Cheap and fast MEI program.

k9medic

k9medic

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 27, 2018
Messages
1,075
Location
N Central FL and GTC Bahamas when off work
Display Name
ATP-H, CMEL, CSEL, CFI/CFII Airplanes and Helicopters
Home Airfield
At an LZ near you
After 25 years of flying, I oddly find myself possibly in need of an MEI rating.

Despite the fact that I have my own 310, I am not willing to start pulling engines in it for a checkride.

Any suggestions on where to get a cheap and fast MEI rating?

I am located in Florida, but can travel if needed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I would have no hesitation to train in my owm 310, there is nothing violent or harmful about it.
 
k9medic said:
Both engines are at TBO. I don’t really want to put undue stress on an $65,000 engine when I can go full rental power on somebody else’s.
Click to expand...
Seems like it’d be more valuable to learn how to prevent and/or identify undue stress on your airplane.
 
k9medic said:
Seems like I already have…. I don’t treat my airplane like a trainer.
Click to expand...
If you’d be treating it “like a trainer,” and that’s putting undue stress on it, then I’d say you definitely haven’t.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
If you’d be treating it “like a trainer,” and that’s putting undue stress on it, then I’d say you definitely haven’t.
Click to expand...
Initially, I wasn’t even going to respond to this, but you’ve been around a while, and a lot of your posts have merit It would seem so I will ask - please explain to me how shutting down a high time, large bore fuel injected continental engine inflight and then doing an air start would not cause additional stress to that engine?

Maybe I missed something.
 
k9medic said:
Initially, I wasn’t even going to respond to this, but you’ve been around a while, and a lot of your posts have merit It would seem so I will ask - please explain to me how shutting down a high time, large bore fuel injected continental engine inflight and then doing an air start would not cause additional stress to that engine?

Maybe I missed something.
Click to expand...
Shouldn’t cause any more stress than shutting it down and starting it on the ground. For all the training we did with “high time, large bore, fuel injected continental engines,” nobody ever saw abnormal wear or stress.
 
FWIW - unlike the ACS for MEL add-on, the PTS does not require an in-air shutdown for the MEI.
 
People turn things on and off, then they break, then they think it broke because they turned it on and off. If they kept it off and never turned it on, then it wouldn’t break. :cool:

(expecting 100 likes for this post, thank you)
 
Mtns2Skies said:
FWIW - unlike the ACS for MEL add-on, the PTS does not require an in-air shutdown for the MEI.
Click to expand...
The local DPE told me we had to shut one down which is why I started this thread. Maybe he’s wrong!
Anthem said:
Many of the bigger Cessna twins - they advise against shutting it down or heavy movements unless absolutely necessary. This is especially so on the 421 with it’s geared engines
Click to expand...
I just did 421 sim initial for the 421 I have in prebuy. Maybe this is where I got it stuck in my head?
 
k9medic said:
The local DPE told me we had to shut one down which is why I started this thread. Maybe he’s wrong!
Click to expand...
Looks through the PTS to see for yourself :). I did not shut one down in MEI training or checkride, maybe shop around local DPE's if you want to do it in your plane. I agree with your concerns for your 310 and if in-air shutdowns were required - would be doing the same in your shoes.
 
Just had a chance to look at the PTS. Kind of ambiguous.

"The feathering of one propeller can be demonstrated in any multiengine airplane equipped with propellers that can be safely feathered unless the manufacturer prohibits the intentional feathering of the propellers during flight. Feathering for pilot flight test purposes should be performed only under such conditions and at such altitudes (no lower than 3,000 feet above the surface) and positions where safe landings on established airports can be readily accomplished, in the event difficulty is encountered during unfeathering.

At altitudes lower than 3,000 feet above the surface, simulated engine failure will be performed by throttling the engine and then establishing zero thrust."

So it would appear to be DPE choice... Just keep it under 3K!
 
k9medic said:
Just had a chance to look at the PTS. Kind of ambiguous.

