Complex Aircraft For Private Certificate Training

[ebykowsky]

Hey all, just had a question that may have been asked before, but I couldn't find any definite answers on the web. I'm sure you can guess what it is from the title: Is it possible to log hours in a complex aircraft as part of your private pilot training? Wouldn't mind killing two ratings with one bird, if it's possible. Of course, I've got plenty of a challenge ahead of me just becoming intimate with a 172, but my school also offers a 182 for nearly the same price ($20/hr more). Any thoughts?

 

[murphey]

A 182 is high performance, but not complex. Need a retract for complex, amoung other things.

 

[LDJones]

A 182 is high performance, but not complex. Need a retract for complex, amoung other things.

That's true, but to answer your question, yes, you can get high performance and complex endorsements as a student pilot and use those aircraft for private pilot training.

 

[GauzeGuy]

Hey all, just had a question that may have been asked before, but I couldn't find any definite answers on the web. I'm sure you can guess what it is from the title: Is it possible to log hours in a complex aircraft as part of your private pilot training? Wouldn't mind killing two ratings with one bird, if it's possible. Of course, I've got plenty of a challenge ahead of me just becoming intimate with a 172, but my school also offers a 182 for nearly the same price ($20/hr more). Any thoughts?

Can be done, in fact I know someone who got her initial training in a multi engine aircraft. That said, it will increase time and cost to go about it that way. Also, there could be insurance issues, for more complex aircraft it isn't unheard of to have minimums for time and ratings.

 

[poadeleted20]

If you expect a complex or HP airplane to be your regular ride immediately upon receiving your PP ticket, then doing your PP training in that complex or HP airpllane is a good idea -- the extra hours in that type will help you on your insurance. Obviously, your PP training will take longer, but in the long run, it will pay off.

However, just going out and doing five or so hours of dual in a complex or HP plane while you are in the middle of training for your PP in something simple like a 172 isn't going to do much except make your PP training longer and more expensive because changing planes back and forth during training only complicates matters. If you just want a taste of complex/HP, wait until you have your ticket in your pocket and then check it out.

 

[ebykowsky]

Alright, thanks for the advice. By the way, I neglected to mention that it is a 182RG, so it is a complex. I'm pretty close to the end of training, so I'll take Cap'n Ron's advice and hold off for another time down the road. Gosh, though, that twin duchess in the corner of the FBO's hangar sure does look fun!

 

[LDJones]

Alright, thanks for the advice. By the way, I neglected to mention that it is a 182RG, so it is a complex. I'm pretty close to the end of training, so I'll take Cap'n Ron's advice and hold off for another time down the road. Gosh, though, that twin duchess in the corner of the FBO's hangar sure does look fun!

I just finished up a student in his Piper Arrow...every hour in his logbook is in that aircraft. He will probably reach for a gear switch lever even when he flys a fixed gear because it is so engrained.

Good luck with your training!

 

[weilke]

Alright, thanks for the advice. By the way, I neglected to mention that it is a 182RG, so it is a complex.

Chances are the school (or their insurance company) wouldn't allow you to solo in that RG until you have 'x' number of hours.

I did a couple of hours in HP and complex planes during the later stages of my private training. Just something different to do, got me the endorsements somewhere around my PP checkride.

 

[ja_user]

Alright, thanks for the advice. By the way, I neglected to mention that it is a 182RG, so it is a complex. I'm pretty close to the end of training, so I'll take Cap'n Ron's advice and hold off for another time down the road. Gosh, though, that twin duchess in the corner of the FBO's hangar sure does look fun!

If you know you are going to be flying a complex shortly, make sure you start doing a proper GUMPS check now... I did as a student pilot, and I haven't left the gear up... Yet..

 

[LDJones]

If you know you are going to be flying a complex shortly, make sure you start doing a proper GUMPS check now... I did as a student pilot, and I haven't left the gear up... Yet..

My students call out GUMPS and on "Udercarriage" they look at the C-150's wheel to make sure it's down. We haven't had a gear up, either!

 

[ja_user]

My students call out GUMPS and on "Udercarriage" they look at the C-150's wheel to make sure it's down. We haven't had a gear up, either!

I have been doing it since the beginning, it really helps..

 

[Meanee]

My students call out GUMPS and on "Udercarriage" they look at the C-150's wheel to make sure it's down. We haven't had a gear up, either!

