If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Best Option for Private Pilot to Multi Commercial Instrument Ratings
I am currently a ASEL private pilot and would like to get to Multi Commercial
Instument ASAP. I can dedicate full time to this and would like your opinions on the best way to go about it. There seem to be 2 schools of thought - 1- get my instrument and commercial in a Single Engine, then get my multi add ons. 2- Get my multi first, then work on instrument and commercial in the multi. I can understand the pro's and cons to both. Option 1 allows me to work on one thing at a time since I am already comfortable in a single engine, however it might be detrimental b/c I won't have any appreciatable multi time when I am done. This will lead to problems with insurance rates if I am insurable at all. Option 2 on the other hand will be a more expensive option, and will require learning a few new things at the same time, but will also build 150 or so hrs in the multi when I have my ratings which will certainly help insurance companies. Additional info - I am currently at about 185 hrs. I am not looking to go to the airlines, but rather I am looking to fly a Cessna 421 for my company. Any suggestions? thanks, Mark |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Hudson Valley Amusement" wrote in message =
... I am currently a ASEL private pilot and would like to get to Multi = Commercial Instument ASAP. I can dedicate full time to this and would like your = opinions on the best way to go about it.=20 =20 There seem to be 2 schools of thought - 1- get my instrument and commercial in a Single Engine, then get my = multi add ons. =20 2- Get my multi first, then work on instrument and commercial in the = multi. =20 I can understand the pro's and cons to both. Option 1 allows me to = work on one thing at a time since I am already comfortable in a single engine, = however it might be detrimental b/c I won't have any appreciatable multi time = when I am done. This will lead to problems with insurance rates if I am = insurable at all. Option 2 on the other hand will be a more expensive option, and will = require learning a few new things at the same time, but will also build 150 or = so hrs in the multi when I have my ratings which will certainly help = insurance companies. =20 Additional info - I am currently at about 185 hrs. I am not looking = to go to the airlines, but rather I am looking to fly a Cessna 421 for my = company. =20 =20 Any suggestions? thanks, Mark Instrument, Commercial, then Multi-Engine should be easiest. You'll be challenged enough transitioning to the 421. You wouldn't welcome the hassles of the other ratings at the same time. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Mark,
While you may be qualified in the FAA's eye's. The companies insurance company will want you to have 500 hrs multi before they let you loose in a twin for hire. Michelle Hudson Valley Amusement wrote: I am currently a ASEL private pilot and would like to get to Multi Commercial Instument ASAP. I can dedicate full time to this and would like your opinions on the best way to go about it. There seem to be 2 schools of thought - 1- get my instrument and commercial in a Single Engine, then get my multi add ons. 2- Get my multi first, then work on instrument and commercial in the multi. I can understand the pro's and cons to both. Option 1 allows me to work on one thing at a time since I am already comfortable in a single engine, however it might be detrimental b/c I won't have any appreciatable multi time when I am done. This will lead to problems with insurance rates if I am insurable at all. Option 2 on the other hand will be a more expensive option, and will require learning a few new things at the same time, but will also build 150 or so hrs in the multi when I have my ratings which will certainly help insurance companies. Additional info - I am currently at about 185 hrs. I am not looking to go to the airlines, but rather I am looking to fly a Cessna 421 for my company. Any suggestions? thanks, Mark |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Solo time is required for the commercial certificate, and there is no way in
the world that an insurance company will cover you in a twin without hundreds of hours of twin time. Bad idea financially. Get the certificate and rating in a single, then go for the MEL. Expect to be disappointed when your company tells their insurer that they want to put you on their policy. A 421 is a VERY demanding airplane (one of the few I have lost an engine in) and a hangar queen. Bob Gardner "Hudson Valley Amusement" wrote in message ... I am currently a ASEL private pilot and would like to get to Multi Commercial Instument ASAP. I can dedicate full time to this and would like your opinions on the best way to go about it. There seem to be 2 schools of thought - 1- get my instrument and commercial in a Single Engine, then get my multi add ons. 2- Get my multi first, then work on instrument and commercial in the multi. I can understand the pro's and cons to both. Option 1 allows me to work on one thing at a time since I am already comfortable in a single engine, however it might be detrimental b/c I won't have any appreciatable multi time when I am done. This will lead to problems with insurance rates if I am insurable at all. Option 2 on the other hand will be a more expensive option, and will require learning a few new things at the same time, but will also build 150 or so hrs in the multi when