Multi-Engine to Meet Complex Requirement for Commercial

F

flannelw

Pre-Flight
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
32
Display Name
Display name:
flannelw
Hi everyone. Thanks in advance for your help.

I'm going to be starting my commercial training very shortly and I've been talking with a local FBO who does flight training. I'm wanting to do my single engine commercial first then do the multi-engine add-on. The only issue with this is they don't have a SE complex in their fleet. However, they have a ME complex. The guy I talked to said what they would do is have me do all of the commercial single engine training in a 172. Then do the complex requirement in their multi. And for the checkride, do the maneuvers in the 172, land, and then essentially do a multi-engine add-on which would meet the requirements for the complex. So after the first checkride, I'd walk away with a SE and ME commercial certificate. Does this sound right? Would this work? If so, I'm all for it. I've looked in the FARs and didn't see anything referencing this particular situation.

The same question goes for my CFI training and checkride; do the maneuvers in the 172 first, land, and then go do some pattern work in the multi. And if I did my multi add-on as part of the commercial course, then I would be PIC while doing the CFI checkride, if that matters for planning purposes. And that would be only for the initial CFI-A, not with a MEI add-on.
 
That doesn't sound quite right. The commercial is in the wrong order. You would have to take the multi-comm checkride first. Then you could do a single-engine add-on rating in a non-complex aircraft. It would be two checkrides.

As for the CFI, and this goes for any checkride, but it's one checkride per certificate/category/class. You can't do half the checkride in one category and class, and the other half in a different class. You might as well be asking if you could meet the complex requirement in a helicopter. It doesn't make sense. You would have to get your MEI first, then add on the single-engine, just like what I just described for the commercial.
 
dmspilot said:
That doesn't sound quite right. The commercial is in the wrong order. You would have to take the multi-comm checkride first. Then you could do a single-engine add-on rating in a non-complex aircraft. It would be two checkrides.

As for the CFI, and this goes for any checkride, but it's one checkride per certificate/category/class. You can't do half the checkride in one category and class, and the other half in a different class. You might as well be asking if you could meet the complex requirement in a helicopter. It doesn't make sense. You would have to get your MEI first, then add on the single-engine, just like what I just described for the commercial.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's what I was thinking as well but just wanted to make sure and see what everyone else's opinions are. I don't really want to do the multi as the initial commercial and initial CFI. So I guess I'll keep looking for a FBO that has a single engine complex. Nearest one to me is 2 hours away and it's a Cutlass, and I'm not a fan of Cessna RGs. The nearest Arrow is almost 5 hours away.
 
flannelw said:
I'm not a fan of Cessna RGs. The nearest Arrow is almost 5 hours away.
Click to expand...

Why? I did my commercial in a '68 Arrow and CFI in a 172RG. I didn't like the latter at first but it grew on me by the time I was ready for the checkride. I like them equally now.
 
Either the school is very jumbled up, or your interpretation of their plan is wrong. Have them show you a written syllabus or sit down with you and show how they’ll meet the requirements of each checkride, and in what order.

You can do the initial Commercial in their multi, if there’s no retract single around to fly, but that’s all in the multi. It tends to be more expensive and you’ll usually end up with more multi time, which may or may not be what you want. But you can’t mix a multi into a single engine checkride.

I did mine “backwards” that way on purpose. I wanted to fly the single engine stuff in my 182. And I didn’t mind the extra multi time. It’s not the most effficient way to do it, money-wise.

Perhaps they’re saying they want to teach you the Commercial maneuvers in the single, jump over to the multi and you’ll already know the general idea of the maneuvers but you’ll still need some time in it and doing the multi ride first, then jumping back to the single and doing a second ride.

But it’s hard to guess. The plan as you understood it, is not possible. Check back with them and figure out where the communication went wrong. If they’re not showing you a written syllabus or referencing the FARs with a plan you can write down in order, run, don’t walk, away. Find someone more organized.
 
I find my self in a very similar situation. Where I fly out of, there are no complex aircraft, though I really like my instructor. So for me there are a few options. Do the single first, train for the maneuvers in a fixed gear, then go somewhere to rent a complex and brush up on them with my CFI, use that for the ride. Then I can go and do a weekend crash course in a multi, to get the commercial multi instrument add on in a separate check ride.

Option 2, do the full commercial multi first, this takes care of your complex requirements without the need of a complex single. Then do the single engine add on, which you can now do in a fixed gear single. You can do both of these on the same day if you want, however, it is TWO separate check rides, and yes you must pay for each. As others have said these can not be one single ride. You can always do the multi, then come back and do the single at a later date too if you want.
 
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
 
bobmrg said:
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
Click to expand...
So this is for sure happening? I've heard rumors for a couple of years that this change was coming, but never heard anything else about it. I fly a 182 G1000 all of the time, so this change would be perfect. Thanks for the info.
 
bobmrg said:
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
Click to expand...
I read through the FAA Safety Briefing and didn't see anything about the change to TAAs expect in the gentleman's bio close to the rear it was mentioned that he was part of developing it. But nothing about it coming out this month, unfortunately.
 
bobmrg said:
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
Click to expand...

I have a feeling this one will be like my other prediction about the one for logging simulator time. Any FedGov agency promising anything in December during holidays and vacations, will usually deliver sometime around the end of first quarter, in March. If then.

Unless you’re in contact with someone who’s about to publish it all, Bob? But even if you are, I know you probably can’t say.

I never hold my breath on these things, and definitely never plan my life around them.

If someone makes a decision and gets moving on their plan, they’ll be done long before these changes come out, I suspect. If not, they still got it done. Most TAAs aren’t cheaper than retract singles trainers... yet anyway...

And retract singles are about to undergo a depreciation loss bigger than they’ve seen in decades, so that’ll make rental pricing interesting... as well as their future longevity as leasebacks. Poof, market gone. Kinda.

Anyway... waiting around for FAA rule changes isn’t something I’d be willing to put on a planning calendar.

“Get ‘er done.”
 
denverpilot said:
I have a feeling this one will be like my other prediction about the one for logging simulator time. Any FedGov agency promising anything in December during holidays and vacations, will usually deliver sometime around the end of first quarter, in March. If then.

Unless you’re in contact with someone who’s about to publish it all, Bob? But even if you are, I know you probably can’t say.

I never hold my breath on these things, and definitely never plan my life around them.

If someone makes a decision and gets moving on their plan, they’ll be done long before these changes come out, I suspect. If not, they still got it done. Most TAAs aren’t cheaper than retract singles trainers... yet anyway...

And retract singles are about to undergo a depreciation loss bigger than they’ve seen in decades, so that’ll make rental pricing interesting... as well as their future longevity as leasebacks. Poof, market gone. Kinda.

Anyway... waiting around for FAA rule changes isn’t something I’d be willing to put on a planning calendar.

“Get ‘er done.”
Click to expand...

That would be the Government Printing Office, and I don't know anyone there. To the best of my knowledge I can say whatever I want to say about anything.

Bob
 
bobmrg said:
That would be the Government Printing Office, and I don't know anyone there. To the best of my knowledge I can say whatever I want to say about anything.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yep. I hear ya. No argument on that last part either.

I just don’t schedule around FedGov. They’re not exactly “motivated” to hit release dates by anything unless a Senator is whining. Even then, they don’t always respond.
 
bobmrg said:
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
Click to expand...

Will this also apply to the CFI?
I’m prepping for the CFI Airplane written now. I hold an CFI Glider.
A C182RG is available but I do not know for how long. I am getting access to a DA40 XLS and could do all the flight prep in the DA40.
 
We are both going to have to wait for the official publication. My crystal ball is in the shop for its annual.

Bob
 
flannelw said:
Hi everyone. Thanks in advance for your help.

I'm going to be starting my commercial training very shortly and I've been talking with a local FBO who does flight training. I'm wanting to do my single engine commercial first then do the multi-engine add-on. The only issue with this is they don't have a SE complex in their fleet. However, they have a ME complex. The guy I talked to said what they would do is have me do all of the commercial single engine training in a 172. Then do the complex requirement in their multi. And for the checkride, do the maneuvers in the 172, land, and then essentially do a multi-engine add-on which would meet the requirements for the complex. So after the first checkride, I'd walk away with a SE and ME commercial certificate. Does this sound right? Would this work? If so, I'm all for it. I've looked in the FARs and didn't see anything referencing this particular situation.

