flying more than one make and model?

[[email protected]]

Hi guys, another question.

What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
model of aircraft?

Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
currency.

At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?

Tom

[Jose[_1_]]

> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?

There are two commonly held views:

1: don't do it.
2: do it.

I have no trouble switching aircraft, and it makes me more flexible.
But you do have to be a bit more aware fo the differences between them.
I'm in a flying club now that has three cherokees, outfitted almost
identically. I'd rather have different kinds of aircraft for different
missions. IT takes me a bit to get used to the Cessnas again when I fly
out West, but it's no big deal.

When I had just gotten my license, I was a member of a club that had a
Warrior, a 172, a 152, and a Tomahawk. I don't remember any particular
problem switching between them, though they did fly differently (I could
make smoother greasers in the Warrior; the 172 tended to plop sometimes)

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Robert M. Gary]

I generally don't recommend student pilots switch back and forth
because they are still learning and becuase they need to become "one
with the plane" for their checkride. However, any private pilot who
flys semi-regularly should have no problems switching between the Piper
and the Cessna. At some point the differences between planes become
almost non-existant. Often times the first experience I have in a new
type of airplane is sitting right seat with a student pilot.

-Robert, CFII

[Emily[_1_]]

wrote:
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom
>
As an instructor, I usually fly (or at least watch people fly) different
makes and models, and it's never been an issue. As long as you can keep
track of speeds, quirks, and everything else, I don't see it as a big deal.

When I fly myself, I usually fly twins, so it's a moot point - there
just aren't that many rentals out there, most schools only have one
model for rent.

[Don Tuite]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 16:18:59 GMT, Jose >
wrote:
>
>When I had just gotten my license, I was a member of a club that had a
>Warrior, a 172, a 152, and a Tomahawk. I don't remember any particular
>problem switching between them, though they did fly differently (I could
>make smoother greasers in the Warrior; the 172 tended to plop sometimes)
>
I think quirks in radios and panels are more important than where the
wing is. When I was a primary student, I remember that the yellow 150
flew *way* different than the blue 150. My instructor said that, for
me, they probably did feel different. Much later, I'd say that, for
getting from here to there, vfr, most fairly dirty fixed-gear
airplanes fly pretty much alike.

Most. The Yankee took a little more attention in the air; the
Luscombe took more attention on the ground.

Don

[Ben Jackson]

On 2006-09-13, > wrote:
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?

It's not just make and model. I did all my private pilot training in
C-172s. I probably flew at least 6 different planes during my training,
and they're all different. Different radios, flap controls, yokes,
engine power, fuel drains, etc.

I think flying exactly one plane (mine!) during instrument training made
a big difference. If you switch around you have to adapt to new audio
panels, which radio controls which CDI, which radio is the "remote" for
the DME, power settings, and on and on. It's not that you can't learn
to fly a variety of planes AND on instruments, but there's no need to
work on both at the same time.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article . com>,
wrote:

> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom

I flew a couple of types (Tri-Pacer and Cessna 140) shortly after I got
my pricate and had no trouble. Later, I was in a flying club that had a
C140, a C172, two Bonanzas (B-35 and F-35) and a Meyers 200 (my favorite
at the time). I had about 150-200 hours at the time and had no trouble
with any of them. It is just a matter of keeping track of the quirks in
each and flying accordingly.

[Tom Young[_2_]]

> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.

In my vast career of 63 hours total time, I've flown several 172s and
Diamond DA20s, a 150, and a Beech Sundowner. Flexibility is fine and all,
but for me it's just a lot more fun knowing how to fly more than one kind of
plane. Also, it's gotten me a lot closer, faster, to knowing what kind of
plane I want to fly long-term. As far as transitioning goes, I found that
the differences in radio and panel layout and procedures were more
noticeable than differences in flight characteristics. The instructor who
checked me out in the DA20 kept saying, "Don't worry, it's just another
airplane," and he was kinda right.

> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?

I don't expect there's a right answer for everyone, but I didn't want to try
something else until I felt comfortable enough in the 172 I trained in. The
reason for wanting to reach a certain comfort level before moving on was to
have something reassuring to come back to -- nothing more sophisticated than
that.

-Tom Young

[Dave S]

At one point in time, my flying club had 10 planes, from a 150 to a
bonanza. I was able to fly all but the taildragger and the bonanza at
the time. Now, with a tailwheel endorsement and HP signoff, I could have
flown those two as well.

Cessna 150/152, 172, 177, Warrior, Archer, Arrow, Grumman Tiger and a
Mooney 20-E

Its all about having the checklists and proper performance data right
there. I had a checkride in each plane from an instructor. I was
considered current by our rules in all. Rather than memorizing ALL the
performance data for a given plane, you review it before flight, and
know your speeds based on reference to the checklist.

