ccjohn
Topic Author
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 2:36 am

Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:33 am

This is a question I’ve always wondered but been afraid to ask due to not wanting to offend pilots.

But I’m curious who if either would have better emergency skills of either. Take a long haul wide body pilot who flys a sector a day with a highly automated plane. Verses a commuter Cessna pilot who flys 10+ hops a day. If something was to go wrong who would do better? Obviously is varies between airlines and the safety culture but if some emergency happens where pure airmanship skill comes into play would the Cessna pilot doing 10 or more takeoffs and landings a day do better? I know to become a widebody pilot you have to know your stuff and I trust them completely whenever I fly but I’m curious if the over and over takeoff and landings in a small plane keeps pilots fresh verses the widebody pilot who has maybe 1 a day and has many automated systems to help along the way.

Obviously each plane is very different and I’m not trying to start an argument between pilots I’m just curious. Mods feel free to delete or move the thread if it’s not appropriate.
 
User avatar
BWIAirport
Posts: 725
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:29 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:44 am

Let's just say there's a reason large aircraft pilots are certified, and it's not because they're good at pressing buttons.
The premise of your question seems to be that long-haul pilots only land once a month or so. Sure they don't perform 4 or 5 flights per day like a SkyWest pilot, but they're still landing once a day or once every other day. This is far too frequent for such a skill to "get old" with the pilots and for them to lose their touch.
Next flight: August 1: WN2002 BWI-MSY B737
SWA, UAL, DAL, AWE, ASA, TRS, DLH, CLH, AFR, BAW, EIN, AAL | E190 DC94 CRJ2 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B752 B753 B762 B77W A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A388 MD88
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5945
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:47 am

One word: Sully
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:49 am

Having flown with both, I'm usually not impressed by the airmanship of former long haul pilots. They might have more hours, but their interactions with abnormals seems much more limited than short haul pilots.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:08 am

As far as pure stick and rudder skills the commuter types would be more sharp on average. Me personally I'd say I was the sharpest one job before the regionals, when I was flying piston twins single pilot with only a primitive autopilot.

However, it is false reasoning to suggest the successful outcome of an emergency comes down to stick and rudder skills. IMHO far more important is the ability for a Captain to manage the situation and make the right decisions. As such, the long haul pilot on average would have an upper hand due to more experience, especially in a seniority based system. See UA 232 or QF32.
FLYi
 
glideslope900
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:30 am

ccjohn wrote:
This is a question I’ve always wondered but been afraid to ask due to not wanting to offend pilots.

But I’m curious who if either would have better emergency skills of either. Take a long haul wide body pilot who flys a sector a day with a highly automated plane. Verses a commuter Cessna pilot who flys 10+ hops a day. If something was to go wrong who would do better? Obviously is varies between airlines and the safety culture but if some emergency happens where pure airmanship skill comes into play would the Cessna pilot doing 10 or more takeoffs and landings a day do better? I know to become a widebody pilot you have to know your stuff and I trust them completely whenever I fly but I’m curious if the over and over takeoff and landings in a small plane keeps pilots fresh verses the widebody pilot who has maybe 1 a day and has many automated systems to help along the way.

Obviously each plane is very different and I’m not trying to start an argument between pilots I’m just curious. Mods feel free to delete or move the thread if it’s not appropriate.


A more appropriate comparison would be comparing regional airline pilots to long haul mainline pilots. Both are professionals, both are skilled. However, when riding in the back, I’d rather have mainline pilots up there during an emergency. I say that as a regional pilot. There is just a higher threshold of experience to get to a legacy airline such as Delta.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:36 am

BWIAirport wrote:
Let's just say there's a reason large aircraft pilots are certified, and it's not because they're good at pressing buttons.
The premise of your question seems to be that long-haul pilots only land once a month or so. Sure they don't perform 4 or 5 flights per day like a SkyWest pilot, but they're still landing once a day or once every other day. This is far too frequent for such a skill to "get old" with the pilots and for them to lose their touch.


Give me a good regional pilot who follows procedures and has good CRM practices over a Skygod like KLM's captain Vanzanten any day.
 
airtran737
Posts: 3406
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:48 am

glideslope900 wrote:
ccjohn wrote:
This is a question I’ve always wondered but been afraid to ask due to not wanting to offend pilots.

But I’m curious who if either would have better emergency skills of either. Take a long haul wide body pilot who flys a sector a day with a highly automated plane. Verses a commuter Cessna pilot who flys 10+ hops a day. If something was to go wrong who would do better? Obviously is varies between airlines and the safety culture but if some emergency happens where pure airmanship skill comes into play would the Cessna pilot doing 10 or more takeoffs and landings a day do better? I know to become a widebody pilot you have to know your stuff and I trust them completely whenever I fly but I’m curious if the over and over takeoff and landings in a small plane keeps pilots fresh verses the widebody pilot who has maybe 1 a day and has many automated systems to help along the way.

Obviously each plane is very different and I’m not trying to start an argument between pilots I’m just curious. Mods feel free to delete or move the thread if it’s not appropriate.


A more appropriate comparison would be comparing regional airline pilots to long haul mainline pilots. Both are professionals, both are skilled. However, when riding in the back, I’d rather have mainline pilots up there during an emergency. I say that as a regional pilot. There is just a higher threshold of experience to get to a legacy airline such as Delta.


I’m not sure that I can completely agree with you. While a mainline pilot undoubtedly had more hours than a regional pilot, the regional pilot spends more time brushing up on his skills. When I was on the 145 my average four day trip had 18 flights. Four trips of that a month gave me 36 landings mixed between long boring ILS and actually flying visuals in the outstations. Now that I have upgraded to the 175 I am on an airplane with better technology than the A320 which our mainline counterparts are flying. So the regional pilots are getting more opportunities to better their proficiency and flying as complicated equipment as mainline.

The downside to the US system IMHO has been the transition to AQP training. Rather than having to possess extremely in-depth knowledge ie build the airplane, now pilots are receiving scenario based training which allows a lot more forgiveness for mistakes.
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7207
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:55 am

The grey haired guys that have been flying the DC-9/MD-88 their entire career doing 4-6 legs a day out of places like ATL, LGA, ORD that love their job, love their aircraft, and take pride in their professional responsibilities.

The guys and gals new hire flying CRJs that can barely speak and articulate basis cabin announcements concern me, particularly in situations that require emergency management and situational awareness.

US1549 in NYC vs. Colgan 3407 in BUF.
 
glideslope900
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:12 am

airtran737 wrote:
glideslope900 wrote:
ccjohn wrote:
This is a question I’ve always wondered but been afraid to ask due to not wanting to offend pilots.

But I’m curious who if either would have better emergency skills of either. Take a long haul wide body pilot who flys a sector a day with a highly automated plane. Verses a commuter Cessna pilot who flys 10+ hops a day. If something was to go wrong who would do better? Obviously is varies between airlines and the safety culture but if some emergency happens where pure airmanship skill comes into play would the Cessna pilot doing 10 or more takeoffs and landings a day do better? I know to become a widebody pilot you have to know your stuff and I trust them completely whenever I fly but I’m curious if the over and over takeoff and landings in a small plane keeps pilots fresh verses the widebody pilot who has maybe 1 a day and has many automated systems to help along the way.

Obviously each plane is very different and I’m not trying to start an argument between pilots I’m just curious. Mods feel free to delete or move the thread if it’s not appropriate.


A more appropriate comparison would be comparing regional airline pilots to long haul mainline pilots. Both are professionals, both are skilled. However, when riding in the back, I’d rather have mainline pilots up there during an emergency. I say that as a regional pilot. There is just a higher threshold of experience to get to a legacy airline such as Delta.


I’m not sure that I can completely agree with you. While a mainline pilot undoubtedly had more hours than a regional pilot, the regional pilot spends more time brushing up on his skills. When I was on the 145 my average four day trip had 18 flights. Four trips of that a month gave me 36 landings mixed between long boring ILS and actually flying visuals in the outstations. Now that I have upgraded to the 175 I am on an airplane with better technology than the A320 which our mainline counterparts are flying. So the regional pilots are getting more opportunities to better their proficiency and flying as complicated equipment as mainline.

The downside to the US system IMHO has been the transition to AQP training. Rather than having to possess extremely in-depth knowledge ie build the airplane, now pilots are receiving scenario based training which allows a lot more forgiveness for mistakes.


I like the AQP...and the aviation safety culture has improved drastically, with LOSA/ASAP/and the overall more open approach to self reporting/disclosure. It is less punitive and encourages sharing of info.

Also, more t/o and ldgs does not neccesaeily correlate to better performance in an emergency. An emergency requires decision making/CRM/situational awareness which is not a rote skill/muscle memory like doing t/o and ldgs.
Last edited by glideslope900 on Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
glideslope900
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:15 am

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
The grey haired guys that have been flying the DC-9/MD-88 their entire career doing 4-6 legs a day out of places like ATL, LGA, ORD that love their job, love their aircraft, and take pride in their professional responsibilities.

