Turbine Time Vs Piston Time

[Superglide]

I am new to this forum(3months),and look to hear feedback from the turbine drivers.I'm at the last half of my CFII training in R22/300C pistons.It seems to me that turbine time is more of a resume builder no matter how many hours you have under that 1000 to 1500 hr resume requirement.

Should I bite the bullet and "go turbine" from this point forward,or soldier along to 1000 hrs,and hope someone will hire me to train and fly their turbine ship??

[Wally]

I am new to this forum(3months),and look to hear feedback from the turbine drivers.I'm at the last half of my CFII training in R22/300C pistons.It seems to me that turbine time is more of a resume builder no matter how many hours you have under that 1000 to 1500 hr resume requirement.

Should I bite the bullet and "go turbine" from this point forward,or soldier along to 1000 hrs,and hope someone will hire me to train and fly their turbine ship??

 

If your plan is to go the conventional route, I wouldn't spend the money. A 135 operator has to run all new hires through a training program, especially for whatever airframe used, which makes your proposed expenditure redundant, in my opinion. If all the prospective new hires being considered were clones, then turbine time might influence my decision.

[HeloPitts]

Turbine time is valuable, But a helicopter is a helicopter. If I were you I'd keep plugging away just as you are doing building that time, let the company that you go to work for pay for the turbine time. The only big difference with a turbine helicopter besides starting it is that you can spend alot more money real quick if you are not paying attention. It's the total time that is going to matter when getting hired, unless you have alot of time in say a certain airframe and the company can work out some kind of deal with the insurance company. Just have a good time flying and building that time.

[K-38]

Don't do it. 1000 hrs all piston is the way to go. You would only be throwing your money down the drain on turbine time. As stated above let your future employer pay for your turbine/airframe specific training when the time comes.

[bossman]

Don't do it. 1000 hrs all piston is the way to go. You would only be throwing your money down the drain on turbine time. As stated above let your future employer pay for your turbine/airframe specific training when the time comes.

You are so wrong.

[K-38]

You are so wrong.

I respect your opinion Bossman. I know that you have been doing this for a long time, and speak from experience. My point was the requirements for most entry level jobs are 1000 hrs P.I.C. RTC therefore find the most cost effective way to make that happen for you. It seems reasonable to me.

I would like to understand what you see as being so wrong with my thought process. No hard feelings.

[bossman]

I respect your opinion Bossman. I know that you have been doing this for a long time, and speak from experience. My point was the requirements for most entry level jobs are 1000 hrs P.I.C. RTC therefore find the most cost effective way to make that happen for you. It seems reasonable to me.

I would like to understand what you see as being so wrong with my thought process. No hard feelings.

Every bit of turbine time you can get will give you an edge over the all piston time pilot. You might think that employers look at just total time, but they don't. Some will give you a shot with 600 hours if you can show more than just R22 instructor around the patch. Even the insurance companies will cut some slack for pilots with a variety of aircraft verses the piston only instructor. This I know for a fact, if we get a 200 hour pilot and let him or her get another 100 turbine, our insurance will accept them. It's all in the reputation you have with your insurance company and how much they accept your judgement. The variety of aircraft and turbine time will get you in the door faster. Everyone knows that I am an advocate of getting as many types in your logbook as possible.

[jtravis1]

<<<<<<<<

Edited January 25, 2009 by jtravis1

[gfowler]

There is no magic to flying a turbine, it is really easier than a piston, just monitor the start, beep up to 104% (or whatever speed is specified) and fly. Turbine transition is mostly a money making opportunity for the schools. Be the best piston pilot out there and build quality time (night, cross country).

[jtravis1]

<<<<<<<<

Edited January 25, 2009 by jtravis1

[Superglide]

I tend to agree with Bossman,which is why I posted this topic.the veteran pilots and operators I have spoken to on this topic would take a turbine time pilot over an R22 instructor with the same amount of time.I wish I would have spent the extra $$$$$ back when I started,it definitely would have made me more marketable,and a more diversified pilot.

Take the military for an example,before the TH-57 came on line(civil B-206III),it was 40 or 50Hrs in the piston ship,then on to turbines.Just my $.02 on the subject.

[Wally]

Every bit of turbine time you can get will give you an edge over the all piston time pilot. You might think that employers look at just total time, but they don't. Some will give you a shot with 600 hours if you can show more than just R22 instructor around the patch. Even the insurance companies will cut some slack for pilots with a variety of aircraft verses the piston only instructor. This I know for a fact, if we get a 200 hour pilot and let him or her get another 100 turbine, our insurance will accept them. It's all in the reputation you have with your insurance company and how much they accept your judgement. The variety of aircraft and turbine time will get you in the door faster. Everyone knows that I am an advocate of getting as many types in your logbook as possible.

 

Bossman is stating facts. The opinion one draws from facts is what the argument is all about. I completely agree with his basic point that a broad depth of experience is best. If two resumes are identical except that one has turbine time, that will be a differentiator.

How much is that difference worth? If turbine time is two or three times the cost of recip time, and your wallet and log are both thin, that's a tough call- just like all the rest you make in that situation. Welcome to the real world.

Me, if if I was comfortably going around the patch every day and clearly on the way to the magic number to be broadly hireable- but not doing much else, I might spend something to add some color to a black and white resume. If I was less comfortable, scrabbling for every hour but building experience in a lot of work and different airframes, I wouldn't.

There isn't a silver bullet answer, although broad experience comes close. Good luck.

Edited February 17, 2008 by Wally

[Bluetamon]

If you are a "jerky" flyer, this will cause problems in turbines. They require the pilot to be smooth on the controls especially if you are trying to get the most out of the ship.

 

I personally have become a better and more smooth pilot by doing some of my training in an R22. I think that if you can learn to fly that thing at near max gross, you pick up better feel and finess in anything you fly. I was lucky enough to get a job flying a big ship while having relatively low time (all piston), and the captains that I have flown with have commented me on my smoothness in the aircraft. So there is a benefit to the small training ships in that respect.

 

I have personnally witnessed that, with the entry level jobs that are out there (GOM in particular), the interviewer is more interested in how you fly and your personality, not what you've flown. In my interview, they didn't even look at my logbook to see what I've flown.

[HeloPitts]

just curious what helicopter do you beep up to 104 percent?