I have my ratings which will certainly help insurance companies. Additional info - I am currently at about 185 hrs. I am not looking to go to the airlines, but rather I am looking to fly a Cessna 421 for my company. Any suggestions? thanks, Mark |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Gardner" writes: Solo time is required for the commercial certificate, and there is no way in the world that an insurance company will cover you in a twin without hundreds of hours of twin time. [...] This is simply not correct. Insurance will be of course more expensive than for a c172, but on the smaller twins and private use, is indeed available. Through a Canadian broker, Lloyd's started covering me with just 70 hours on type (pa23-250). I gather from other posts that, despite speculation of the cognoscenti, the actual USA situation is not much worse. - FChE |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Frank Ch. Eigler" wrote in message ... "Bob Gardner" writes: Solo time is required for the commercial certificate, and there is no way in the world that an insurance company will cover you in a twin without hundreds of hours of twin time. [...] This is simply not correct. Insurance will be of course more expensive than for a c172, but on the smaller twins and private use, is indeed available. Through a Canadian broker, Lloyd's started covering me with just 70 hours on type (pa23-250). I gather from other posts that, despite speculation of the cognoscenti, the actual USA situation is not much worse. A 421 has more in common with a B-17 than it does with an Aztec. Think of it as a twin turboprop without any of the systems automation. The major attraction is that you can buy a lot of performance for pretty short money up front, particularly a year or so back when the wing spar AD was hanging over everyone's head. But you'll probably pay it all back out in operating costs eventually. At least if you buy a Cheyenne or MU-2 you get the comfort of turbine reliability, all the more so considering how little you want to lose an engine in a 421. -cwk. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Hudson Valley Amusement" wrote in message
... I am currently a ASEL private pilot and would like to get to Multi Commercial Instument ASAP. I can dedicate full time to this and would like your opinions on the best way to go about it. One-third of the instrument rating is learning attitude flying- how to fly S&L, make turns, climbs, and descents accurate by reference to instruments only. This should be mastered in a slow, simple airplane first. Two-thirds of it is learning procedures, which are basically independent of the airplane, but will again be easier to master in a slower airplane until you get thehang of it, which may take a good 15-20 hours or more. The commercial ticket doesn't really require you to master any dramatically new skills, so you might as well train for it in a twin if you can afford it. Personally, I think the best thing to do in your case would be to head to Fla. or Ariz. and knock your ratings out in minimum time and money, and then come back and find yourself a good instructor-pilot to fly with you the first 100 hours or so and really educate you. The insurance company likely won't cut you loose anytime soon anyway so you might as well get used to it. -cwk. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:02:14 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
wrote: One-third of the instrument rating is learning attitude flying- how to fly S&L, make turns, climbs, and descents accurate by reference to instruments only 13-14 hours to learn how to atttitude fly? Either you got a slow student or a bad instructor, in my opinion. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I guess I was a slow student.
wrote in message ... On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:02:14 GMT, "C Kingsbury" wrote: One-third of the instrument rating is learning attitude flying- how to fly S&L, make turns, climbs, and descents accurate by reference to instruments only 13-14 hours to learn how to atttitude fly? Either you got a slow student or a bad instructor, in my opinion. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
One-third of the instrument rating is learning attitude flying- how to fly S&L, make turns, climbs, and descents accurate by reference to instruments only 13-14 hours to learn how to atttitude fly? Either you got a slow student or a bad instructor, in my opinion. I guess it depends on what you mean by "learn how to attitude fly". It's one thing to keep it straight and level for short periods of time while concentrating hard. It another thing to hold heading and altitude to tight tolerances and execute climbs, descents, and turns for hours on end with almost no thought given to it, so you can devote you entire attention to procedures. Add in silly maneuvers like steep turns and more important stuff like partial panel and unusual attitude recoveries, and it's a lot of work. Once you got that stuff down cold, flying approaches is easy. My instrument training had me doing approaches almost from day one. As a result, I was strugging to keep up with the airplane and spent a lot of time getting frustrated because I wasn't making any progress. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 3 | June 23rd 04 04:05 PM |
Musings of a Commercial Helicopter Pilot | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 6 | February 27th 04 09:11 AM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |