Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Dual Qualified

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

ASApuppy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
334
Lets start a reasonable discussion on the merits of being dual qualified in the CR2/CR7 and now CR9.

First off, for the record, I'm opposed to dual qualification and even more opposed to one-rate. But, for the sake of argument, if something had to give, I'd choose to be dual qualified over being paid one rate. I bring this up out of discussions I've had over the new LAX operation. I can certainly see the operational advantages for Delta of being able to run CR7's on the busy days and CR2's on the slack days. With day lines only planned, this would not represent a scheduling nightmare.

A question for those of you that operate multiple equipment: How do you stay current? Are your checkrides in both or do they alternate? Do you carry 2 POH's or one big one with both sets of data? Do you feel safe jumping in between airframes?

I'm usually in the screw the company at all costs mode given the tone they set at negotiations, but I'm trying to step away from that and start a civilized discussion. Ultimately I do desire a healthy industry. Whether or not ASA can join those ranks is completely up to management.

Some things that I see in order to make this work without incidents (like melting a CR2 engine off the pylon when your look for detent power) is that we must actively fly both. No building of pure one type schedules. I say this for the safety aspect. Also, there should be an override for flying larger equipment. FO's should get at least 60% of the CA's override.

Those are my thoughts, please share yours. I'm off to go give airplane rides.
 
Just a quick thought: Mainline pilots have always been qualified in mutiple series (727-100 and -200, 757-200 and -300, A319 A320 A321, etc). They carry multiple sets of data in their AFMs, usually on color coded pages. I *think* WN sets a distinction between 'classics' and 'NG', but otherwise those pilots fly, what, 6 different series numbers?

Now, pay? That's a different subject altogether.
 
I personally think that I could safely be dual rated in the 50 and 70. The 900 is a totally different airplane so no to that.
I hope some good discussion comes out of this from dual qualified pilots....
Skywest, PSA, Mesa or whoever else out there does it.
Cheers
 
Southwest pilots fly the 737-300/500/700. Our books explain the differences for systems/procedures but all SWA pilots fly all of our aircraft. We only have the 3 different series though.
 
700 versus 900??

The 900 is a totally different airplane so no to that.

I thought that the 700 and 900 were relatively the same, system wise. What are the big differences in operational procedures?? Thanks.
 
firstthird said:
Southwest pilots fly the 737-300/500/700. Our books explain the differences for systems/procedures but all SWA pilots fly all of our aircraft. We only have the 3 different series though.

My bad, thank you for the correct information.
 
Sawmill said:
Try landing a 700 the way you land a 200...if you survive, you will probably be out a job.

I've had students who took their commercial checkrides in two different airplanes. chandelles in a Cessna and landings in a Mooney. These are kids with 300 hours. Entirely different cockpits and systems. They did it. They got used to it. Quit whining.
 
;)If they want us "Dual Qualified," that's fine....but it will be at 700 pay rates or they can STICK IT!!!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top