182 to 337 transition; wise? - Page 2

WebMaster · #16 04-17-07, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ernie Martin
Yeah, Larry, but what about the point made by Herb Harney (that 337 time does not count as conventional ME time if your check ride was in a Skymaster) and Tropical's assertion that it does count? Who's right? Anybody know? Herb's point came as a surprise to me, since I thought it did count, but I don't know.

Ernie

It counts as ME-CLT. In fact, I took my Instrument ride in my Skymaster, and they wanted to give me an Instrument-CLT rating. Because I have a conventional ME rating, I ended up with a conventional ME-Instrument. It's all moot if you are only ever going to fly a 337. However, if you have a friend with a twin commanche, or a 310 or a twin commander, if you are CLT, you can not take the controls (I left out 421's, because that requires a high altitude endorsement).

gkey · #17 04-17-07, 02:43 PM

Maybe I am totally off tract here, so pardon me if that's the case. I currently only have a sinlge engine fixed gear, fixed prop land rating (for my Cessna 172 N).

Then I bought the 337. My insurance company stated that I had to fly 25 hours with my CFI to do the conversion to retract gear, variable prop settings and multi engine (in the 337). Bear in mind, I told them I was not interested in conventional twins at this time, I only want to fly my 337. After I have completed the 25 hours duo with my CFI, I have to fly my checkride in the 337.

That's it. That's all. They're happy. I'm happy. I realize I can not fly a conventional twin with this rating, but who cares? I love my 337.

Ernie Martin · #18 04-17-07, 03:35 PM

Larry, we know we can't fly a conventional multi-engine airplane with a multi-engine CLT-only license. That's not the issue. The question is this: if you have a multi-engine CLT-only license, do you count your time piloting a 337 as ME time for purposes of a) airline jobs, and b) logging it in your log book. I think the log book issue is clear, you do log it as ME time. But say you have 300 hrs on a 337, then get a full ME license and have 700 hrs on a conventional twin, and then apply for an airline job. Do you have 1000 hrs ME or 700 hrs ME?

Ernie

gkey · #19 04-17-07, 03:51 PM

Ernie, I asked that very same question to my insurance company (for future logging purposes). They had no problem with adding the time in a Skymaster to total ME time, they only wanted the times specified to each plane. Basically, as someone said already, 2 throttles = 2 engines.

I suspect though, that many companies will have their own interpretation of this rule, so maybe it should be best to contact one's own insurance company directly, and get the answer straight from the horse's mouth.

Frank Benvin · #20 04-17-07, 07:53 PM

The rules might be different from Canada to the US. I have a type rating on my licence. ( C337 inline type endorsment) I can fly a single and a 337 , Twin rating is a seperate licence.

Frank

hharney · #21 04-17-07, 10:35 PM

Boy, I guess I really opened the can and the worms came out. I am not positive of this but here is how I understand it.

The log book time is ME. Period. The license is ME - CLT. I am not leagal to fly a conventional twin. I have to fly 25 hours with an instructor and ride with an examiner to have the CLT limitation removed from my license. As far as the time logged it's ME. I do not distinguish it as ME - CLT just ME.

Earnie, your question should be answered with 1,000 hours ME.

What I was suggesting was that you should take your initial training for ME in a conventional twin so that you have a standard ME license. I love my Skymaster but I also love airplanes that have other configurations. I just think it's better to get the full rating.

At one time the FAA was going to pull the CLT rating. Then the only choice would be a standard ME which a Skymaster would not qualify for the training aircraft.

That's just my interpitation but I could be wrong.

John Hoffman · #22 04-17-07, 10:43 PM

I think everyone is right in a way re mulit logging.There was a time in the 80s that the CLT rating wasnt available. Just before I took delivery of my 337 in December 1998 I heard that the CLT was coming back and made inquiries thru the local FAA office. They dug up the info and sure enough it would be available to me - even found an examiner that could do the CLT but it was clear that if I did the CLT then I would log CLT hrs. only. I decided to skip the fuss and just get a multi. at a school in their plane. Glad I did it that way, got it out of the way in a weekend and have been logging multi. hrs since. It was a good learning experience, got to learn how to declare an emergency when the critical engine that was shut down for the checkride demo wouldnt restart in the air.

tropical · #23 04-17-07, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ernie Martin
But say you have 300 hrs on a 337, then get a full ME license and have 700 hrs on a conventional twin, and then apply for an airline job. Do you have 1000 hrs ME or 700 hrs ME?

Ernie

You have 1000 hours of multi engine time.

WebMaster · #24 04-18-07, 08:30 AM

Good point, John. I favor, always, doing the ME training in someone else's airplane, in a structured enviroment, so you get it out of the way. I know someone who did the CLT thing, but it took him months to get the training, and quite some difficulty in finding a DPE.

One other thing to consider, is the commercial license. If you ever intend to pursue a commercial ME license, there is no such thing as Commerical ME-CLT.

Dave Underwood · #25 04-18-07, 10:12 AM

my two cents worth.

I had been out of flying for a few years (12 to be exact) when I decided to return to flying. Up to that point I had flown a variety of aircraft, of which 400 hours was in retractable complex singles.

I wanted a simple, straight forward, safe multi and after flying a Seneca II doing single engine work at less than 200 fpm climb on the missed on a warm day, decided that was not for me.

Did some more research and figured the 337 was the best and not unreasonable in terms of complexity for me, even if I was not flying it regularily.

I found my FT337GP and returned to flying using it to train in. A bit of a step, but it was similar to 182's and 210's from the past, just heavier, faster and a little more complex. Pretty easy to fly all in all and single engine requires little effort and no sweat at all.

So in answer to the original question in this thread, moving from a 172 to a 337 is not a big step. You would make a similar step moving to a 210 or any training multi-engine aircraft. I would advise you get good training for the transition. If you can find an instructor with 337 experience, all the better.

As to licences, I did not have an FAA license (and my Canadian ones had lapsed) so I did my FAA private ride in the 337. The DPE had to get clearance for the ride and my licence was then private, multi-engine land, center line thrust restricted.

I then went to Florida and trained for my IR in 172's. Along the way did the SEL ride which the DPE wanted me to have before he would do the IR ride in the 172. My license was then SEL, MEL CLT restricted, Intrument Airplane, ME restricted to VFR only

I then did some time in a Duchess, training for the ME-IR. The DPE had to get permission again regarding the removal of the CLT restriction, but on that ride, I was given the ME-IR and had the CLT restriction removed. The license then read SEL & MEL, Instrument airplane.

In respect to the other questions on the thread, you can do the MEL ride in the 337 provided the DPE gets clearance from his FSDO. The license will be MEL, CLT restricted.

A MEL-IR would also be CLT resticted until you do the required upgrades per the practical test standards. That is mostly a VMC demo and demonstrating control while single engine and an approach and landing. That is only if you wanted to remove that restriction. I got that for free because of what I was training in.

I also think it is a good idea to fly a variety of multi-engine planes so you can appreciate how much nicer and simple the 337 is to fly in comparison.

Regards - Dave