Multi Time vs Glass Time

MulePilot

MulePilot

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
29
Display Name
Display name:
MulePilot
Hi there,
I'm currently an instrument-rated private pilot with about 200hrs and enrolled in a flight program at a college. My next course of action will be the commercial certificate but I'm in a bit of a dilemma. My options are either to stay ASEL in a G1000 equipped C172 or to transition to a steam-gauge B58 Baron. All of my private time was with round dials, and all of my instrument time has been glass. I am not interested in the airline path, rather the corporate/business or charter route. So my question is would you, as employers, prefer to see more experience in multi-time, or time in a glass panel?
 
If you can afford to feed two engines that is the route to take.

Others who have been there will be along soon, but my OPINION is that multi time and a type rating are more useful than the instrumentation.
 
Ravioli said:
If you can afford to feed two engines that is the route to take.

Others who have been there will be along soon, but my OPINION is that multi time and a type rating are more useful than the instrumentation.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
 
Multi time is far more useful.

Being a child of the magenta line may actually make you less desirable.
 
MulePilot said:
Hi there,
I'm currently an instrument-rated private pilot with about 200hrs and enrolled in a flight program at a college. My next course of action will be the commercial certificate but I'm in a bit of a dilemma. My options are either to stay ASEL in a G1000 equipped C172 or to transition to a steam-gauge B58 Baron. All of my private time was with round dials, and all of my instrument time has been glass. I am not interested in the airline path, rather the corporate/business or charter route. So my question is would you, as employers, prefer to see more experience in multi-time, or time in a glass panel?
Click to expand...

Multiengine for sure. Employers don't care about your glass experience.

Bob
 
bobmrg said:
Multiengine for sure. Employers don't care about your glass experience.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yep. I have never been asked about how much experience I have flying behind a glass panel. All anyone wants to know is about your multi and/or turbine time.

I see no dilemma here. Do the multi.
 
Multi for sure, altough I'm not sure why this is either/or. Fly the twin as much as you can and fly the glass once in a while to stay current.
 
With the number of TBMs, PC12s, M600s, and now SF50s showing up. Is multi still the be-all and end-all it has always been?

Tim
 
tspear said:
With the number of TBMs, PC12s, M600s, and now SF50s showing up. Is multi still the be-all and end-all it has always been?
Click to expand...

It depends on your career path. Part 25 aircraft are always going to be multi-engine. When you look at airlines, they still want multi time. My opinion is still yes.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
It depends on your career path. Part 25 aircraft are always going to be multi-engine. When you look at airlines, they still want multi time. My opinion is still yes.
Click to expand...

But the OP stated, not airline. Corporate. And from what I have seen anecdotally, corporate seems headed to SETP or SEJ.

Tim
 
tspear said:
But the OP stated, not airline. Corporate. And from what I have seen anecdotally, corporate seems headed to SETP or SEJ.
Click to expand...

Small corporate, sure. Bigger corporate is still Phenoms and CJs on up through Gulfstreams. The SETP/SEJ I see a lot more in the personal/owner pilot world.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Yes. And turbine time where you can get it.
Click to expand...

+1 on that. I didn't think turbine time mattered much for me given my career path. When the MU-2 came around I was very happy to have those 100 hours of turbine time in the logbook, made insurance much easier. And now I see the extra options that turbine time could give me in the future career wise if I ever decided to jump back into being a professional pilot.

Cabin class is better than standard multi, turbine is better than piston, jet is better than turboprop, etc. when it comes to what hours help you most/give you the most options. We look at hours but there's something to the concept of the dollar value of your logbook.
 
tspear said:
With the number of TBMs, PC12s, M600s, and now SF50s showing up. Is multi still the be-all and end-all it has always been?

Tim
Click to expand...

The airplanes you mention are essentially the bottom tier of corporate aircraft. If you want a job most of the corporates are looking for 500+ multi hours in the job listings I’ve seen. So yes, multi time is still a very relevant thing.
 
tspear said:
With the number of TBMs, PC12s, M600s, and now SF50s showing up. Is multi still the be-all and end-all it has always been?

Tim
Click to expand...

You’re missing a few parts here, it’s not so much the glass or the second engine, it’s the more complex systems and how much faster things are going to happen, the sequence of things and waking and chewing gum.

It’s a huge cop out that the FAA will allow someone to get a CPL in a 172 vs requiring complex, just dumbing down aviation.

Go for multi, or a complex single
 
tspear said:
With the number of TBMs, PC12s, M600s, and now SF50s showing up. Is multi still the be-all and end-all it has always been?
Click to expand...

I have yet to see a single pilot job listing requiring, or even asking for, glass panel time. Plenty of them still looking for multi time.
 
MulePilot said:
Hi there,
I'm currently an instrument-rated private pilot with about 200hrs and enrolled in a flight program at a college. My next course of action will be the commercial certificate but I'm in a bit of a dilemma. My options are either to stay ASEL in a G1000 equipped C172 or to transition to a steam-gauge B58 Baron. All of my private time was with round dials, and all of my instrument time has been glass. I am not interested in the airline path, rather the corporate/business or charter route. So my question is would you, as employers, prefer to see more experience in multi-time, or time in a glass panel?
Click to expand...

Multi hands down!

Majority of corporate flight departments fly multi-engine planes, and usually require, as a minimum, a Commercial, Instrument, MEL resume.
 
Thank you to everyone for your responses, they are greatly appreciated. It’s nice to have answers from pilots across the field.
 
I'm with the majority on this.
Multi, and in as many types as you can get your hands on.
 
MulePilot said:
If you don’t mind my asking, what was your chosen career path?
Click to expand...

It's worth noting that I'm a career engineer, so although I've been a professional pilot I wasn't intending on jumping ship. My non-profit, Cloud Nine Rescue Flights, operated piston twins up until early this year.

I had figured that, should the correct circumstances arise for it to make sense, I would be a shoe-in at any of the regionals given that I have almost all multi time and am well above their minimums. I also figured that there was no way that Cloud Nine would end up with a turboprop at any point.

Then the MU-2 happened, and having 100 hours of turbine time made that a whole lot easier from an insurance perspective (not to mention made it an easier transition, of course). Now, I'm looking at potentially ending up with qualifications that could either put me directly into one of the majors, skipping the regionals entirely (that's a path that is becoming more and more feasible these days) or else make me much more attractive for one of the fractionals or cargo operators that flies bigger iron. I would likely still need 1,000+ hours of turbine time for that, but I'm already at 300 and at this rate looking at around 200+ hours per year.

Having turbine time also means that, if I wanted to do some corporate flying (i.e. not fractional or airlines/cargo), I'd be qualified for pretty much any turboprop and could potentially talk my way into a jet position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top