smartt1982 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 212 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3463 times:
I was recently watching some videos about the Colgan Air Crash and US regional carriers in general. I cannot quite pinpoint where I heard or thought I heard it but it was that the co-pilots on such carriers would not actually get a full type rating on the aircraft and only the captain would have a full type rating, the co-pilot getting a course but not as extensive or as in-depth as the person in command.
futureualpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2561 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
First Officers (the title used, co-pilot is somewhat antiquated, much like stewardess is) used to go through the same training Captains received, but would not perform a couple of the maneuvers Captains would in order to earn a type (single engine missed approaches and taxiing the aircraft). Now, First Officers still go through the same course but are starting to get a full type rating rather than the SIC type, and take the exact same check rides as their partners in the left seat.
This is a bit trivial and not directly related to your question but just a bit of info..to be considered a "captain" or PIC, you must hold an ATP certificate. You also can't get an ATP until you're at least 23.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
woodreau From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 890 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3413 times:
In the United States, Part 121 first officers originally were not required to hold any type ratings. All that was required to act as second in command was a commercial pilot certificate.
In the mid 2000's, in order to comply with ICAO conventions and Annex 1/FCL, the FAA implemented a SIC type rating (which is a useless type rating as far as I am concerned) as some countries outside the US required co-pilots to have a type-rating. Since US industry practice is not to type-rate first officers (even today), airlines would find their co-pilots not "qualified" to operate their aircraft outside the United States, in places like Canada or Mexico. Hence the implementation of the SIC type rating for first officers which would allow US non-type rated pilots to operate their aircraft outside the US. That is the current state of things in the US. The SIC type rating is merely a paperwork/semantics thing to comply with ICAO Annex 1/FCL.
By Aug 2, 2013, all pilots whether first officer or captain will be required to hold an ATP to fly under Part 121/135. But there still is no requirement for a type rating to fly as a first officer. There is a NPRM which would require first officers to hold a full type rating, but that final rule has not yet passed.
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 3): This is a bit trivial and not directly related to your question but just a bit of info..to be considered a "captain" or PIC, you must hold an ATP certificate. You also can't get an ATP until you're at least 23.
Not quite, if the aircraft required a type rating, you could act as PIC by having a type rating on your pilot certificate, an ATP is not required. You could act as PIC of a 747 with a private pilot certificate with a 747 type rating, you just can't carry any passengers cargo for hire, etc. All the limitations of the pilot certificate applies to the type rating.
Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from surviving bad judgement.
Completely true. First officers are not required to have a type rating by the FAA. However, if they are flying outside the country, they do need to have one - this is accomplished by getting a type rating with the limitation of SIC only, which is just a paperwork issue to check that the person in question has training on the airplane. There is no checkride required.
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
smartt1982 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 212 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3385 times:
So with this SIC rating, would the first officer not be as knowledgeable or as skilled in operating the aircraft as the captain? Would it really be that much more expensive to do a full type rating?
If this first officer goes on to do their command, would they then do a full type rating from start to finish?
Is this dangerous, how come they are only looking for first officers to have ATPs and not also full type ratings? I take it this is a result of the Colgan Air Crash.
Would this be the case for all regionals, so Dash 8s, ATRs and CRJ jets?
Apologies for the earlier referral to co pilots, I am myself one in Europe. This was from an occasion when I asked an American captain I worked with about the best way to have a look at the flight deck of a transatlantic flight on an American carriers flight I was about to undertake, either before departure or after landing of course. He told me to say that I was a "co-pilot" for a European carrier when I asked the cabin crew so obviously he gave me bad info. Did not intend to be disrespectful at all, as I say I am a "co-pilot” myself
By the way, when is the best time and best way (if at all) to ask about a look in the flight deck? I am flying with UA from Heathrow to Newark in the near future and would love to see a 777 flight deck up close, last thing I want to do is annoy the crew.
futureualpilot From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2561 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3373 times:
Without delving into regulatory nuances, First Officers do go through the same qualification process during airline training that Captains do when it comes to ground school, systems knowledge, sim training and check rides. In fact it is not uncommon for Captain upgrade candidates and new-hire First Officer candidates to be in the same class and be paired together for sim training. The difference used to be in the check ride. First Officers previously did not have to perform certain maneuvers that Captains were required to do. Now, with the rule change, Captains and First Officers will be equally qualified. The difference is that the Captain is the PIC for the flight, and signs his or her name and ultimately assumes responsibility for the safe and legal operation of the aircraft.
My apologies if I gave the wrong impression about terminology, it is a minor thing but it is more common now, at least among flight crews in the states to hear the "First Officer" or "FO" for short rather than "co-pilot." Just trying to offer some help!
As far as visiting flight decks, I'm sure they'd be happy to as long as they have the time. I've yet to come across a crew that was anything less than fully accommodating, as I'm sure you know, pilots love to show off their airplanes! If they are too busy with pre-departure preparation, check again after landing.