Even the airline guys have different speeds based on aircraft weight,
and have to look itup on a flight by flight basis.

It's a non issue in my mind (multiple currency)
Dave

wrote:
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom
>

[Dave Doe]

In article . com>,
says...
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?

I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.

--
Duncan

[Matt Whiting]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> I generally don't recommend student pilots switch back and forth
> because they are still learning and becuase they need to become "one
> with the plane" for their checkride. However, any private pilot who
> flys semi-regularly should have no problems switching between the Piper
> and the Cessna. At some point the differences between planes become
> almost non-existant. Often times the first experience I have in a new
> type of airplane is sitting right seat with a student pilot.

The FBO where I learned had two C150s, an older model with the straight
turtledeck and no back window and a later version with the "omni view"
or whatever Cessna called it. The older one also had manual flaps vs.
electric in the new one. The avionics were totally different. I
switched back and forth often during my training and never found it a
problem. Personally, I think it actually helped when I moved up the the
172 and then 182.

I believe it is very important to learn to make the airplane do what you
want it to do with whatever control inputs are required. I think
switching airplanes now and then helps develop this trait. I hear way
too many people who move to a different airplane and then land on the
nosewheel, or drop it in or some such thing and then say "well N12345
didn't require that much pull to flary." Who cares what the last
airplane required to flare? You are flying the one you are in now, not
the one you were in last.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Doe wrote:

> In article . com>,
> says...
>
>>Hi guys, another question.
>>
>>What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
>>model of aircraft?
>>
>>Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
>>different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
>>model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
>>and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
>>terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
>>currency.
>>
>>At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
>>fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
>
> I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.

Why not? As I posted earlier, I think it is a great idea. I'd flown
two fairly different airplanes before I soloed! And no, I didn't take a
long time to solo.

Matt

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Dave Doe > wrote:

> > At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> > fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.

My CFI would do that regularly with her students - but normally
after first solo. A 172 and a warrior simply aren't that different.
btw - my CFI would also take up a passenger or two so that that
I (the student) would not get used to the weight configuration and
get surprised when flying solo.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Viperdoc[_1_]]

I regularly fly a Baron and an Extra 300. They are vastly different in all
regards, and require a completely different set of skills.

In the end, they are both just airplanes, and it's mostly a matter of touch
and feel that makes the difference.

[Dudley Henriques[_1_]]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom

I usually suggest that students remain in one aircraft type through
certification if possible. This is done for various reasons pertaining to
the flight instruction scenario, but after certification, there should be no
reason why a pilot should avoid flying different types of airplanes.
You should use the same approach to flying various types that you use to fly
a single type; that being a thorough and competent familiarization and
checkout with each type flown.
There's really no reason to limit yourself to one type of airplane based on
the reasoning that your familiarization with that type will make your flying
safer.
Just treat each airplane you fly as THE airplane you are flying on that day
and at that time and you should be fine.
Conversely, switching airplanes frequently without a thorough understanding
and compliance with what I have mentioned above can indeed be a potential
safety problem.
What makes switching airplanes safe is simply the attitude you develop about
the issue. That attitude should transfer directly into the habit patterns
you need to be safe in this environment.
Done correctly, flying different airplanes frequently can and indeed should
be a plus for you as a pilot, not a negative.
Dudley Henriques

[Dave Doe]

In article >,
says...
> Dave Doe wrote:
>
> > In article . com>,
> > says...
> >
> >>Hi guys, another question.
> >>
> >>What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> >>model of aircraft?
> >>
> >>Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> >>different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> >>model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> >>and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> >>terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> >>currency.
> >>
> >>At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> >>fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
> >
> >
> > I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> > good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.
>
> Why not? As I posted earlier, I think it is a great idea. I'd flown
> two fairly different airplanes before I soloed! And no, I didn't take a
> long time to solo.

Because when you're learning to fly - that's what you should be
concentrating on - not learning to adjust and fly a different type
aircraft, as well.

Question back at you: why do you think it's a great idea? - and another,
since you mentioned it didn't take long for you to solo - how long might
that be: :)

--
Duncan

[Dave Doe]

In article >,
says...
> In article >,
> Dave Doe > wrote:
>
> > > At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> > > fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
> >
> > I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> > good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.
>
> My CFI would do that regularly with her students - but normally
> after first solo. A 172 and a warrior simply aren't that different.
> btw - my CFI would also take up a passenger or two so that that
> I (the student) would not get used to the weight configuration and
> get surprised when flying solo.

See reply to Matt.

--
Duncan

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Doe wrote:

> Because when you're learning to fly - that's what you should be
> concentrating on - not learning to adjust and fly a different type
> aircraft, as well.

I agree, you should be learning to fly, not learning to fly just a C150
or whatever your training aircraft happens to be.


> Question back at you: why do you think it's a great idea? - and another,
> since you mentioned it didn't take long for you to solo - how long might
> that be: :)

I posted earlier why I think it is a good idea. 8.2 hours.

Matt

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Dave Doe > wrote:

> > > I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> > > good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.
> >
> > Why not? As I posted earlier, I think it is a great idea. I'd flown
> > two fairly different airplanes before I soloed! And no, I didn't take a
> > long time to solo.
>
> Because when you're learning to fly - that's what you should be
> concentrating on - not learning to adjust and fly a different type
> aircraft, as well.

That's part of flying too.

>
> Question back at you: why do you think it's a great idea?

The CFI gets to see if the student is flying by rote or actually being
a pilot


>- and another,
> since you mentioned it didn't take long for you to solo - how long might
> that be: :)

8 hours to solo, 48 hours to ASEL.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Dave Doe wrote:
>
> I think it's fine - once you have your PPL! ie I don't think it's a
> good idea to mix plane types while a student pilot.

Fly one airplane, and only the one you're currently flying, at a time.

While attending a Part 141 school, I swapped between (3) differently
equipped PA28's with AI's calibrated in knots. At 20 hours, I changed
to a BE23 with an AI in MPH, and took my check ride @ 47 hours.

I was required to give a ~30 minute presentation to each instructor on
the systems and flying (V speeds, emergency procedures, etc...)
differences, using the POH's as visual aids. None of the instructors
had previously flown any Beech 23 family aircraft. I made laminated
V-speed and extra checklists that were offered to each instructor and
the DE. In hindsight, I think the extra homework was beneficial, and an
excellent experience. Both aircraft became that much more detailed in
my mind.

A great example learned while actually flying involved stalls. Using
the stall recovery technique for the Warrior on the Sundowner resulted
in an unwanted pitch down attitude, while gently relaxing the elevator
pressure worked perfectly. The Sundowner also needed slightly different
inputs to slip, when compared to the Piper.

I believe that I was a much better pilot when the DE arrived for the PPL
ride, because I felt like I _really _ knew the aircraft, in addition to
being able to execute maneuvers.

All in all, I think changing aircraft can actually be good, if the
student is willing and able to put in the proper effort.

[Michelle P]

wrote:
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom
>
It takes me about 100 hours to get really comfortable in an airplane.
The piper Cherokee was the first and it took my about a year. My second
was my Maule and it too me about 6 months. My third a C-172 that took me
about a month. my forth, a Turbo charged, pressurized Skymaster, about a
month. The more frequently you fly an airplane the faster you will
become comfortable. I regularly switch between tail draggers and Nose
pushers. At this point I have no problems.

Michelle P (I fly for a living)

[john smith]

In article . com>,
wrote:

> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?

The flying club I am a member of has the following aircraft available:
1x PA32-300
2x C182
1x PA28T-201RT
1x PA28-181
4x C172
2x C152
plus a few others I don't remember.

I am checked out in all these aircraft.
My recommendation is to get checked out in as many as you can as soon as
you meet the insurance minimums.
The C172s in my club are used extensively for primary and instrument
training, so they are always booked.
The C152s are used for primary training and are also often booked.

Insurance companies set the minimum pilot requirements for most aircraft
checkouts. These may be hours and or ratings, particularly with high
performance and complex singles which are most commonly available.
Taildraggers and twins are available for rental some places.

Sometimes you can get a checkout as part of using a particular aircraft
to get another pilot rating. You are going to be flying more than the
minimum insurance requirements to get the ratings, so why fly around
just to fly the hours off for the checkoff. Especially with instrument
training.

Some pilots cannot afford to spend the hourly rate x the minimum number
of hours dual to get checked out in the high performance aircraft, so
they only fly the aircraft they can afford.
This limits their selection when they want to take a trip.

The earlier in your flying career that you get checked out in a
particular aircraft, the better off you will be in the future.

[BTIZ]

I am constantly flying different types and makes of aircraft, 4-5 different
make/models of gliders, AMEL, ASEL, tail draggers, conventional gear and do
not have a problem. On some models I do not fly often I review the pertinent
information before flight (aircraft systems, emergency procedure etc) and
keep the check list handy. On the check list (or on a card in my shirt
pocket) are the needed Vspeeds for review before that phase of flight.