"The feathering of one propeller can be demonstrated in any multiengine airplane equipped with propellers that can be safely feathered unless the manufacturer prohibits the intentional feathering of the propellers during flight. Feathering for pilot flight test purposes should be performed only under such conditions and at such altitudes (no lower than 3,000 feet above the surface) and positions where safe landings on established airports can be readily accomplished, in the event difficulty is encountered during unfeathering.

At altitudes lower than 3,000 feet above the surface, simulated engine failure will be performed by throttling the engine and then establishing zero thrust."

So it would appear to be DPE choice... Just keep it under 3K!
Click to expand...
You mean OVER 3K?
 
No, the PTS says "at altitudes lower than 3,000 feet above the surface, simulated engine failure will be performed by throttling the engine and then establishing zero thrust." So all I have to do is fly below 3000' and we can't feather an engine...
 
Anthem said:
yeah - not advised to shutdown, feather and restart on a geared GTSIO engine. . . Actually I think the recomendation is usually no more than 1" of MP per minute if possible - unless you absolutely have to like a go around or something. . .
Click to expand...
I assume “or something” includes takeoffs?

Tower: Twin Cessna 123, cleared for takeoff.
Twin Cessna 123: Ah, we’re going to need about 38 minutes in position for power up.
(ok…I exaggerated…they already had a few inches of MP at idle…it should be under half an hour.)
 
Well I made three calls to different DPE's yesterday and all 3 agreed with the first DPE... Engine has to be feathered. Can any current MEI DPE confirm? PM is acceptable.
 
What's the concern with a shut down? We're not talking about a geared engine or a turbo (I assume). Is it shock cooling? Hasn't that myth been largely dispelled?


Eric Reese does full shut downs and VMC demos in Aerostars.. planes that have a reputation. Fast forward to 15:45 if desired.


Anyway, there are enough hungry instructors that I am sure you can find someone.. but if you're going to go MEI route I vote going for quality. The fact that the DPEs that have been called won't do a checkride without a feather should tell you something
 
Tantalum said:
The fact that the DPEs that have been called won't do a checkride without a feather should tell you something
Click to expand...

That depends. If doing a checkride in a customer airplane, I would be hesitant to have the applicant do a shut down and feather. The restart could be in question, and now the check ride turns into an emergency, nothing a DPE wants to have to deal with.
 
Yes, always feather, no exceptions. The vast majority of my ME checkrides are in typical trainers like the Seminole, Seneca, and Twin Comanche. I've never had an MEI applicant present an aircraft whose mfgr "prohibits the intentional feathering of the propellers during flight." I'd have to cross that bridge if and when I come to it; doubt that will ever happen. And all of this must take place above 3,000' AGL; I use 4500' as a minimum. That's all this line in the PTS means from a practical application perspective. No ambiguity whatsoever.
 
k9medic said:
No, the PTS says "at altitudes lower than 3,000 feet above the surface, simulated engine failure will be performed by throttling the engine and then establishing zero thrust." So all I have to do is fly below 3000' and we can't feather an engine...
Click to expand...
No, that's not what it means. These requirements are being made of the evaluator, not the applicant. There are other PTS tasks in which going to simulated feather is the only acceptable means of accomplishing the task. XIII.B, XIII.C and XIII.D are simulated feather tasks. XIV.D. cannot be accomplished without feathering the prop. If the aircraft is unable to climb above 3,000' AGL due to weather, performance, etc. to perform this task, a letter of discontinuance will be issued. A suitable aircraft or better weather will be needed to finish the practical test.
 
