Avg time for ME rating?

Discussion in 'Pilot Training' started by 6t6, Aug 30, 2019.

  1. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    Pretty much like most threads here with questions. I see the drive bys haven’t slowed in the time I was gone. They probably googled.
     
  2. unsafervguy

    unsafervguy Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,550
    Location:
    Sw florida
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    bob
    no, the argument is that most people that are teaching in seminoles and senecas are products of the flight school that they teaching at. they get a ME rating and add a MEI after they get the minimum hours allowed. in a lot of cases they have never flow an aircraft with a critical engine. the seminole, seneca, and even the aztec and apache give you plenty of warning when it gets slow. barons and twinkies dont, they are flying until they are not. then your in a VMC spin. I have seen to many instructors that teach VMC as a thing to check off on the training report and not as a life threatening event that it is. at most flight schools VMC instuction is take way to lightly. there is nothing wrong with the airplane, its the type of instructors that are being turned out as a result of them being the predominate trainer and instructors with way to low multi time before teaching in them. as to the single engine part, no, but I disagree with the fact that someone that has only flown a 172 and a cutlass RG is qualified to check someone out in a mooney or a something on that level legally.
     
    KA550 and GRG55 like this.
  3. Scottman

    Scottman Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2019
    Messages:
    25
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Scottman
    Right. However I’m ME rated (VFR) and I was under the impression that a new IR would not transfer to my ME rating — I’d have to shoot some approaches in a twin with an examiner.
     
  4. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    What you’re looking for is in the Appendix in the Commercial ACS in the add on table tasks and the note about removing the limitation is also there.

    One approach. Or at least the examiner can combine all the tasks into one if they like.

    Clip’s point was there’s no backward limitation to SE from ME. Earn the IR in the ME and it’s earned in SE. If you hold Private SE and take the IR in the twin, you’ll have IR in both.

    (Note currency requirements — not getting into that in this post.)

    If you then were to continue Comm in the twin, you’d have a non-Commercial limitation slapped on your SE, but not an IR limitation. “May only exercise Private Pilot Privileges...”

    Your Commercial SE ride then would then have no requirement to shoot an approach.

    Also someone said your IR is “automatic” in the Comm ME ride. Not really. If you have certain circumstances like centerline thrust or taking the ride in a twin with no published Vmc, you don’t get Comm IR privileges. That leads to the “50 nm day VFR” limitation on the card, I believe.

    You must demonstrate an engine failure under the hood, and a single engine approach and landing on the Comm ME ride for Instrument privs on the Comm ME ticket. Technically all the sub-tasks on those. No matter what.

    Fun Trivia:

    The really funny thing in the Commercial ACS is read the “single engine approach to landing” and then the “single engine INSTRUMENT approach to landing”, for AMEL, and note the differences.

    Standards. So much for those. From Flight Standards.

    The entire task list should have been a cut and paste with instrument limitations added. It isn’t.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    @midlifeflyer will like this ACS legal trivia and slap his head when he sees it. LOL.

    Maybe they’ll fix it in round three of these docs. :)

    Anyway, you can’t get out of it being three checkrides but if you do the Instrument in the multi, you don’t have to fly any approaches during the SE Commercial.

    Double check against the add on table. I got tired of scrolling on the phone to make sure this year’s update didn’t change that.

    Have fun. The easiest way to make a list for any add on is to print the ACS, then hit the items in the add on table with a highlighter. Old school, list done in 20 seconds. :)

    Many folks miss the add on tables because they’re at the end of the ACS and they don’t read that far. ;)
     
  5. Scottman

    Scottman Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2019
    Messages:
    25
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Scottman
    Thanks for the explanation, @denverpilot. I probably won't get my instrument in the twin, thus the reason I was wondering if the IR carries forward to a twin if earned in a single. I'll check out the tables per your suggestion.
     
  6. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    Okay yeah, if you do a single engine failure and an approach and landing in the twin, under the hood... that’ll add the IR.

    Examiner can ask for more but it’s unlikely. Mostly because if the first one is unsatisfactory the ride is over anyway. :)

    But always be prepared for more.

