I have done some looking around online but I couldn't find an answer to this question.

Are pilots of an airline certified to fly both cargo and passenger planes of the same model? For instance can a KLM 747 pilot fly 747-400, 747COMBI and 747-400F routes? Or can a China Airlines pilot fly both 747-400 and 747-400F routes? Or are different certifications required to fly pax vs. cargo? I am fully aware that pilots need different type ratings to fly aircraft of different models of aircraft but I wasn't sure about passenger vs. cargo.

There is no 747-400F type rating. So, the simple answer to your question is they can fly both types of aircraft.

They always have the Same Type Rating, correct? So yes you can fly either.

Iw as thinking of some ridiculous answer for this one, as it deserves it. Actually once you have touched a freighter you become soilded for life and there is no turning back. Your life is over as an airline pilot:)

BravoOne wrote:

Iw as thinking of some ridiculous answer for this one, as it deserves it. Actually once you have touched a freighter you become soilded for life and there is no turning back. Your life is over as an airline pilot:)

Hey now, I resemble that remark!

tb727 wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

Iw as thinking of some ridiculous answer for this one, as it deserves it. Actually once you have touched a freighter you become soilded for life and there is no turning back. Your life is over as an airline pilot:)

Hey now, I resemble that remark!

What is wrong with the OP's question?

Are you so out of touch that you need someone to explain that to you as others have prior to my post? For the record I once flew for Flying Tiger Line so I know the drill, so get over your self, it was a joke.

were you there in '89?

For several years I (and probably MMO) flew both the 747-200 both passenger and freighter versions at NW. During a 10 day trip or so, you might fly a 50-50 mix or any other combination of percentages. My personal preference was flying the freighters as you didn't have to deal much with 'people'. There was difference training so you knew how to handle both versions. The ANCbased pilots probably flew a larger percentage of freighters on trips, but they also had to deal with pax and flight attendants as their trips were mixed also.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

For several years I (and probably MMO) flew both the 747-200 both passenger and freighter versions at NW. During a 10 day trip or so, you might fly a 50-50 mix or any other combination of percentages. My personal preference was flying the freighters as you didn't have to deal much with 'people'. There was difference training so you knew how to handle both versions. The ANCbased pilots probably flew a larger percentage of freighters on trips, but they also had to deal with pax and flight attendants as their trips were mixed also.

For the young among us, did most TPAC 742 pax flights also stop in ANC? By the time I was following the industry, the 742s were just about gone.

Cubsrule wrote:

RetiredWeasel wrote:

For several years I (and probably MMO) flew both the 747-200 both passenger and freighter versions at NW. During a 10 day trip or so, you might fly a 50-50 mix or any other combination of percentages. My personal preference was flying the freighters as you didn't have to deal much with 'people'. There was difference training so you knew how to handle both versions. The ANCbased pilots probably flew a larger percentage of freighters on trips, but they also had to deal with pax and flight attendants as their trips were mixed also.

For the young among us, did most TPAC 742 pax flights also stop in ANC? By the time I was following the industry, the 742s were just about gone.

I know RetiredWeasel will verify this, but very few 742 flights stopped in ANC. The 200B was flown from JFK-NRT in the wintertime and from DTW-ITM. Those were about the longest flights. ORD-NRT could be flown with a Q powered aircraft and LAX/SFO-NRT/SEL would be flown with a Q. SEA-NRT was generally flown with a 100. IIRC, it wasn't too uncommon to have a double re-release flight from JFK-NRT in the winter. We also had a sliding scale of minimum fuel which took NRT weather into consideration. I think if NRT was VFR (back in the single runway days) we could arrive with around 18,000lbs and we would still be legal. If NRT was IFR I think the fuel bumped up to 23,0000lbs.

I remember Wilco 737 talking about both versions of the 747 on LH. It is probably common when an airline has both types, but I don't know of many airlines who do.