The guys and gals new hire flying CRJs that can barely speak and articulate basis cabin announcements concern me, particularly in situations that require emergency management and situational awareness.

US1549 in NYC vs. Colgan 3407 in BUF.


Lets not disrespect CRJ pilots now. I know multiple ones that have been in emergencies and managed them successfully.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7207
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:24 am

Oh I agree on that front for sure.
 
Chemist
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:50 am

It seems a pattern that perhaps a more important criteria than long vs short haul would be recreational flying - GA, gliders, etc. Those guys get to use stick and rudder more often in addition to their airline skills. The pilot of the Gimli glider was comfortable slipping a 767 because he did it in gliders all the time.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:06 am

glideslope900 wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
The grey haired guys that have been flying the DC-9/MD-88 their entire career doing 4-6 legs a day out of places like ATL, LGA, ORD that love their job, love their aircraft, and take pride in their professional responsibilities.

The guys and gals new hire flying CRJs that can barely speak and articulate basis cabin announcements concern me, particularly in situations that require emergency management and situational awareness.

US1549 in NYC vs. Colgan 3407 in BUF.


Lets not disrespect CRJ pilots now. I know multiple ones that have been in emergencies and managed them successfully.


Unfortunately regional pilots get a lot of negative posts around here. There are also a few captains here that still use the term "copilot" instead of first officer. They know better but still use it anyway.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:13 am

N328KF wrote:
One word: Sully

Sully wasn’t flying long haul international. The OP makes a good point. There was a UA 744 about 15 years ago that nearly crashed in SFO due to an engine out and barely missed a mountain. The pilots flying did something like 4-5 cycles per month and committed a bunch of errors.
 
USAirKid
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:19 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
BWIAirport wrote:
Let's just say there's a reason large aircraft pilots are certified, and it's not because they're good at pressing buttons.
The premise of your question seems to be that long-haul pilots only land once a month or so. Sure they don't perform 4 or 5 flights per day like a SkyWest pilot, but they're still landing once a day or once every other day. This is far too frequent for such a skill to "get old" with the pilots and for them to lose their touch.


Give me a good regional pilot who follows procedures and has good CRM practices over a Skygod like KLM's captain Vanzanten any day.


I'm hoping its your point, but CRM came about after KLM's Vanzanten died in the Tenerife Disaster. He made mistakes, but he was not trained in CRM, as it didn't exist yet.
 
glideslope900
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:24 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
glideslope900 wrote:
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
The grey haired guys that have been flying the DC-9/MD-88 their entire career doing 4-6 legs a day out of places like ATL, LGA, ORD that love their job, love their aircraft, and take pride in their professional responsibilities.

The guys and gals new hire flying CRJs that can barely speak and articulate basis cabin announcements concern me, particularly in situations that require emergency management and situational awareness.

US1549 in NYC vs. Colgan 3407 in BUF.


Lets not disrespect CRJ pilots now. I know multiple ones that have been in emergencies and managed them successfully.


Unfortunately regional pilots get a lot of negative posts around here. There are also a few captains here that still use the term "copilot" instead of first officer. They know better but still use it anyway.


Bombardier and maintenance at my company uses the term “co-pilot.” I’m pretty sure it is used at other companies as well. I don’t think it is an insulting term. What the everyday flyer doesn’t understand is that co-pilots/FOs fly the plane just as much as the Captain.
 
MSJYOP28Apilot
Posts: 420
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:28 am

I dont see a big difference between long haul and short haul. The differences between each plane are not so great that it takes greater knowledge or skill to fly a widebody than narrowbody. The seniority system means it is pure luck of timing versus skill or knowledge. A terrible pilot can be a widebody captain and a great pilot can be a small narrowbody first officer.

The only difference I see between the regionals and mainline is that the regionals are career stepping stones that bleed pilots in large numbers to the mainline carriers. This coupled with growth and lower pay means that regional airlines often overlook things on a pilots record in order to put butts in the seat to keep the airline moving. That is why you had Colgan 3407. Mainline and LCCs are never desperate for pilots so they can be picky about who they hire.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3383
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:06 am

Point 1: There is no correlation in "stick and rudder" skills between long and short haul pilots. Long haul pilots wouldn't have gotten where they are without those skills.

