I was reading an accident report about the crash of a Boeing 720-015B aircraft in the Florida Everglades [NW Flight 705] in 1963. The CAB report is a bit confusing to me on the cause[s]. Seems they are blaming weather and pilots. But in the report it states that the Captain had 17,835 total flying hours but only 150 hours on the type while the First Officer had less total flying hours [11,799] but more hours on the type [1093] than the Captain. Am wondering how airlines determine who is going to be a Captain? Is it just seniority as the carrier? Is 150 flying hours on a particular type of aircraft a lot?

Civil Aeronautics Board Accident Report #1-0006.

Seniority equals bidding the captain’s seat, period. Low time on type captains flying with high time type FO. No, not a lot of time, but it was a new type, nobody had a lot hours on them.

Typically, and especially in North America, promotion would be strictly seniority-based. The discussion does get a bit complicated since you might need more seniority to be an FO on a certain aircraft than captain on another.

150 hours on type is not a lot. 2-3 months of flying. But you have to start somewhere. The conversion course won't entail too many hours in the aircraft. There will be a bunch of sim sessions prior, of course.

Seniority rules everything, I’ve flown with guys who had 5000+ hours on the 737 and bid over to the A320 as captains for their own reasons. 150 hours is roughly two months of flying the airplane, as our schedules (at my airline in US, I won’t speak for anyone else) are 75-90 hours of flying a month. Hell, I can hold 737 capt at my airline, and if I had bid it, would have gone to upgrade class with very few hours on type.

convair880mfan wrote:

I Am wondering how airlines determine who is going to be a Captain? Is it just seniority as the carrier? Is 150 flying hours on a particular type of aircraft a lot?

Civil Aeronautics Board Accident Report #1-0006.

I would wager he was a captain on another type and recently transferred.

zeke wrote:

[
I would wager he was a captain on another type and recently transferred.

Not if he was employed by a US carrier. Everyone starts at the same place, the bottom!

VMCA787 wrote:

Not if he was employed by a US carrier. Everyone starts at the same place, the bottom!

The early 1960s is when Northwest introduced the DC8, 720, 707, pilots moved across from aircraft like 377 Stratocruisers to the jets.

zeke wrote:

VMCA787 wrote:

Not if he was employed by a US carrier. Everyone starts at the same place, the bottom!

The early 1960s is when Northwest introduced the DC8, 720, 707, pilots moved across from aircraft like 377 Stratocruisers to the jets.

You are correct, but the pilots were already on the seniority list! They did not jump right into the left seat.

VMCA787 wrote:

You are correct, but the pilots were already on the seniority list! They did not jump right into the left seat.

I want talking of DEC, just transferred from another type. Lots of total hours, just a little on type.

Modern day equivalent would be the OZ accident in SFO, the captain just transferred from another fleet.

Right, but it is all based on seniority. I know of a pilot who was an attorney, flew as a WB F/O and left on a Friday night and returned on Sunday. He also had a law practice! If a pilot hasn't been a F/O on that aircraft after upgrade, of course, he/she will have little time on type.

VMCA787 wrote:

zeke wrote:

VMCA787 wrote:

Not if he was employed by a US carrier. Everyone starts at the same place, the bottom!

The early 1960s is when Northwest introduced the DC8, 720, 707, pilots moved across from aircraft like 377 Stratocruisers to the jets.

You are correct, but the pilots were already on the seniority list! They did not jump right into the left seat.

Yes they could. Zeke is correct. You can be a captain on a type that you were never an FO on. You don't drop to the bottom of the type seniority list just because you switched aircraft.

Please re-read what I am posting.

In the US, seniority drives everything. For example, I have a friend who was a FO for almost his entire career. It was only in the last 5 years that he moved from the right seat to the left seat. The reason was his pension was based on the highest salary for 5 of the last 10 years of his career. He had the quality of life he wanted as being the most senior FO and it was only when he, from his perspective, had to move seats, did he go to the left seat. He moved to an aircraft he had no time on and that was not an issue.
However, a pilot walking into a US airline, as a new employee, even if he had 10,000 hours time on type, would go to the right seat. That's just the way it works in the US and the system seems to work in that market.

