Still fly recreationally after becoming a professional pilot?

Hacker15e said:
Interestingly enough, even after so many years flying pointy-nose kerosene burners, I find enormous joy in putting around in GA airplanes.

Lately I've been flying around with @uncreative in a 172 doing basic instrument stuff and it has been an absolute blast.

I've said this before on JC (and it received a notably bad reception), but I think 121 companies should also own a fleet of Decathlons and make their Captains have a monthly currency to go fly acro and get tailwheel landings. I'm still amazed that we have airline pilots out there who've never been upside-down in an airplane, and I think the automation-induced atrophy of stick-and-rudder airmanship (see Air France 447, et al) would be well countered by horsing a taildragger around the pattern.

Failing that, I think it is the professional responsibility of pilots who carry pax for a living to make their airmanship experience bucket as deep as possible. That means they should be out doing non-121 flying in the most non-121 types possible: gliders, acro, seaplanes, etc.

If I remember right, the answer I received from the JC 121 crowd was something to the effect of, "if my airline wanted me to have that kind of experience, they'd include it in my training."

Because, after all, no pilot has ever had to deal with a situation that wasn't covered in formal training.
Click to expand...
My bucket of experience comes from my past jobs, which is a mix of 121 and 135. I do my present job safely and competently, even if I have to knock some rust off if I haven't flown in a while (didn't get a landing on this trip I'm finishing, actually). Compared to my past jobs (particularly the SPIFR 135 job), flying a 767 around is really the easiest flying I've done.

I don't do non-121 flying because of costs, and honestly, a lack of interest. While I might not have the "firebreather" status I once had when it came to hand-flying a 402, I do just fine at work without proficiency flying on the side. If my company feels that my performance is unsatisfactory (they don't), they're more than welcome to toss some extra dough on my paycheck to go out and rent a Decathalon.

But, until then... :)
 
Hacker15e said:
he simply needs to experience the somatic sensations where his body is telling him....
Click to expand...

Hey now, watch your language..there are kids on this forum. Save your dirty "somatic" talk for other forums!:p:D

I got out of GA flying just before 9/11 when I sold my partnership in a C310. Don't really miss it and every time I think about getting back in to GA the fuel prices quickly nix the idea. Honestly, I'm not sure how anyone can afford to own and/or operate an airplane anymore.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
?
Are you not a XJT FO anymore? I thought you had several years there. I hope that's not what senior XJT FOs are making.
Click to expand...
California Pacific's payscale is far from flattering.

Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Yes, but most pilots aren't going to pony the thousands it costs for a typical Extra 300 upset/recovery course. In my case, it isn't worth it. I'd rather fly in the sim in alternate law. Or how about direct law, which I haven't flown in since the type ride. These things are much more important IMO for my line of work than an Extra 300 session.
Click to expand...
I still think you shouldn't be able to get an ATP without a full aerobatics course. I did one. It was (1) the most fun I'd had in an airplane and (b) immensely educational for the seat of my pants, which DOES have a place even in a big airliner. (Something about "you've got to push!" comes to mind with recent aircraft handling accidents.)

Plus: Even the fancified Airbus is an all-attitude vehicle; the fact that it shouldn't get INTO those attitudes does not preclude the fact that it CAN.

Related: You guys don't fly in alternate/direct in recurrent? (I'm genuinely curious...)
 
Hacker15e said:
Interestingly enough, even after so many years flying pointy-nose kerosene burners, I find enormous joy in putting around in GA airplanes.

Lately I've been flying around with @uncreative in a 172 doing basic instrument stuff and it has been an absolute blast.

I've said this before on JC (and it received a notably bad reception), but I think 121 companies should also own a fleet of Decathlons and make their Captains have a monthly currency to go fly acro and get tailwheel landings. I'm still amazed that we have airline pilots out there who've never been upside-down in an airplane, and I think the automation-induced atrophy of stick-and-rudder airmanship (see Air France 447, et al) would be well countered by horsing a taildragger around the pattern.

Failing that, I think it is the professional responsibility of pilots who carry pax for a living to make their airmanship experience bucket as deep as possible. That means they should be out doing non-121 flying in the most non-121 types possible: gliders, acro, seaplanes, etc.

If I remember right, the answer I received from the JC 121 crowd was something to the effect of, "if my airline wanted me to have that kind of experience, they'd include it in my training."

Because, after all, no pilot has ever had to deal with a situation that wasn't covered in formal training.
Click to expand...

I wish I could triple like this post. I did my flight training part time from 2001 until I became a full time CFI in 2007 and did my tailwheel endorsement and seaplane rating along the way. As a regional FO, I haven't touched a GA airplane since my last CFI flight. But I may in the future. For now, I will have to settle for my copy of Wind, Sand and Stars that just arrived last night.
 