Point 2: There is no correlation between emergency procedures and stick and rudder skills. Ask a Cessna pilot how he/she would have handled Qantas flight 32, for example.

There seems to be a fundamentally flawed premise and/or assumption behind this question.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:27 am

Most any emergency in a large transport category airplane isn't about being the ace of the base and typically doesn't involve a lot of highly skilled maneuvering. Emergencies in large airplanes are about following a procedure and working together as a crew.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:28 am

spacecadet wrote:
Point 1: There is no correlation in "stick and rudder" skills between long and short haul pilots. Long haul pilots wouldn't have gotten where they are without those skills.

Point 2: There is no correlation between emergency procedures and stick and rudder skills. Ask a Cessna pilot how he/she would have handled Qantas flight 32, for example.

There seems to be a fundamentally flawed premise and/or assumption behind this question.


I think the point was that domestic pilots may get more takeoffs and landings in a day than international pilota in a month. It's been reported that some long-haul pilots have to go to the sim because they didn't get the required amount of landings in that month. For a pilot that truly enjoys flying it would seem quite boring doing long-haul flights. Some trips you will just be a relief pilot and do no flying at all. When you see an airline retire a fleet type like the MD-80 or 737 and some pilots retire along with it, you know they truly enjoyed their job. They could have had their pick of wide-bodies with that high of seniority but they chose something that gave them the most opportunity to do what they loved most.
 
787Driver
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:41 am

BWIAirport wrote:
Let's just say there's a reason large aircraft pilots are certified, and it's not because they're good at pressing buttons.
The premise of your question seems to be that long-haul pilots only land once a month or so. Sure they don't perform 4 or 5 flights per day like a SkyWest pilot, but they're still landing once a day or once every other day. This is far too frequent for such a skill to "get old" with the pilots and for them to lose their touch.


He's actually right. I often only do 1-2 landings per month. Imagine that on most flights we're three pilots and on a few training flights we might be four pilots. So even if you're flying a return trip, you might still not get a takeoff and landing which is why it doesn't amount to many takeoffs and landings per pilot in a month. This is also why I prefer the "shorter" longhaul flights where only two pilots are needed, so that one landing is almost guaranteed :)
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:35 am

TTailedTiger wrote:

I think the point was that domestic pilots may get more takeoffs and landings in a day than international pilota in a month. It's been reported that some long-haul pilots have to go to the sim because they didn't get the required amount of landings in that month. For a pilot that truly enjoys flying it would seem quite boring doing long-haul flights. Some trips you will just be a relief pilot and do no flying at all. When you see an airline retire a fleet type like the MD-80 or 737 and some pilots retire along with it, you know they truly enjoyed their job. They could have had their pick of wide-bodies with that high of seniority but they chose something that gave them the most opportunity to do what they loved most.


Widebody vs. narrowbody means nothing. Income and quality of life does, though.

The number of landings in a given day have quite literally nothing to do with handling an inflight emergency. Monkey aircraft handling skills have little to do with it, either.

If the question is one of a 2000 hour regional pilot vs. a 26,000 hour long haul pilot...experience counts.

We're paid for our judgement as aviators, not so much our stick and rudder skills.

I've been flying airplanes in formation under powerlines since I was a teenage kid, and doing it for a living; there's really not much about airline flying that impresses me as exemplary of outstanding stick and rudder skills, and that includes Sully's landing. What Sully did right was make a decision. Other than that, he flew a descending turn to a ditching. Not really that remarkable. If he hadn't made that decision, however, all would be lost. It came down to a decision in the face of very few choices, and no other choice would have been a good one. It's about decision making. It's about acting together as a crew, and it's about following procedure.

I've flown long haul with pilots from every conceivable background, from tactical fighters to the world's highest time current DC3 pilot, to crop dusters to those with a dozen airlines in their past, to corporate, regional, various utility, etc. I flew with one man who is the only person I know to have lost a wing in flight and lived. All kinds of backgrounds and experiences. Typically when I get in a cockpit, I'm in pretty good company with over 100 years flying experience between us, collectively on that flight deck. That ought not be taken lightly.

When Al Haynes talked of his experience on UAL232, he stressed that the key to their handling of the inflight emergency, which by any metric is about as dire as it can get, was attributable to their working together as a crew and focusing on their training, and in large part the experience brought to the table.

Following procedure and training and working together as a crew can be found in regional cockpits as much as long haul cockpits.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3383
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:03 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
I think the point was that domestic pilots may get more takeoffs and landings in a day than international pilota in a month.