Hopefully, that will clear up what I had posted.

Not just FO, he’d be on the bottom of the list, last choice of plane, seat, base, schedule, vacation, bidding on open or premium time. Everything is based on their seniority, even first base and type initial training.

A friend of mine retired as an FO at FDX on the A300–I’ll bid captain when I can bid the same trips I’m flying as FO, home every night.

VMCA787 wrote:

Please re-read what I am posting.

In the US, seniority drives everything. For example, I have a friend who was a FO for almost his entire career. It was only in the last 5 years that he moved from the right seat to the left seat. The reason was his pension was based on the highest salary for 5 of the last 10 years of his career. He had the quality of life he wanted as being the most senior FO and it was only when he, from his perspective, had to move seats, did he go to the left seat. He moved to an aircraft he had no time on and that was not an issue.
However, a pilot walking into a US airline, as a new employee, even if he had 10,000 hours time on type, would go to the right seat. That's just the way it works in the US and the system seems to work in that market.

Hopefully, that will clear up what I had posted.

We understand that. It's just you were the only one talking about someone new to the airline. The conversation was about people already employed.

johns624 wrote:

VMCA787 wrote:

Please re-read what I am posting.

In the US, seniority drives everything. For example, I have a friend who was a FO for almost his entire career. It was only in the last 5 years that he moved from the right seat to the left seat. The reason was his pension was based on the highest salary for 5 of the last 10 years of his career. He had the quality of life he wanted as being the most senior FO and it was only when he, from his perspective, had to move seats, did he go to the left seat. He moved to an aircraft he had no time on and that was not an issue.
However, a pilot walking into a US airline, as a new employee, even if he had 10,000 hours time on type, would go to the right seat. That's just the way it works in the US and the system seems to work in that market.

Hopefully, that will clear up what I had posted.

We understand that. It's just you were the only one talking about someone new to the airline. The conversation was about people already employed.

It doesn’t work that way outside the US, which confuses others.

A bit different aspect of it, I assume what original question implied:
How important is the experience on the type vs general experience? How transferrable skills are?
E.g. how much 10k+ hours on 737 matter for the upgrade to, say, A350 captain - aircraft being pretty dissimilar to 737. Does overall experience trumps specific knowledge and experience of the particular type?
Of course, current answer in this thread is "seniority", and that is the name of the game in US, no way around it. But what about actual operations?

Quite a bit of transference, I had some hand in introducing a new bizjet into service. Most of the pilots had slathers of experience in the previous model, so basic systems and FMS were very similar; FBW made manual flying easier. OTOH, the early jets had much bigger systems differences and handling was probably different.

kalvado wrote:

A bit different aspect of it, I assume what original question implied:
How important is the experience on the type vs general experience? How transferrable skills are?
E.g. how much 10k+ hours on 737 matter for the upgrade to, say, A350 captain - aircraft being pretty dissimilar to 737. Does overall experience trumps specific knowledge and experience of the particular type?
Of course, current answer in this thread is "seniority", and that is the name of the game in US, no way around it. But what about actual operations?

In actual practice, it's seniority as far as the US is concerned.

kalvado wrote:

A bit different aspect of it, I assume what original question implied:
How important is the experience on the type vs general experience? How transferrable skills are?
E.g. how much 10k+ hours on 737 matter for the upgrade to, say, A350 captain - aircraft being pretty dissimilar to 737. Does overall experience trumps specific knowledge and experience of the particular type?
Of course, current answer in this thread is "seniority", and that is the name of the game in US, no way around it. But what about actual operations?

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines.