If you think bug smashing is just limited to GA you should look at the radome and leading edge of the Lear I fly in late summer. We cleaned off the leading edge almost after every flight some days.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
California Pacific's payscale is far from flattering.
Click to expand...
Oh. I didn't know they were flying. How's it going there, is it full up and running?

I still think you shouldn't be able to get an ATP without a full aerobatics course. I did one. It was (1) the most fun I'd had in an airplane and (b) immensely educational for the seat of my pants, which DOES have a place even in a big airliner. (Something about "you've got to push!" comes to mind with recent aircraft handling accidents.)
Click to expand...

I believe the new law changes the requirements for an ATP to require specific-aircraft/sim training for 20? hours. I don't know exactly what the details are. As for the "you've got to push" I can tell you until Apr 2009 (or whenever the sun shine hearing for Colgan was), we always held the yoke in the shaker during an approach to landing stall. Max power, spoilers in, and just "hold it there" to minimize altitude loss. It was the dumbest thing when it came to stalls. After Colgan and AF, now they have realized that minimizing altitude loss doesn't mean much when an aircraft stalls with a full loss of control and subsequent loss of aircraft/life. Whether you are at FAF altitude of 2,300 ft outside Buffalo or at FL350 over the Atlantic, once an aircraft stalls, a proper nose down recovery is required - which will result in altitude loss, but we must accept it to unload the wing and get back to flying again. Some lessons in aviation come the hard way. Actually, come to think of it, nearly all aviation changes are written in blood.

Plus: Even the fancified Airbus is an all-attitude vehicle; the fact that it shouldn't get INTO those attitudes does not preclude the fact that it CAN.
Click to expand...

True, and that's what abnormal attitude law is for. However, I wouldn't want one to just start slamming the rudder around in order to gain control. AA 587 and AF 447 both showed the dangers of over-reaction. In both cases, just letting it be and NOT touching anything would have resulted in a far better and safer outcome.

In general, I think airline training throughout the industry needs to focus more on cruise flight. After all, this is the majority of where we spend our time. Statistically speaking accidents are much more likely to happen at takeoff and landing, and we do practice a lot of those phases of flights in the sim (normal T/Os, rejected T/Os, V1 cut, and all approaches). But how about actually hand flying the airplane? I routinely do that through FL180. Once in a while, all the way up to cruise. The air is thinner and the aircraft reacts/behaves differently than it does at much lower altitudes. All pilots should have a feel for that. I think we'd all benefit with more training in the sim for abnormal conditions we might experience in the Flight Levels.


Related: You guys don't fly in alternate/direct in recurrent? (I'm genuinely curious...)
Click to expand...
PCs, no. Unless the PC ends and there is time to do some extra stuff. Often, at this stage you can ask for whatever issue/failure you want to see in the sim. PTs, same thing. Now we've started LOFTs and yes here you can experience "multiple failures of redundant systems" which will put you in alternate law. Direct law is a more severe downgrade and you'll most likely see that when in alternate law and the gear is thrown down. We're currently in the process of switching to AQP so to aid that process, both CAs and FOs are paired up together for 6 month PC / 6 month LOFT cycle. I like the idea of a sim every 6 months. I do not know what it will be once AQP is up and running.
 
Super cub or bust on my days off. I can't imagine ever being an airline pilot who only flies at work, that's just a job. Flying is what I do on my days off.
 
Fly my 172 to work anytime I can, and on the occasional day off. Unfortunately I've been without it for 3 weeks now as it's getting new paint.
 
This is an open invatation to (121 JCers) who want to fly GA, but have other more pressing financially responsibilities.

If you have the time to jumpseat down to DHN, Alabama (preferably Saturday), I will pick you up and we'll go for a hop around the local area. This will cost you a Coke zero. I don't work for free.

@Hacker15e I can see you are advocating for those of us to become an aviator, not simply just a pilot. It starts and ends with attitude.
 
I'll throw down too. I don't own a airplane, but if paying 50 bucks an hour for an instructor is too much for an aircraft checkout. I'll check out any 121JCer at my local LGB flight school free of instructor charge, just pay for the airplane. You will have 24/7/365 access to your choice of 152, 162, steam 172, glass 172 and steam SR20. PM me for rental prices.

It's not much I know, but if it helps get you in the air flying GA then mission accomplished.
 
I fly other people's airplanes for fun if they'll cover the fuel. I fly a bonanza around that I manage for my boss, and a pitts S1c for a guy pretty regularly.
 
jtrain609 said:
Bro, I'm paid $23,000 a year to fly an airliner around, and I have 11-12 days off per month. When I'm not at work, I'm chasing my kid around, and spending that entire $23,000 on her.

I'm sure you can understand that I'm not sinking my entire paycheck back into the professional development that has been advocated for on the internets.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're kidding me?! You make $23k a year? How long have you been flying mang?! You need to do something different, that's no bueno... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top