Yeah, I got that. My point is that long haul pilots got all that earlier in their careers too, and built up those skills and then added more skills on top of them to get where they are as long haul pilots. The assumption behind the question then has to be that long haul pilots' hand flying skills have *degraded* over time, which is a faulty assumption to make. And the second assumption is that those hand flying skills will help in any emergency, which is another faulty assumption to make, as my example of Qantas 32 pretty easily proves. Systems management and CRM is what saved that plane, not hand flying skills. And we are talking about the lives of 440 passengers there - lives that someone with *only* hand flying skills would likely not have been able to save.

Emergencies come in all forms. But modern airliners, like it or not, are based around automated systems and technology. And CRM is not just about the crew working together, it's about using *all* resources available to you in the cockpit to solve a problem, including any technology and aircraft systems available. TransAsia flight 235 is an example of what can potentially happen when someone relies on hand flying skills in an emergency when the plane's own systems would handle that emergency better. That plane would not have crashed if the captain had just done nothing and left the plane on autopilot. Even better, he'd have followed the systems management procedures listed in the EICAS. But he could have just done nothing and the plane would have kept flying. Instead he took control, shut down the wrong engine and crashed the plane.

Hand flying is piloting 101. It is the first skill you learn. It's not the last. Training for airline pilots continues forever beyond that, until the day a pilot retires. Long haul pilots typically have the *most* training and experience, not the least. That's not to say that a commuter or regional pilot isn't well equipped to handle an emergency in the plane he/she is trained to fly - 99.99% of them certainly are. But this is like comparing a 3 star Michelin chef with someone just out of culinary school who just opened a hot new trendy restaurant in lower Manhattan. They're both good cooks. But one guy's just got more experience and has *extra* skills that the other guy doesn't yet. And both of those things are really, really important in an emergency in a modern airliner.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:52 am

...De-Contextualizing (from the US, as always!) here and re-contextualizing (to international).... I think it's worth expanding the conversation beyond the usual [set-in-stone] logics of US-centric flying...
In the rest of the world, and particularly in Europe, you see a lot of regional flying that is handled by very experienced pilots who for a large variety of reasons are flying smaller aircraft at a later age. Some go through a very successful career flying short-haul, regional flying ONLY. And very happily too! Also salaries are not necessarily a reflection of the type of aircraft you fly over here.
All of above reasons make for a much more relaxed and less toxic atmosphere without the classic gap between mainline and regional.
So I would not imply that flying short-haul regional inherently has younger, less-experienced pilots. Quite the contrary. I have had several grey-haired long-timers on many 'regional subsidiaries' like BA Connect, KLM cityhopper, LH CityLine, SK Cimber, OS Tyrolean, AZ Express...

This aside, I agree that regional pilots might be exposed to more "hand flying" perhaps, but at the end of the day for me, in an emergency of any sort, it's the pilot who will maintain his cool and has good CRM capacity the one I want....... Stick and rudder alone might not necessarily help you out of an emergency all the time...
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:42 pm

oldannyboy wrote:
...De-Contextualizing (from the US, as always!) here and re-contextualizing (to international).... I think it's worth expanding the conversation beyond the usual [set-in-stone] logics of US-centric flying...


Most of us commenting operate internationally and have done so for a long time.

Note also that the original pilot pointed to a "cessna commuter pilot" doing 10 legs a day.

You won't find a lot of grey hair doing that.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2114
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:53 pm

Many of today's long haul pilots have a very varied background. Many started in the military, flying F-16 or Hercules, then moving on to DC-9, MD-80 or 737 Classics. Then onwards to the big birds. They go through simulator training on a regular basis. I would trust them 100%.

But of course there are very skilled commuter and bush pilots as well. I've flown with some of them in Sub-Saharan Africa. It's a completely different world of flying.

Let's put it this way. In an emergency situation onboard an A330, I would trust the long haul pilot to do the job best. On a Cessna Caravan, the commuter pilot would do best. This is obvious.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:12 pm

747Whale wrote:
oldannyboy wrote:
...De-Contextualizing (from the US, as always!) here and re-contextualizing (to international).... I think it's worth expanding the conversation beyond the usual [set-in-stone] logics of US-centric flying...


Most of us commenting operate internationally and have done so for a long time.

Note also that the original pilot pointed to a "cessna commuter pilot" doing 10 legs a day.

You won't find a lot of grey hair doing that.