Ryan F. said:
No, that's not what it means. These requirements are being made of the evaluator, not the applicant. There are other PTS tasks in which going to simulated feather is the only acceptable means of accomplishing the task. XIII.B, XIII.C and XIII.D are simulated feather tasks. XIV.D. cannot be accomplished without feathering the prop. If the aircraft is unable to climb above 3,000' AGL due to weather, performance, etc. to perform this task, a letter of discontinuance will be issued. A suitable aircraft or better weather will be needed to finish the practical test.
Click to expand...
You mean there’s a difference between “one engine inoperative” in XIV.D and “simulated inoperative engine” and “simulated engine failure” in the other tasks? I guess that whole “read, write, speak, and understand English” thing is actually a useful requirement. :eek:
 
I will point out one interesting scenario related to this discussion. For a brief time, years ago, I was entertaining an MEI ride in a King Air C90. This required coordination with the FSDO and some thoughtful consideration. The C90 falls into the "unique" category with regards to task XIV.D. and as I recall (? it's been awhile) the manufacturer not only prohibited the intentional shutdown of the engine in flight, but no one involved, including me, was interested in doing that.

Ended up deciding not to do the ride for various reasons, mainly the fact that it had been at least 15 years since I'd flown a King Air, and would need a number of proficiency flights just in order to be able to safely conduct the practical test. But that would be the sort of exception that would call these PTS notes into question... not your typical ride in NA light multiengine airplanes.
 
MauleSkinner said:
You mean there’s a difference between “one engine inoperative” in XIV.D and “simulated inoperative engine” and “simulated engine failure” in the other tasks? I guess that whole “read, write, speak, and understand English” thing is actually a useful requirement. :eek:
Click to expand...

Your observation on the name of the tasks and why they're named that way... is accurate. ;)
 
k9medic said:
Both engines are at TBO. I don’t really want to put undue stress on an $65,000 engine when I can go full rental power on somebody else’s.
Click to expand...
How is an engine that has reached TBO a $65,000 engine? Your life and your wallet, but I wouldn’t get “cheap and fast” training in a typical ME trainer then jump in a 310 with run out 285 hp engines.
 
Last edited:
I've made ME pilots in my plane. The engines didn't seem to mind. Is the transition to low power and high power in flight any more stress than, say, moderate turbulence transmitted through those props? I doubt it. The mounts are strong.

I dunno any ME mills on that side of the world. It used to be Sheble's bread and butter, and maybe still is. They keep hopping around from FSDO to FSDO so I don't know their story anymore. https://www.shebleaviation.com/course/add-on-cfi-mei/
 
Doc Holliday said:
That depends. If doing a checkride in a customer airplane, I would be hesitant to have the applicant do a shut down and feather. The restart could be in question, and now the check ride turns into an emergency, nothing a DPE wants to have to deal with.
Click to expand...
I mean, I understand that viewpoint. But; shouldn't the aircraft's airworthiness and overall eligibility and applicability be examined before the check ride? If the examiner isn't comfortable with the aircraft and the applicant demonstrating a shutdown and feather then probably the check ride should not take place.
 
k9medic said:
After 25 years of flying, I oddly find myself possibly in need of an MEI rating.

Despite the fact that I have my own 310, I am not willing to start pulling engines in it for a checkride.

Any suggestions on where to get a cheap and fast MEI rating?

I am located in Florida, but can travel if needed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Used to intentionally shut down and feather my 310 engines once a year to check feather mechanism. And that was a turbo. They can be finicky to restart so over an airport is not a bad idea.

if you are going to use the 310, learn and test in it. Don’t know if you are running 470s or 520s but both are pretty robust. You’ll learn a lot about the single engine performance of the aircraft which is so-so but Florida is flat so you’ve got that in your favor.

You’ll then want to go up with a really good instructor every six months to repeat and hone your recognition and resolution of an engine failure. Otherwise there’s no point in having the twin for you can’t stay sharp without such recurrent training.

Cheap and fast rating you can get, but you’ll still want to do it all in your 310 afterwards regardless. it is not nearly as well behaved as the Seminole you’ll probably use at ATP (which is the answer to your original question).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top