The same question goes for my CFI training and checkride; do the maneuvers in the 172 first, land, and then go do some pattern work in the multi. And if I did my multi add-on as part of the commercial course, then I would be PIC while doing the CFI checkride, if that matters for planning purposes. And that would be only for the initial CFI-A, not with a MEI add-on.
Click to expand...
This doesnt have anything to do with the multi checkride but I did the majority of my CPL checkride in a Citabria to build tailwheel hours and proficiency then went around the pattern twice in a 172RG to complete the complex requirement.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
This doesnt have anything to do with the multi checkride but I did the majority of my CPL checkride in a Citabria to build tailwheel hours and proficiency then went around the pattern twice in a 172RG to complete the complex requirement.
Click to expand...
Oh you rebel. That goes contrary to the majority of the advice around here that says you shouldn’t risk having to know 2 airplanes for a check ride.

FWIW, I did much the same thing with a 150 and a Cutlass back in ‘81.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Oh you rebel. That goes contrary to the majority of the advice around here that says you shouldn’t risk having to know 2 airplanes for a check ride.

FWIW, I did much the same thing with a 150 and a Cutlass back in ‘81.
Click to expand...
You and I also did CPL before IR ;).
 
I did my instrument in a C182, and then went up in a Lance for the commercial same afternoon. 141 Commercial/Instrument program at an FBO.
 
flannelw said:
I'm wanting to do my single engine commercial first then do the multi-engine add-on.
Click to expand...

I did multi commercial in a Seminole, then a week later did the single commercial in the mighty C-152.

Combine the CFII with the MEI by doing both at the same time in a twin.
 
BillTIZ said:
Will this also apply to the CFI?
I’m prepping for the CFI Airplane written now. I hold an CFI Glider.
A C182RG is available but I do not know for how long. I am getting access to a DA40 XLS and could do all the flight prep in the DA40.
Click to expand...
I talked to AOPA. They expect the change to come around the first part of the year. And it will apply to both commercial and CFI. The specific paragraph in the NPRM can be found at https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...on-training-and-pilot-schools-and-other#p-201.
 
bobmrg said:
Sometime this month the regulation requiring a complex aircraft will be change so that a Technically Advanced Aircraft will be acceptable. Don't do anything rash until that change becomes effective, and then search out a TAA for the checkride. Details of the proposed change can be found in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing, available online at www.faa.gov.

Bob
Click to expand...
That’s good news. I am having trouble finding a complex to use for commercial. I thought I read some time ago that a moving map gps and autopilot was a TAA. It looks like the FAA is going to define TAA in part 61. It sounds like they are also going to require an integrated flight display as well. I was hoping I could save some money and use our 172 but it is not looking like it.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...ion-training-and-pilot-schools-and-other#h-27

TAA would be required to include a PFD that is an electronic display integrating all of the following flight instruments together: An airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator, heading indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator. Additionally, an independent MFD must be installed that provides a GPS with moving map navigation system and an integrated two axis autopilot.[44] In general, the pilot interfaces with one or more computers in order to operate, navigate, or communicate. The proposed definition of TAA would apply to permanently-installed equipment and would not apply to any portable electronic device.
Click to expand...
 
Jim_CAK said:
That’s good news. I am having trouble finding a complex to use for commercial. I thought I read some time ago that a moving map gps and autopilot was a TAA. It looks like the FAA is going to define TAA in part 61. It sounds like they are also going to require an integrated flight display as well. I was hoping I could save some money and use our 172 but it is not looking like it.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...ion-training-and-pilot-schools-and-other#h-27
Click to expand...

FAA will likely define TAA as “Whatever makes Cirrus and Garmin happy.” :)
 
Jim_CAK said:
That’s good news. I am having trouble finding a complex to use for commercial. I thought I read some time ago that a moving map gps and autopilot was a TAA. It looks like the FAA is going to define TAA in part 61. It sounds like they are also going to require an integrated flight display as well. I was hoping I could save some money and use our 172 but it is not looking like it.
Click to expand...
If and when you get into an airplane that meets the FAA's definition of TAA, hopefully it'll be fairly obvious why just GPS, moving map, and autopilot DON'T qualify.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top