Dear 747Whale, I read you and do appreciate your input. However, no offence meant to you, the US based posters or anything, but no, sadly this forum is so US-centric at times it makes me ill. The lingo, the mind-set and general knowledge is so so so focused almost exclusively on the US, cue this "regional" vs "international" distinction on this subject; which makes little to no sense elsewhere... there's no set/hard distinction between these two 'artificially created and maintained' groups in the rest of the globe! (see the clauses created in the US precisely to do this -- none of which exist anywhere else).
And, no, I'd argue that most posters unfortunately come to this forum with a mostly 'domestic' (US based) mentality, with subsequently less international experience and exposure, and a most definitive hard stance on things non-American they are not familiar with - all in all very frustrating.
And, precisely to paraphrase you, the US is probably the one country where the reference "cessna commuter pilot" doing 10 legs a day makes any sense, certainly not Europe.
And, quite conversely to what you state, you WILL most definitely find plenty of gray hair working the short-haul/regional/small jets in Europe and elsewhere. :wave:
 
bhxalex
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:40 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:15 pm

It depends far too much on the pilot themselves, the surroundings and situation for a valid A v B argument.

You cannot assume all 777 pilots and all C208 pilots are the same. In a scenario where reactions are tested you might get 100 differing responses from 100 pilots. Unless you tested every pilot flying (impossible) you will never get a conclusive answer to this.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13658
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:30 pm

Flying is a skill, and it takes more than just stick and rudder skills to get you through a day, let alone an emergency.

If you were to compare pilots to other skill based jobs, I think anyone would err on the side of having a more experienced person be it a plumber, carpenter, pilot, or doctor.

With flying what experience gives us is spare capacity, you see young pilots running at the maximum, and old timers with lots of spare capacity.

In a significant emergency on an aircraft I am not going to try and hand fly the aircraft and manage the situation. I will use the autopilot and the FO fly the aircraft, and that way I can monitor and review what is going on and direct the necessary adjustments as required.

These are multi crew operations, not single pilot.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
kczombie
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:40 pm

Taca Flight 110 May 24, 1998: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFTFCfcnqF8
Piper PA-31-325 June 7, 1993: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0erWd2euSMk

Both great examples of pure piloting skill, no matter what your equipment or service route.

And don't forget the Gimli Glider...
 
User avatar
Vio
Posts: 1537
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:23 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:10 pm

BWIAirport wrote:
Let's just say there's a reason large aircraft pilots are certified, and it's not because they're good at pressing buttons.
The premise of your question seems to be that long-haul pilots only land once a month or so. Sure they don't perform 4 or 5 flights per day like a SkyWest pilot, but they're still landing once a day or once every other day. This is far too frequent for such a skill to "get old" with the pilots and for them to lose their touch.


Well... The "reason" is mostly seniority. At the airline level, I'd say all (if not close to all) are very competent pilots.

As far as the original post is concerned:
Experts do admit that relying too much on automation is not a good thing. Sadly we've seen the outcome of that in some fairly high profile crashes. Experience is an important factor all around. "Hands and feet", experience on type and decision making are all important. The type of flying varies as well. You can't compare a crop dusting pilot with a 777 captain. They have different sets of skills that serve their specific field.

I can speak for Canadian pilots, because that's where I trained and work as a pilot. I'd like to think that my 6 years spent flying turboprops in the Canadian Arctic certainly helps me now that I'm an airline pilot. In my opinion, having "command" time is some of the most valuable type of experience one can have. I believe that it's easier to teach someone "stick and rudder" skills than it is decision making. In today's highly automated world of flying, decision making and automation knowledge is key to being a safe pilot, not to downplay the importance of actual flying skill...
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
 
747Whale
Posts: 726
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:41 pm

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:17 pm

oldannyboy wrote:
However, no offence meant to you, the US based posters or anything, but no, sadly this forum is so US-centric at times it makes me ill.


No offense taken.

oldannyboy wrote:
And, quite conversely to what you state, you WILL most definitely find plenty of gray hair working the short-haul/regional/small jets in Europe and elsewhere. :wave:


Not doing 10 legs.

In the US, the regionals are largely the domain of the entry-level, though not always. Domestic flying is done all the way through retirement.
 
horsepowerchef
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Longhaul vs commuter plane airmenship in emergency?

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:18 pm

In an emergency situation, I think more often than not, it probably comes down to the individual pilot and how well he know his aircraft types systems to be able to quickly and accurately extrapolate the data that the aircraft is giving him and get to a solution quickly, more than "airmanship"

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos