Mainline views turboprop same as jet time

Dockjock · Post by **Dockjock** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:58 am

I was updating my application yesterday and noticed that some aircraft categories have been eliminated, and some amalgamated. Looks like any mention of small aircraft (single and twin) is gone, and also the SIC turboprop/jet and PIC turboprop/jet categories have been merged.
Good news for turboprop drivers, not so great (but not really bad) for those with jet time.

neophyte · Post by **neophyte** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:43 pm

Yeah, it looks as though they only distinguish between heavy or light aircraft.

Interesting. And I just sold my sole to get a jet job!

Just kidding!

monkeyspankmasterflex · Fri Feb 03, 2006 5:20 pm

What's a "hvy" turbo-prop?

twinpratts · Post by **twinpratts** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:28 pm

King air 350, Metro 23... abv 12,500 I assume

bcflyer · Post by **bcflyer** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 8:10 pm

Those probably qualify but I would guess that something more around the size of a Dash-8, Shorts 360, Dornier 320 or maybe a Saab 340 (sorry not sure of the size of the Saab) would be looked upon more favourably. Of course if you're military then the Herc is definitely "heavy turboprop" time

superpilot · Post by **superpilot** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 8:20 pm

Not sure about the Saab 340 being heavy? Take the definition for heavy and double it then add some and then you get the TO weight of the Saab.

29chev · Post by **29chev** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:26 pm

Heavy turbo prop is...over 44,000 lbs MTOW like a HS748 , CV580 or a herc, I think a dash 8-300 is close but just under the 44,000....under 12500 is light and 12500-43999 is med.
as I recall
29chev

neophyte · Post by **neophyte** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:31 pm

The online application states that AC considers heavy time as being time on any aircraft with a MCTOW greater than 12500 lbs.

YULdude · Post by **YULdude** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:57 pm

12500? I crap bigger than that!

Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm sure a C-130. L188 (P-3) or DC-4 would be considered "heavy" turbo(charged?)-prop, but a king air 350? Bit of a stretch IMO, but if that's what AC is saying, good for those king-air folks!

twinpratts · Post by **twinpratts** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:58 am

LOL!

Inverted2 · Post by **Inverted2** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:01 am

I'm sure a C-130. L188 (P-3) or DC-4 would be considered "heavy" turbo-prop, but a king air 350?

I didn't know DC-4's had turboprops, but they are heavy.

[/quote]

YULdude · Post by **YULdude** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:50 am

I'm sure they're turbocharged........

Tuned & Identified · Post by **Tuned & Identified** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:54 am

Caution!.......Possible wake turbulence behind the departed King Air 350!

Sweet

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:17 pm

I believe the application asks to differentiate between "small" and "large" aircraft. A large aircraft is one which has a certified max takeoff weight greater than 5700 kg. (~12,566 lbs).

Localizer · Post by **Localizer** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:41 pm

I think this discussion has gone full circle twice now .... the website says over 12,500lbs .. what is there to argue about?

Loc

SittinPretty · Post by **SittinPretty** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 3:50 pm

Jeeezz guys. Do you discuss the size of everything in your life in such excruciating detail?
Heavy is over 12,500. Unless your are talking wake turbulence.

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 4:39 pm

8.3 inches...

Lost in Saigon · Post by **Lost in Saigon** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 4:46 pm

I didn't know DC-4's had turboprops, but they are heavy.

I'm sure they're turbocharged........

DC-4's aren't turbocharged..... They have "blowers" (superchargers) that are driven off the engine.

KAG · Post by **KAG** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:14 pm

Make fun of a 350 all ya like, but to AC it's a heavy. Ask all those 1900 drivers that are currently in one phase or another at AC. Sure it's a baby heavy, and really no different than a light turbine, but it's over that 12566 hump. and a 350 has EFIS, FMS, and some other goodies that the "big boys have". The only think it's lacking is any real wake behind it.

Cheers.

neophyte · Post by **neophyte** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 9:01 pm

YYZ - 8.3 " AROUND!!!!

But seriously, let's not forget that there are some turboprops equipped nicer than those "heavy" birds mentioned above, 4 tube EFIS, FMS, EGPWS, TCAS the works. Hell, that said, there are some singles better equipped than that.

Size/weight doesn't necessarily make one aircraft better or nicer than the next. (but it sure helps when looking to get an interview)

Cheers,

Neophyte