poadeleted21
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2011
- Messages
- 12,332
Tallying up the log book, it seems I can log my HP/Complex training w/CFI as PIC even though I didn't have a HP/Complex endorsement. Am I reading it right?
Tallying up the log book, it seems I can log my HP/Complex training w/CFI as PIC even though I didn't have a HP/Complex endorsement. Am I reading it right?
Wish they would have just done away with HP endorsement.
I fly a 340hp plane but because it's 170hp per side it's not HP. Ever time I get into a HP plane I can't log it because I for have the freaken endorsement.
More to the point, every time you get into a HP plane you can't be acting PIC!Wish they would have just done away with HP endorsement.
I fly a 340hp plane but because it's 170hp per side it's not HP. Ever time I get into a HP plane I can't log it because I for have the freaken endorsement.
Why not spend 30 minutes with a CFI and get it?
More to the point, every time you get into a HP plane you can't be acting PIC!
Wouldn't they need to give me the whole checkout in order to give me a HP endorsement? Since that would take a few hours I don't really want to pay.
I thought the endorsement was more or less a judgement call on the part of the CFI (I'm sure there's some FAA guidelines or what not), I figured if you showed competence (which I also guesstimated that you would having your ME, which I also assumed given your post) that it wouldn't be more than 30 minute formality. I'm a 275ish hour PPL with a 1 week old HP & Complex endorsement, so consider your source
My understanding is the HP endorsement was more about the engine/fuel management than dealing with excess horsepower. Other than an impressive VSI reading compared to my cherokee and an appreciation for the right rudder on take off. The HP isn't much of a deal.
With an RG, are you planning to go for the complex at the same time as the HP? They'll probably want to take you out of the pattern for that, and maybe to a power off 180, too. Remember, you don't have feathering on most single engine aircraft, but it still helps immensely to pull the prop back!You know what, I think your right, at least it logically makes sense. They wouldn't need to test me on navigation or any of that crap so it should be much faster than a normal checkout.
I think there is a flight school on the field with a C182RG, going to give them a call tomorrow see if they can give it to me in 30min.
With an RG, are you planning to go for the complex at the same time as the HP? They'll probably want to take you out of the pattern for that, and maybe to a power off 180, too. Remember, you don't have feathering on most single engine aircraft, but it still helps immensely to pull the prop back!
Except the Chief Counsel already said yes...years ago. Only stipulation is you must be rated, i.e., have all appropriate category/class/type ratings on your pilot certificate. So, if you're getting your HP/complex training in a twin but only have an ASEL on your pilot certificate, you cannot log it as PIC time. Other than that, yes, it's legal, by both the plain reading and the Chief Counsel's interpretation of the relevant regulations.Until our Dear Leader, the Chief Counsel says no. Hahah.
Because he'd also have to pay for 30 minutes (or more) of rental on an airplane with at least one over-200 HP engine?Why not spend 30 minutes with a CFI and get it?
The endorsing instructor need only give enough ground and flight training (some of each must, by regulation, be logged) is necessary for that instructor to be satisfied that the trainee is competent to act as PIC of an airplane with at least one engine of more than 200HP. A five minute discussion and once around the pattern might be sufficient in some cases, but several hours of ground and flight training might be necessary in others.Wouldn't they need to give me the whole checkout in order to give me a HP endorsement? Since that would take a few hours I don't really want to pay.
Actually, it's not really complex by the regulatory definition, as you cannot directly control the props, but the FAA granted an exemption for the DA42 to allow it to be used to meet the requirements for complex training in 61.31, 61.129, and Commercial/CFI Airplane practical tests.I fly the TwinStar, it's complex. I expect it to feel like an underpowered single, should be pretty easy.
More than 30 years ago by my count. And consistently ever since.Except the Chief Counsel already said yes...years ago.
Because he'd also have to pay for 30 minutes (or more) of rental on an airplane with at least one over-200 HP engine?
The endorsing instructor need only give enough ground and flight training (some of each must, by regulation, be logged) is necessary for that instructor to be satisfied that the trainee is competent to act as PIC of an airplane with at least one engine of more than 200HP. A five minute discussion and once around the pattern might be sufficient in some cases, but several hours of ground and flight training might be necessary in others.
BTW, the "flight" portion may be given in a simulator or FTD, not just an airplane, which might help MachFly.
Actually, it's not really complex by the regulatory definition, as you cannot directly control the props, but the FAA granted an exemption for the DA42 to allow it to be used to meet the requirements for complex training in 61.31, 61.129, and Commercial/CFI Airplane practical tests.
That's all well and good, but by the regs (the DA42 exemption and seaplane exception in the reg notwithstanding), for the complex endorsement, you need to get training in a complex airplane, i.e., one plane with all the goodies installed, not training in one retractable plane and one c/s prop plane. :wink2:Ah, I see what you mean. I fly a Super Decathlon every month or so to stay proficient in aerobatics and I used to do a lot of flying in the DA40 about two years ago, also occasionally a fly a couple of bonanzas. So I am familiar with the manual prop controls.
That's all well and good, but by the regs (the DA42 exemption and seaplane exception in the reg notwithstanding), for the complex endorsement, you need to get training in a complex airplane, i.e., one plane with all the goodies installed, not training in one retractable plane and one c/s prop plane. :wink2:
That said, it's kind of a square-filler event, as you can get the complex endorsement in a seaplane and then go fly a retractable gear landplane without ever getting 10 seconds instruction on retractable gear, or get it in the exempted DA42 without ever learning how to manage an independent prop control. Further, you can legally fly a fixed-pitch or Aeromatic prop retractable gear plane (I think there are some Swifts with the Aeromatic prop) without ever getting any instruction on retractable gear. Finally, I've yet to see any statistics comparing the rates of gear-up landings before and after the complex endorsement was invented in 1997.