BT

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hi guys, another question.
>
> What are the most commonly-held views on flying more than one make and
> model of aircraft?
>
> Take the example of a 172 and a Warrior. Clearly the aircraft are
> different and the best solution would be to fly only one make and
> model, but the reality of plane rental is that if you are checked out
> and current in more than one aircraft, you have more flexibility in
> terms of when you can go flying, which means more fun and more overall
> currency.
>
> At what experience level is it generally seen as sensible to regularly
> fly two different makes and models of plane? Is this a big deal or not?
>
> Tom
>

[Dave Doe]

In article >,
says...
> Dave Doe wrote:
>
> > Because when you're learning to fly - that's what you should be
> > concentrating on - not learning to adjust and fly a different type
> > aircraft, as well.
>
> I agree, you should be learning to fly, not learning to fly just a C150
> or whatever your training aircraft happens to be.

There is no need to increase the burden of flying learning different
types IMO. (You would agree, would you not, that it *is* additional
workload - learning new types?). This is particularly evident later on
in training when learning stall recovery... I learnt in a Traumahawk -
the std config (two stall strips per wing) - and even then, they have a
noticeable wing drop - unlike a C172 that generally just mushes
forwards.

Perhaps even more basic than stalling... doin' yer first turns,
including climbing and descending turns - why complicate matters with
different rates, different speeds, different characteristics - all of
which are directly related to simply flying a different type aircraft.

My opinion is unchanged - stick to one type - do your various type
ratings as you wish after yer PPL is obtained.

I note that some familair posters who are or were instructors endorse
this also.

PS: I soloed in less hours, perhaps thats the difference? (7.5) :)

--
Duncan

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Dave Doe > wrote:

> I note that some familair posters who are or were instructors endorse
> this also.

If you haven't noticed already, you will find CFI's have different opinions
on how to instruct. In fact, I'd pay good money to watch you try to tell
my CFI that she shouldn't offer option of flying other aircraft to her students.

>
> PS: I soloed in less hours, perhaps thats the difference? (7.5) :)

Not in my case since I didn't fly the warrior until after the first few solos.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Brian[_1_]]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> I generally don't recommend student pilots switch back and forth
> because they are still learning and becuase they need to become "one
> with the plane" for their checkride. However, any private pilot who
> flys semi-regularly should have no problems switching between the Piper
> and the Cessna. At some point the differences between planes become
> almost non-existant. Often times the first experience I have in a new
> type of airplane is sitting right seat with a student pilot.
>
> -Robert, CFII

No Kidding I have had days were I have flown 8 different airplanes in
the same day. One Day I flew all of the following.

Tomahawk, Aeronca 7AC, C175-180, C172, PA28-151,C150, C206,Citabria.

Does tend to make you a "Jack of all Trades, Master of None."

Brian CFIIG/ASEL

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Doe wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>>Dave Doe wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Because when you're learning to fly - that's what you should be
>>>concentrating on - not learning to adjust and fly a different type
>>>aircraft, as well.
>>
>>I agree, you should be learning to fly, not learning to fly just a C150
>>or whatever your training aircraft happens to be.
>
>
> There is no need to increase the burden of flying learning different
> types IMO. (You would agree, would you not, that it *is* additional
> workload - learning new types?). This is particularly evident later on
> in training when learning stall recovery... I learnt in a Traumahawk -
> the std config (two stall strips per wing) - and even then, they have a
> noticeable wing drop - unlike a C172 that generally just mushes
> forwards.

The additional workload for me wasn't worth worrying about. Most of the
workload comes from learning the avionics and that isn't a big deal
during the first 20 hours of primary training.


> Perhaps even more basic than stalling... doin' yer first turns,
> including climbing and descending turns - why complicate matters with
> different rates, different speeds, different characteristics - all of
> which are directly related to simply flying a different type aircraft.

To learn that it takes different settings to get the same performance
from different airplanes. This is an important lesson that many don't
learn for a long time. I learned to fly from an old "seat of the pants"
pilot, not one of the new "by the numbers" instructors. Each has its
pros and cons, but I'll take the seat of the pants approach for primary
training. I selected a more "by the numbers" instructor for my
instrument training.


> My opinion is unchanged - stick to one type - do your various type
> ratings as you wish after yer PPL is obtained.

As is mine. Fly a few different types and learn to fly airplanes, not
an airplane.


> I note that some familair posters who are or were instructors endorse
> this also.

Yes, most "modern" instructors probably do for the reaons I stated above.


> PS: I soloed in less hours, perhaps thats the difference? (7.5) :)

I don't know. My main problem was that I could only afford to fly 30-60
minutes a week (one session a week basically)so it took me a couple
months to solo and roughly a year to get my private (at 47.2 hours).

If you flew more frequently that probably helped. And maybe you are
just a better pilot than me. The plus is that I transitioned to a C172
with one trip around the pattern and to a C182 with two trips around the
pattern. Had to fly a little longer as the instructor felt that a
sign-off for HP with 0.3 hours might not look good. :-)

Matt