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6499 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3285 times:
Quoting woodreau (Reply 4): Not quite, if the aircraft required a type rating, you could act as PIC by having a type rating on your pilot certificate, an ATP is not required. You could act as PIC of a 747 with a private pilot certificate with a 747 type rating, you just can't carry any passengers cargo for hire, etc. All the limitations of the pilot certificate applies to the type rating.
I should have been more specific. "Commercial OPS" But I hoped people would understand that as this is what the thread is about.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3079 posts, RR: 12 Reply 9, posted (10 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3198 times:
Quoting smartt1982 (Reply 6): So with this SIC rating, would the first officer not be as knowledgeable or as skilled in operating the aircraft as the captain? Would it really be that much more expensive to do a full type rating?
Training at the two airlines I've been at is the same regardless of seat. In fact I've had upgrading captains in my class as a new hire in both. Every year at recurrent we are in the same room as captains as well.
While we trained on all the maneuvers that are required in an ATP ride, we do not demonstrate a single engine go around, taxing or a rejected take off during our annual checkride. As a result of the new regulations that arose during the colgan crash we will have to do this on our next annual proficiency check as we will be getting an ATP (if we pass).
Quoting smartt1982 (Reply 6): Is this dangerous, how come they are only looking for first officers to have ATPs and not also full type ratings? I take it this is a result of the Colgan Air Crash.
IMO, no. It's not dangerous. Despite not having an ATP, I have almost 4000 hours in the type I now fly. I know my limitations and wouldn't hesitate to speak up if the situation warrented. It is my personal opinion that the regulartory changes that came about from the colgan crash completely missed the point. Both pilots in the front of the Q that night would have been there under the new regulations. The only difference is that the FO would have had a slightly different title on a piece of plastic in her wallet. Anybody and everybody, regardless of experience, makes stupid mistakes when they are fatigued. There have been a number of crashes because of fatigue. When a controller fell asleep the FAA changed the rules within 2 weeks. Despite numerous crashes where the NTSB cited fatigue as a contributing factor they gave airlines a couple years to deal with new rules because the airlines cried about how much money it would cost.
smartt1982 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 212 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (10 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3198 times:
Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 7): My apologies if I gave the wrong impression about terminology, it is a minor thing but it is more common now, at least among flight crews in the states to hear the "First Officer" or "FO" for short rather than "co-pilot." Just trying to offer some help!
Hey no worries at all, I hope I did not come across the wrong way with my response, If so I apologise.
e38 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 231 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3019 times:
Quoting Smartt1982 (Thread starter), "when is the best time and best way (if at all) to ask about a look in the flight deck?"
Smarrt1982, well, it depends. You can visit the flight deck either before the flight departs the origin airport or after arriving at the destination. Here's what it depends on . . .
If you go to the flight deck before the flight--during the boarding process--often the crew is busy working on preflight procedures; programming the Flight Management System; or conducting pre-flight briefings. If they are not busy, it is an excellent time for the crew to give you a briefing on the route of flight, the aircraft, the enroute weather, or anything else you may be interested in. Keep in mind, the pilots will be thrilled to know you are interested in their aircraft, but they may not be able to devote their full attention to you and you may feel your visit to the flight deck is rushed.
You can always visit the flight deck after landing at your destination during the deplaning process. However, keep in mind, depending on the situation (for example, a New York based crew of an American Airlines flight arriving at JFK), the pilots may have already left the aircraft and while you will have plenty of time to look at the flight deck, without feeling rushed, it is possible that none of the pilots will be there to talk to.
If, however, you are flying BA to JFK, the chances are good the pilots will still be there, waiting for all the passengers to deplane; and then proceeding to customs/immigration with the cabin crew.
I just re-read your post, "I am flying with UA from Heathrow to Newark." In this case, the crew will probably be based at Newark (a former Continental Airlines crew) and the pilots may leave the flight deck as soon as their post flight duties are complete to get through customs, and go home, or to catch another flight if they "commute" to and from EWR.
In this case, you may want to visit the flight deck before departing Heathrow. And, if you feel rushed, just say, "I know you are kind of busy right now, would it be OK for me to come back after we land in Newark?"
When you get on, just inform one of the flight attendants--sometimes it helps if you talk to the lead flight attendant or purser--that you are interested in a visit to the flight deck. In this "post 911" era, it is possible the flight attendant will ask, "Why do you want to see the flight deck?" then just be honest and state you are very interested in aviation, you would like to be a pilot someday, and/or this is your first flight on the particular type of aircraft. Be enthusiastic about your desire to see the flight deck.
Also, if the pilots have the time, they love to visit with airplane enthusiasts and, time permitting, will talk your ear off about the airplane, etc. Do not be concerned you will annoy the crew; you won't!
Finally, there is nothing wrong with the term "co-pilot." You don't need to apologize to anyone for using it--perfectly good aviation term. In the United States, however, the common terminology is "Captain" and "First Officer" when dealing with commercial aviation and "Aircraft Commander" and "Co-Pilot" in the military environment (i.e.,C-17, C-130, KC-135, for example).
As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing wrong with the terms "stewardess" or "cockpit" although these days of political correctness you most frequently hear "flight attendant" and "flight deck."