I had a new FO at my ULCC recently.
I never assume the experience or inexperience of the other pilot - it's a bad habit to get into...
he was an older person, so in the course of talking i find out that he used to fly 747s for TWA...

so my first question was why wasn't he at AA now?

long story short, lots of bad luck and timing caused him to end up in the right seat of my ULCC.... he has way more experience than i do - he was a 121 airline pilot before i ever graduated high school and became a pilot. but because of the circumstances, he's now my FO, even though he's crossed the pond numerous times, and i've never crossed the pond as a flight crew member in an airplane...

i had another FO a few days ago... after discussing his background, it turns out the 319 we were flying is the smallest airplane he's ever flown. He's never flown anything smaller. He's had over a decade of experience flying 380s, 350s, 777s at other air carriers. but now he works at my ULCC. he has more flight time and i do and he's the FO, and im the inexperienced Capt.



Im at the point in my career, that if my airline ever declared bankruptcy and liquidated, I'm probably not ever going to be at the controls of an airliner again. I just choose not to start at the bottom of a seniority list again even though I have over a decade left before i am forced to retire due to age 65. I'll go do something else not aviation related even though the legacy airlines are hiring like gangbusters and can't get enough pilots... ( Im not complaining, I've been very fortunate in this career. I've never been furloughed, and i still have my original spouse.... ) but that is just the nature of this industry.... The legacies are stripping the regional airlines of all of their pilots and sabotaging their competitor's regional feed and denying ULCC/LCCs pilots for their expansion....

Woodreau wrote:

kalvado wrote:

A bit different aspect of it, I assume what original question implied:
How important is the experience on the type vs general experience? How transferrable skills are?
E.g. how much 10k+ hours on 737 matter for the upgrade to, say, A350 captain - aircraft being pretty dissimilar to 737. Does overall experience trumps specific knowledge and experience of the particular type?
Of course, current answer in this thread is "seniority", and that is the name of the game in US, no way around it. But what about actual operations?

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines.

I had a new FO at my ULCC recently.
I never assume the experience or inexperience of the other pilot - it's a bad habit to get into...
he was an older person, so in the course of talking i find out that he used to fly 747s for TWA...

so my first question was why wasn't he at AA now?

long story short, lots of bad luck and timing caused him to end up in the right seat of my ULCC.... he has way more experience than i do - he was a 121 airline pilot before i ever graduated high school and became a pilot. but because of the circumstances, he's now my FO, even though he's crossed the pond numerous times, and i've never crossed the pond as a flight crew member in an airplane...

i had another FO a few days ago... after discussing his background, it turns out the 319 we were flying is the smallest airplane he's ever flown. He's never flown anything smaller. He's had over a decade of experience flying 380s, 350s, 777s at other air carriers. but now he works at my ULCC. he has more flight time and i do and he's the FO, and im the inexperienced Capt.



Im at the point in my career, that if my airline ever declared bankruptcy and liquidated, I'm probably not ever going to be at the controls of an airliner again. I just choose not to start at the bottom of a seniority list again even though I have over a decade left before i am forced to retire due to age 65. I'll go do something else not aviation related even though the legacy airlines are hiring like gangbusters and can't get enough pilots... ( Im not complaining, I've been very fortunate in this career. I've never been furloughed, and i still have my original spouse.... ) but that is just the nature of this industry.... The legacies are stripping the regional airlines of all of their pilots and sabotaging their competitor's regional feed and denying ULCC/LCCs pilots for their expansion....

And can you comment on how reasonable that is from the technical point of view? Seniority system is a given, and I am not the one who is going to challenge that. But - is it something hindering operations safety (CA with low hours on the type, as discussed above) or having CA with high total hours is a more important factor?

Woodreau wrote:

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines..

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

kalvado wrote:

Woodreau wrote:

kalvado wrote:

A bit different aspect of it, I assume what original question implied:
How important is the experience on the type vs general experience? How transferrable skills are?
E.g. how much 10k+ hours on 737 matter for the upgrade to, say, A350 captain - aircraft being pretty dissimilar to 737. Does overall experience trumps specific knowledge and experience of the particular type?
Of course, current answer in this thread is "seniority", and that is the name of the game in US, no way around it. But what about actual operations?

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines.

I had a new FO at my ULCC recently.
I never assume the experience or inexperience of the other pilot - it's a bad habit to get into...
he was an older person, so in the course of talking i find out that he used to fly 747s for TWA...

so my first question was why wasn't he at AA now?

long story short, lots of bad luck and timing caused him to end up in the right seat of my ULCC.... he has way more experience than i do - he was a 121 airline pilot before i ever graduated high school and became a pilot. but because of the circumstances, he's now my FO, even though he's crossed the pond numerous times, and i've never crossed the pond as a flight crew member in an airplane...

i had another FO a few days ago... after discussing his background, it turns out the 319 we were flying is the smallest airplane he's ever flown. He's never flown anything smaller. He's had over a decade of experience flying 380s, 350s, 777s at other air carriers. but now he works at my ULCC. he has more flight time and i do and he's the FO, and im the inexperienced Capt.



Im at the point in my career, that if my airline ever declared bankruptcy and liquidated, I'm probably not ever going to be at the controls of an airliner again. I just choose not to start at the bottom of a seniority list again even though I have over a decade left before i am forced to retire due to age 65. I'll go do something else not aviation related even though the legacy airlines are hiring like gangbusters and can't get enough pilots... ( Im not complaining, I've been very fortunate in this career. I've never been furloughed, and i still have my original spouse.... ) but that is just the nature of this industry.... The legacies are stripping the regional airlines of all of their pilots and sabotaging their competitor's regional feed and denying ULCC/LCCs pilots for their expansion....

And can you comment on how reasonable that is from the technical point of view? Seniority system is a given, and I am not the one who is going to challenge that. But - is it something hindering operations safety (CA with low hours on the type, as discussed above) or having CA with high total hours is a more important factor?

There are some rules in place. No “green on green” pairings. In other words you can’t pair a low time Captain in type with a low time FO in type (generally less than 100 hours). So a new 320 Captain that has less than 100 hours in type can’t fly with a 320 FO with less than 100 hours in type (consider the 320 as the entire family, same with 737 series).

As to transfer of skills and such, that’s why you go through aircraft specific training, to learn the specifics to the new type and then fly the first 25 hours under the supervision of a check airman. The fundamentals of flying don’t change though. Further as a Captain, just because you may not have previous experience on the type as an FO doesn’t mean much. The fundamentals of managing the flight remain unchanged. Sure the hydraulic system might be different on the new jet but you went to school for that.

DualQual wrote:

kalvado wrote:

Woodreau wrote:

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines.

I had a new FO at my ULCC recently.
I never assume the experience or inexperience of the other pilot - it's a bad habit to get into...
he was an older person, so in the course of talking i find out that he used to fly 747s for TWA...

so my first question was why wasn't he at AA now?

long story short, lots of bad luck and timing caused him to end up in the right seat of my ULCC.... he has way more experience than i do - he was a 121 airline pilot before i ever graduated high school and became a pilot. but because of the circumstances, he's now my FO, even though he's crossed the pond numerous times, and i've never crossed the pond as a flight crew member in an airplane...

i had another FO a few days ago... after discussing his background, it turns out the 319 we were flying is the smallest airplane he's ever flown. He's never flown anything smaller. He's had over a decade of experience flying 380s, 350s, 777s at other air carriers. but now he works at my ULCC. he has more flight time and i do and he's the FO, and im the inexperienced Capt.



Im at the point in my career, that if my airline ever declared bankruptcy and liquidated, I'm probably not ever going to be at the controls of an airliner again. I just choose not to start at the bottom of a seniority list again even though I have over a decade left before i am forced to retire due to age 65. I'll go do something else not aviation related even though the legacy airlines are hiring like gangbusters and can't get enough pilots... ( Im not complaining, I've been very fortunate in this career. I've never been furloughed, and i still have my original spouse.... ) but that is just the nature of this industry.... The legacies are stripping the regional airlines of all of their pilots and sabotaging their competitor's regional feed and denying ULCC/LCCs pilots for their expansion....

And can you comment on how reasonable that is from the technical point of view? Seniority system is a given, and I am not the one who is going to challenge that. But - is it something hindering operations safety (CA with low hours on the type, as discussed above) or having CA with high total hours is a more important factor?

There are some rules in place. No “green on green” pairings. In other words you can’t pair a low time Captain in type with a low time FO in type (generally less than 100 hours). So a new 320 Captain that has less than 100 hours in type can’t fly with a 320 FO with less than 100 hours in type (consider the 320 as the entire family, same with 737 series).

As to transfer of skills and such, that’s why you go through aircraft specific training, to learn the specifics to the new type and then fly the first 25 hours under the supervision of a check airman. The fundamentals of flying don’t change though. Further as a Captain, just because you may not have previous experience on the type as an FO doesn’t mean much. The fundamentals of managing the flight remain unchanged. Sure the hydraulic system might be different on the new jet but you went to school for that.

As you say "the fundamentals... remain unchanged". The basics of how to fly an approach, communicate, handle decision making, and so forth, are all rather generic, especially within an airline.

My $0.02.

If you go from a 777 to an A320, you'll have to learn about the systems and so on. But you won't have to relearn how to manage an approach profile beyond the handling characteristics. You won't have to relearn how to talk on the radio. I'm an Airbus guy, but I've been in the Boeing sims and sure, the overhead panel is a bit of a mystery, but I can still fly an approach and land the thing without making too much of an arse of myself.

My colleague once told me, "the first jet is the hardest". And in that vein, I imagine it was much harder to go from a piston to a swept wing jet back in the 50s and 60s than it is to go from a jet to a jet. If nothing else, the power delivery and lag on those early turbojets was very different from what you'd see in a piston.

I haven't gone to the left seat myself, but a trainer told me, "On the Captain course, I don't want the guy to change his flying style. He knows how to fly since he's been doing it as an FO for years. What we're doing is adding the command skills. If you try to change your flying style to some sort of 'captain style' you're just making life hard for yourself."

Starlionblue wrote:

I'm an Airbus guy, but I've been in the Boeing sims and sure, the overhead panel is a bit of a mystery, ...

You win the internet for the day!

kalvado wrote:

And can you comment on how reasonable that is from the technical point of view? Seniority system is a given, and I am not the one who is going to challenge that. But - is it something hindering operations safety (CA with low hours on the type, as discussed above) or having CA with high total hours is a more important factor?

I would have to say that familiarity with the type of operation is more important. 121 flying / 135 flying.

I’ve spent most of my career as a 121 guy. But if I had to fly in GalaxyFlyers biz jet world I’d would be out of my element. the plane specific things are taught and it’s just a matter of figuring out where to look to find the info you’re looking for.

as a 121 pilot, details like flight planning, maintenance, catering were all taken care of. I just pick up a phone and make phone calls or call ops on the radio and things happen.

135/91k pilots deal with more of that stuff on their own. They have to do all of the behind the scene stuff on their own. So I would probably fail miserably doing their kind of flying until I had some time to adjust and gain operational experience with 135/91k flying. And then I’d probably go running back to my 121 safe cocoon….

Same for the 135/91k pilots coming to 121 but it far easier for them to come to 121 than it is for 121 to go to 135/91k in my opinion.

about the only time I had issues with a low time captain was at my first regional. I was a sub-1500hr FO. Everyone had the seniority to upgrade to captain as a new hire on day 1. Problem was most people didn’t have 1500hrs to hold an unrestricted ATP so we were all FOs. The few pilots that did have 1500hrs were upgraded to CA on day 1.

those pilots went from being CFIs and MEIs straight to 121 captain, paired with sub-1500hr FOs. It was a tough hill to climb simultaneously learning 121 operations and learning their first turbine aircraft which happens to be a turboprop. most captains were able to figure it out and survive. But there were some exciting events that ensued that became the talk of the crew room…. “Hey did you hear about so and so?”

I even had an episode when I upgraded right at 1500hrs and found a time I had a question and I asked my FO who had less than 500hrs and he just shrugged. It truly was the blind leading the blind but I and more importantly my passengers survived. Ignorance is bliss.

This deficiency was addressed with the ATP rule by adding the requirement of 1000 121/135 SIC hours required before being allowed to be a 121 PIC.

Once you get 121 operational experience being a low time captain in a new type really isn’t an issue.

zeke wrote:

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

I’m not sure I understand the question.

There is only one equipment type - narrowbody 320. so everyone is on the same pay scale.

Wouldn’t everyone have prior 121 time?

Woodreau wrote:

zeke wrote:

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

I’m not sure I understand the question.

There is only one equipment type - narrowbody 320. so everyone is on the same pay scale.

Wouldn’t everyone have prior 121 time?

The only thing I can come up with if this is true is it would allow Spirit to get around low time in type restrictions and consolidation requirements (100 hours in 90 days for new on type). If a new pilot to Spirit had prior 121 time in the Bus, Spirit’s OPSPECS may allow them to recognize that time for purposes of low time and consolidation. Or it may allow them to not have to consolidate and reduce the hours for low time restrictions to something less since the new pilot would still be subject to getting used to how Spirit operates the aircraft (differences in flight planning, operational procedures, etc)

Woodreau wrote:

zeke wrote:

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

I’m not sure I understand the question.

There is only one equipment type - narrowbody 320. so everyone is on the same pay scale.

Wouldn’t everyone have prior 121 time?

I think "equipment" could be shorthand for the type/seat combo - at a single-type airline, the question he asks boils down to whether a high-time 121 pilot could bid into the left seat, whether you'd end up as the last FO on the list but paid like a CA, or whether you just are the last and lowest-paid FO like everywhere else.

IADCA wrote:

Woodreau wrote:

zeke wrote:

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

I’m not sure I understand the question.

There is only one equipment type - narrowbody 320. so everyone is on the same pay scale.

Wouldn’t everyone have prior 121 time?

I think "equipment" could be shorthand for the type/seat combo - at a single-type airline, the question he asks boils down to whether a high-time 121 pilot could bid into the left seat, whether you'd end up as the last FO on the list but paid like a CA, or whether you just are the last and lowest-paid FO like everywhere else.

Only if he can hold, via seniority, the left seat. You will go on the payscale where your date of hire is. You could have 10,000 hours of A320 time, but if it's your first day at Spirit, United, Delta, whoever, you're on year 1 FO pay and sitting in the right seat. Experience (except the 1,000 121 SIC time, which the vast majority of mainline pilots already have when hired) does not come into factor when it comes to what seat you're in, it's purely seniority at the US airlines (and passing upgrade training of course). You can go from 737 FO to A320 capt if your seniority holds it.

Not sure what you're meaning with "a high-time 121 pilot could bid into the left seat,". Are you saying as a new hire or moving from one 121 carrier to another. As a new hire, as several people have said, you are at the bottom of the seniority list regardless of your hours and experience. If you move from one carrier to another you relinquish your seniority number at the old carrier and get a new one at the new carrier at the bottom.

If you were a WN pilot (prior Shuttle Commander) with 10,000 hours, 5,000 hours in each seat flying as as a WN captain, WN goes out of business or you’ve had enough of damned 737 and quit. Now hired at DL, you’re a new hire, on probation, flying whatever seat the latest class of new hires is offered. If it’s a 737, you’re still at bottom of the list. If only A330s were available, you’re bottom reserve A330 IRO.

The caveat to this is the legal requirement for 1000 hours of 121 SIC/135 PIC (conditionally) for command.

For example, I've got a fair amount of Part 91 time in a variety of transport category aircraft that wouldn't count towards this command requirement.

zeke wrote:

Woodreau wrote:

At least at US air carriers. your experience as a pilot has no bearing on what seat or aircraft you fly. It's strictly seniority.
Experience is not portable between airlines..

Is Spirit the same, I heard something about them recognizing prior 121 time with a few buddies that went there, or would that just be pay scales not equipment ?

Are your friends happy at Spirit? I heard they looking into the AUS visa program for hiring...