Was never taught GUMPS by my CFI, but starting doing it since I flew Diamond. Helps with fuel pump, prop control, gas tank switch. None of those were needed on a C172.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

You can, but why would you, unless you can get a killer deal, or own a complex, sounds like a EXPENSIVE pain in the ass.

Also their insurance might not be happy with a super low time pilot flying a retract plane.


Dont try to rush through your training, soak in everything you can and be patient, you will get alot more bang for your buck this way :wink2:

Like the others said, if you want to be ahead of the game, starting doing your GUMPS & FIT check on your 172/AA1/PA28 whatever

Gas
Undercarriage
Mixture
Prop
Switches/Safety
Flaps
Instruments
Trim
Transponder

 

[weilke]

Gas
Undercarriage
Mixture
Prop
Switches/Safety
Flaps
Instruments
Trim
Transponder

Its actually:

Gear down ?
Undercarriage is another word for gear
Make sure gear is down
Put the gear down
Sure the gear is down ?

 

[ebykowsky]

Thanks for all the advice. Probably won't be doing any complex for a little while, but a club I'm looking into joining has a nice looking arrow. Will probably eventually try to get my complex in that. As far as for now, I'm sticking with the 172--one possibility was if the 172 I normally fly was down, I might have been able to get some time in a 182RG for no additional cost. Otherwise, I'll be done with private in a little while anyway, so probably won't get to log any complex before then anyway. I might look into getting it as a cheap(er) add-on before instrument. Thanks again!

 

[Z06_Mir]

Two days after my checkride in a Warrior I went to a 182RG. Great airplane, absolutely love it and plan on keeping it for a long time. My insurance company required 20 hours dual before I could solo it (take in mind, I had my PPL) and another 30 either dual or solo before I could carry pax. I have about 100 hours in it now and it's a marvelous airplane, but it was a lot at first going from a very slow simple airplane to getting something with more power, complexity and avionics. Now it's second nature to me but it wasn't for the first 20-30 hours that's for sure.

 

[flyingron]

My Navion was really complex. Not only does it have gear and flaps and a controllable prop, the prop wasn't constant speed and you had to turn on the hydraulic power before the gear and flaps would work. There was a max takeoff power limit that necessitated a power reduction right after takeoff. Things were busy until you leveled out for cruise.

Popping back into a Skyhawk or 170 after I'd been flying the Navion always gives me "now what do I do" feeling after taking off as there's nothing really to do (and in the case of flying at BJC where I learned how to fly, really nothing to do until abeam the numbers on landing).

My wife had a funnier experience. After flying the Navion where the gear handle is a real handle, a giant knob that sticks out of the panel that works both a hydraulic valve and also pulls mechanical uplock cables, she was getting a BFR in a friend's arrow. After taking off the instructor tells her she can raise the gear. Margy is hunting all over the panel for it when the instructor taps the microswitch at the top of the panel. Margy with two fingers takes it and says "This little thing...how cute."

 

[denverpilot]

Its actually:

Gear down ?
Undercarriage is another word for gear
Make sure gear is down
Put the gear down
Sure the gear is down ?

ROFL...! So true.

 

[docmirror]

IIRC, the advice I got about doing the PP in a HP and complex is that you had to show mastery of all systems of whatever aircraft you choose to take the exam in. So, if you did all your training in a complex/HP plane, and showed up with that for your exam, you better know the operation of all the various knobs, buttons, switches that control those systems. Of course, one could do all their training in a complex/HP, and then take the exam in a C150 which would negate the exam requirement, then you would have to go back and get the endorsement for the complex/HP.

 

[gismo]

Hey all, just had a question that may have been asked before, but I couldn't find any definite answers on the web. I'm sure you can guess what it is from the title: Is it possible to log hours in a complex aircraft as part of your private pilot training? Wouldn't mind killing two ratings with one bird, if it's possible. Of course, I've got plenty of a challenge ahead of me just becoming intimate with a 172, but my school also offers a 182 for nearly the same price ($20/hr more). Any thoughts?

Like Ron suggested, adding a complex airplane to the mix during PPL training might be fun but it won't be very productive WRT passing your checkride unless it's your intent to take the ride in said complex airplane. Normally one wouldn't do that unless this was an airplane you owned or was expecting to fly a lot shortly after passing the ride.

OTOH, it would indeed be fun and you would be able to log the time as dual received with or without getting the endorsement. The endorsement would only be required if you were going to fly solo or take the checkride in the complex airplane and chances are there'd be some insurance issues to overcome in that case.

 

[cowman]

Side question from reading this thread, am I to understand that a fixed gear airplane with a constant speed prop does NOT require a complex endorsement. Only if it is both retractable and constant speed prop?

 

[weilke]

Side question from reading this thread, am I to understand that a fixed gear airplane with a constant speed prop does NOT require a complex endorsement. Only if it is both retractable and constant speed prop?

Correct.

Cherokee 235 is not complex. Arrow is complex.

Different for seaplanes, they dont have to have retract (amphib) gear to be complex. So you could get your complex signoff with a seaplane rating in a Maule at Jack Browns in Winter Haven,FL.

 

[Henning]

Bonanza, best, easiest flying plane in GA.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Its actually:

Gear down ?
Undercarriage is another word for gear
Make sure gear is down
Put the gear down
Sure the gear is down ?

That works great for a arrow or a Bo

Still depends on what you're flying, try taking off in something with nearly 1000shp swinging over a 100 inch four bladed prop without some rudder trim, great leg workout

Or rolling down a dirt runway in a loaded 206 with 0 flaps...

I like mine better, doesn't matter really, long as you can easily remember it and it covers what needs to be covered.

 

[poadeleted20]

Alright, thanks for the advice. By the way, I neglected to mention that it is a 182RG, so it is a complex.

With a 235 HP engine as well as retractable gear, a c/s prop, and flaps, it is both complex and HP.

I'm pretty close to the end of training, so I'll take Cap'n Ron's advice and hold off for another time down the road.

I think you'll be happy with the outcome.

Gosh, though, that twin duchess in the corner of the FBO's hangar sure does look fun!

Excelsior.

 

[weilke]

Still depends on what you're flying, try taking off in something with nearly 1000shp swinging over a 100 inch four bladed prop without some rudder trim, great leg workout

Or rolling down a dirt runway in a loaded 206 with 0 flaps...

I thought we are talking about a pre-landing checklist in a complex plane.

The somewhat humorous take on the 'GUMPS check' is simply to emphasize that the most important item in most light aircraft is the 'U' one.

Gas: I dont care about gas in the pre-landing checklist, should have switched to the fullest tank at top of descent, at pattern altitude is a bad time to switch to an empty tank or to put the fuel selector next to the detent. Putting the aux pump on should again not be something automated with mnemonic but a conscious decision, what is a valid checklist item in a Cherokee will leave you with great quietness in a 210. Yeah, its worthwhile to check that I am on the tank I wanted to be (usually a main, not a tip).

Undercarriage: Care very much about that one, over and over. But rather than making it a cursory point in a checklist, it should be 'gear, hand on he lever until 3 green and three in the mirror'

Mixture: Not really an issue, I have already enriched while descending, shoving the mixture forward mindlessly during a checklist may leave you with quietness if for some reason you ended up with a rich mixture to start.

Prop: Again, I have either gone to high rpm during the descent or I'll leave it at 2400 or so, the plane will fly an approach at lower rpm just fine, no need to wake up the airport neighbors with that 'waaaioouu' sound that you create on the outside by shoving the prop forward mindlessly at pattern altitude. If I need rpm for a go-around, the lever is right next to the throttle, I can grab both at the same time with my big paddle hands.



So rather than mindlessly going 'GUMPS, GUMPS, GUMPS' and still landing gear up, I try to focus on one, making the gear extension a conscious act and the checks during the approach to focus on the effect (seing the gear in the mirror, having the 3 lights) than any kind of mnemonic.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

The two stages of flight that people prang airplanes tends to fall to takeoff and landing.

Taking off in a poor configuration will smash you just as good as landing with gear up (sometimes worse).

I like to see my students touch EVERYTHING as they say it. We have done some heavy descents with the prop back a good amount, used some energy management to come out on approach speed at short final and the student did everything but forget to set prop forward, try doing a last minute go around for some reason with the prop way back, it's like starting a drag race in 3rd gear!

I do a GUMPS FITT before take off & landing, I also have a habit of double checking my gear when I have my landing sight picture.