Many US airlines have operated both freighter and pax versions of the 707-320C/B at the same time. NOTHING unusual about this other than some smoke and fire procedures. Ditto for the DC8 50, and 60 series. Same with the DC10/MD11 and the list goes on and on. Some airlines have flown the 707 as a Combi with both pax and freight
Pan Am
NWA
TWA
AA
FTL
SWB
TIA
World
To many to list here, so Yes it's been done in the past and recent past

I started my career as a Cargo Pilot, I was type rated on the A310F, it was a normal type rating, I could even Fly the same aircraft for a passenger airline but that never happened with me. After that I have been type rated on several different aircrafts and I am sure I can fly their cargo versions as well.

You just need a little briefing, like go through things that when you fly for cargo airlines you need to get up to heat your own food etc etc but now when I fly commercial I am served food in front of me.

Yes, I fly both freighters, combis and passenger planes at the same time.

It depends on airlines and how the freight activity and fleet is separated from the passengers or integrated. At the Lufthansa Cargo the pilots are dedicated to flying cargo only. At Air France (if any F airplanes are still around) pilots can be rosted on both pax and cargo flights. I think Turkish pilots fly A330s cargo and pax as well.

rg787 wrote:

I remember Wilco 737 talking about both versions of the 747 on LH. It is probably common when an airline has both types, but I don't know of many airlines who do.

When Lufthansa operated both, the 742 as pax and freighter variant, cockpit crews were the same.

I operated with the same license KLM/MP 747-200C, -200F, -200B(SUD), -200M(SUD), -200(SUD)SF and -300M aircraft.


The same is valid for KLM's 747-400, -400M, and 747-400ERF and 747-412BCF fleet. Different engine types (as installed at the ex MP 747-412BCF) are possible after a slight difference course.

Icelandair pilots can just as well fly the 2 75Fs in the fleet as all the other aircraft there, and I know for a short period pilots even sometimes operated the freighter flight KEF-JFK outbound and then a pax flight JFK-KEF home the next day, while the pax crew from the day before operated the freighter. This was when the summer seasonal morning flights had only just started and were 3-4x weekly, so this maximised the efficiency of the operation.

On Varig 707 captain was involved in two crashs. One pax e one cargo 707.


edit: typo

SJPBR wrote:

On Varig 707 captain was involved in two crashs. One pax e one cargo 707.


edit: typo

What does that ahve to do with either accident, especially given that fact that cause for loss over the Pacific was ever given? Probably a bomb for insurance but I don't believe that was ever determined.

BravoOne wrote:

SJPBR wrote:

On Varig 707 captain was involved in two crashs. One pax e one cargo 707.


edit: typo

What does that ahve to do with either accident, especially given that fact that cause for loss over the Pacific was ever given? Probably a bomb for insurance but I don't believe that was ever determined.

He is merely providing real world evidence that a pilot can fly several different variants at once, based on information gathered from accident reports.

VSMUT wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

SJPBR wrote:

On Varig 707 captain was involved in two crashs. One pax e one cargo 707.


edit: typo

What does that ahve to do with either accident, especially given that fact that cause for loss over the Pacific was ever given? Probably a bomb for insurance but I don't believe that was ever determined.

He is merely providing real world evidence that a pilot can fly several different variants at once, based on information gathered from accident reports.

You must not read all of the previous posting as it was we'll documnetd prior to that post?

Just qn anedoctal example of it! chill out

BravoOne wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

BravoOne wrote:

What does that ahve to do with either accident, especially given that fact that cause for loss over the Pacific was ever given? Probably a bomb for insurance but I don't believe that was ever determined.

He is merely providing real world evidence that a pilot can fly several different variants at once, based on information gathered from accident reports.

You must not read all of the previous posting as it was we'll documnetd prior to that post?

And your unnecessary, off-topic, inflammatory post[s] contribute in what way? Nowhere do the rules state that other posters cant contribute with further relevant information.