I would trust or rely on them to "check my work".

If you're next to someone that is nothing more than dead weight, you're better off using the empty seat for a great place to lay out your lunch!!
Click to expand...

Then hire someone competent?
 
mshunter said:
Then hire someone competent?
Click to expand...
Funny, but not really the point of this thread now is it?

P.S. Somehow people seem to think that the pilot in these organizations has the final say in the hiring/firing process. As a side note, in this particular case, I looked pretty hard but I couldn't FIND one in Miami!
 
I agree that having "ballast" in the right seat is likely to be a detriment to the operation, although just having someone to talk to for those early/late/long day flights would help. The logical response to that is to hire someone competent, preferably someone also SP typed on the jet. For a commercial operation I can see many demerits for single pilot flying, and really only 2 merits (cost and performance).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top