Mixture: Not really an issue, I have already enriched while descending, shoving the mixture forward mindlessly during a checklist may leave you with quietness if for some reason you ended up with a rich mixture to start.

Never shove the mixture! not the best engine mgmt. It's just a check, on a long decent we will use our EGTs to help from shock cooling the engine, however for go around we know where we want the mixture based on D/A, so it's just a double check.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Mixture: Not really an issue, I have already enriched while descending, shoving the mixture forward mindlessly during a checklist may leave you with quietness if for some reason you ended up with a rich mixture to start.

I don't think I've ever been able to make an engine quit because it was too rich using only the mixture knob. In addition, it's just fine to leave the mixture where it is in cruise for the descent, if you're at the same MP (the engine doesn't know where the throttle plate is, it just knows how much air it's getting). However, if you still have the mixture leaned when you go to full throttle on the go-around, the engine is much more likely to quit, at a much worse time.

Prop: Again, I have either gone to high rpm during the descent or I'll leave it at 2400 or so, the plane will fly an approach at lower rpm just fine, no need to wake up the airport neighbors with that 'waaaioouu' sound that you create on the outside by shoving the prop forward mindlessly at pattern altitude.

Anyone who does the prop increase so early that they whiz right back up to full RPM is using poor technique.

My power reduction on pattern entry in all the C/S planes I fly pulls the prop out of the governing range, so that when I do put the blue knob forward, there is no change in the operation or sound of the engine or prop, since it's already at flat pitch. That's how it should be done.

 

[poadeleted20]

I don't think I've ever been able to make an engine quit because it was too rich.

I have, but it usually involved a hot day, a fuel injected engine, and the boost pump.

In addition, it's just fine to leave the mixture where it is in cruise for the descent, if you're at the same MP (the engine doesn't know where the throttle plate is, it just knows how much air it's getting). However, if you still have the mixture leaned when you go to full throttle on the go-around, the engine WILL quit at a much worse time.

Probably won't quit, but you will have less than full power. That's why I teach my trainees to spread their hand across all the levers (throttle, mixture, prop, carb heat, the works) when they go around.

Anyone who does the prop increase so early that they whiz right back up to full RPM is using poor technique.

Agreed. I teach setting the prop to climb RPM when configuring for approach, and then putting the prop levers forwards as part of that "full hand push" if/when the go-around is initiated.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I have, but it usually involved a hot day, a fuel injected engine, and the boost pump.

I should say, I've never been able to make an engine quit because it was too rich *using only the mixture knob*. Boost pump on the Mooney will, at a minimum, make the engine run rough.

Probably won't quit, but you will have less than full power. That's why I teach my trainees to spread their hand across all the levers (throttle, mixture, prop, carb heat, the works) when they go around.

Again, maybe a bit too strong to say "will" but if you cruise LOP and at a slightly higher (7000-ish) altitude like I usually do, I think that descending to a near-sea-level airport and executing a go-around will probably kill it.

 

[Henning]

I should say, I've never been able to make an engine quit because it was too rich *using only the mixture knob*. Boost pump on the Mooney will, at a minimum, make the engine run rough.


Again, maybe a bit too strong to say "will" but if you cruise LOP and at a slightly higher (7000-ish) altitude like I usually do, I think that descending to a near-sea-level airport and executing a go-around will probably kill it.

The only time my 470s will keep running with the pump on high is if I have the engines so far LOP they're about to die. I'm pretty lucky with that, mine both run smooth all the way to nothing on the stock injectors.

 

[poadeleted20]

Again, maybe a bit too strong to say "will" but if you cruise LOP and at a slightly higher (7000-ish) altitude like I usually do, I think that descending to a near-sea-level airport and executing a go-around will probably kill it.

Slam the throttle hard enough, especially on a carbureted engine, and it may choke on you even with the mixture full rich. In any event, there's no substitute for knowledge and understanding of the operation of your engine, and good procedures.

 

[Henning]

I s
Again, maybe a bit too strong to say "will" but if you cruise LOP and at a slightly higher (7000-ish) altitude like I usually do, I think that descending to a near-sea-level airport and executing a go-around will probably kill it.

I cover that by using the 'Cover the Quadrant' method on go around; I descend severe lean all the way to touchdown and taxi with the pops all the way back until off the runway in my taxi/cleanup flow.