    But honestly. Don’t bother just doing that little IR add on by itself if you do it. Get the Commercial or something, if you’re going to spin up for a whole checkride. :)

    Might as well ... already got the DPE there... Commercial ME is a fun ride.

    Have fun!
     
  7. Scottman

    Scottman Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2019
    Messages:
    25
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Scottman
    Yup. My plan is to get my IR and SE commercial and probably CFI. Eventually hopping back into a twin and getting my ME commercial.:)
     
    denverpilot likes this.
  8. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,132
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    I'm not planning to look in enough detail to find it :D
     
  9. unsafervguy

    unsafervguy Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,550
    Location:
    Sw florida
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    bob
    unless he really whats to see what youve got and throws a single engine partial panel NDB to a missed with a hold at you............
     
    denverpilot likes this.
  10. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    Can get the idea just by counting the number of tasks. LOL

    One of these things is not like the other... :)
     
  11. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,132
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Well, each of those is one task. But that aside,

    I would expect different testable skills for a task entitled "G. Approach and Landing with an Inoperative Engine (Simulated) (AMEL, AMES)" and one entitled "D. Instrument Approach and Landing with an Inoperative Engine (Simulated) (solely by Reference to Instruments) (AMEL, AMES)." Of course, I would expect both to be in the emergency section and they are not. But that's not any kind of a worrisome discrepancy to me. Now, if one said "identify and secure the bad engine" and the other said, "identify and secure the good engine," I'd be worried.

    But as I said, I'm not reading them closely enough to parse them for discrepancies.
     
    denverpilot likes this.
  12. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    Okay I’ll pick one example.

    One says under risk factors:

    “Possible single engine go around.”

    The other says:

    “Performing a go-around/rejected landing with a power plant failure.”

    Clearly different authors and no editor looking over differences.

    In a STANDARDS group’s STANDARDS document. LOL.

    The whole list of tasks is like that. Not just the risk factors. In the SAME document. Hahaha.

    SMH. Editing? Proofreading? Which wording do you want? Pick one and cut and paste it to both tasks.

    They’re the SAME main task with one under the hood and one not!

    Your note about the emergency vs non-emergency I noticed also... after staring at it for half an hour the other night I thought I came up with a good reason for it between the Instrument and the Commercial but not really. I forget what my brain finally thought was a good reason for it, but man.

    The differences between the Instrument and Commercial documents on the tasks is also just... gross.

    It makes your eyeballs want to bug out if you’ve ever written tech documents with repeated steps in them, anyway. You copy those tasks and/or reference them back to the original. “Do task XXX adding these sub-tasks.”

    The edits were even released at the same time. I was going to cut one of the comments slack if it was released significantly before the other. But nope.

    Sloppy. Very sloppy.
     
  13. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,132
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    Sloppy proofing and editing I expect :D
     
    denverpilot likes this.
  14. SethV

    SethV Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    100
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    SethV
    I did the same with Tom at Traverse Air this spring. About 8 hrs and ~$3K including checkride. Pretty simple.
     
    jordane93 likes this.
  15. EdFred

    EdFred Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    23,782
    Location:
    Michigan
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ed Frederick
    Prices have gone up with Tom! I did mine 9(?) years ago and it was around 2k including check ride - maybe under. I was going through my logbook this weekend, and I remember seeing 7.1, but I don't recall if it was just for that, or included the other whopping hour of time I have in MEL. So could be 6 and some change, or 7 and some change.

    I would suggest doing the IR ride (and commercial if possible) in SEL before doing the ME ride.
     
  16. jordane93

    jordane93 Final Approach

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    9,130
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jordan
    His price really didn’t go up too much. According to his website and when I did mine almost 4 years ago is $2,495 for the ME course.
     
  17. EdFred

    EdFred Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    23,782
    Location:
    Michigan
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ed Frederick
    jordane93 likes this.
  18. denverpilot

    denverpilot Tied Down

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,423
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    DenverPilot
    Drives me nuts. Once you’ve worked with a good tech writer... :)
     
    midlifeflyer likes this.