Didn’t the Air Force nickname that thing the “flying coffin”?

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

I'm undergoing training on a type rating at the moment for a far less sporty aircraft, and it will be over 60 days training, and 100 hours of full motion simulator before we ever get to the actual aircraft.

100 hours of sim time? Good gracious. May I ask what you are working on?

Every type rating I have has been dished out with 32 hours or less in the sim, and half of that as non-flying pilot.

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

I'm undergoing training on a type rating at the moment for a far less sporty aircraft, and it will be over 60 days training, and 100 hours of full motion simulator before we ever get to the actual aircraft.

100 hours of sim time? Good gracious. May I ask what you are working on?

Every type rating I have has been dished out with 32 hours or less in the sim, and half of that as non-flying pilot.

Not a type rating story here, but A True Story involving PIC time in type:

A guy came to me for training for the Instrument Rating. I wanted to make sure that I was covered on his insurance policy, so I checked with his agent. When asked how much PIC time I had in that type airplane, I answered truthfully, "I have under eight hundred hours in those."

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
"I have under eight hundred hours in those."

Ahhh, just enough to be dangerous.

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
"I have under eight hundred hours in those."

Ahhh, just enough to be dangerous.

I actually had never been in one, so "under eight hundred hours" was a true statement.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
"I have under eight hundred hours in those."

Ahhh, just enough to be dangerous.

I actually had never been in one, so "under eight hundred hours" was a true statement.

And not over 25 nautical miles?

I meet all the requirements except the truck load of $$$.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
while we were talking, he said that the average check out type to get a type rating was 25 hours (and that was for someone with high performance time already under their belt - like an F16 driver)

That's less time than it took me for the T-6/P-51 checkout. No type rating required, but insurance and LOA was tough .

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
"I have under eight hundred hours in those."

Ahhh, just enough to be dangerous.

I actually had never been in one, so "under eight hundred hours" was a true statement.

Brilliant.

I once had a young lady say to me, "I heard pilots make good money."

Considering how little I was making at the time, I simply smiled and replied, "I've heard that too!"

quote:

Originally posted by aileron:
That's less time than it took me for the T-6/P-51 checkout. No type rating required, but insurance and LOA was tough .

Enlighten me: why is LOA needed for these airplanes?

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by aileron:
That's less time than it took me for the T-6/P-51 checkout. No type rating required, but insurance and LOA was tough .

Enlighten me: why is LOA needed for these airplanes?

My guess is because of their experimentalness. I'm curious as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

I'm undergoing training on a type rating at the moment for a far less sporty aircraft, and it will be over 60 days training, and 100 hours of full motion simulator before we ever get to the actual aircraft.

100 hours of sim time? Good gracious. May I ask what you are working on?

Every type rating I have has been dished out with 32 hours or less in the sim, and half of that as non-flying pilot.

MD-11 at the moment. The training, which was originally scheduled for 45 days, will wind up being right about 60.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by aileron:
That's less time than it took me for the T-6/P-51 checkout. No type rating required, but insurance and LOA was tough .

Enlighten me: why is LOA needed for these airplanes?

For some of these aircraft, type ratings used to be required, but the FAA switched for many of the fighter and other type aircraft to a LOA that needs to be renewed. Those with the type already on their pilot certificates could keep the type, but still had to get the LOA.

A letter of authorization points to a need for recurrent training, while a type rating, especially in a single seat cockpit airplane, proves more problematic. A type rating and the criteria specific to the type are identical to the ATP test; a type ride by and large is an instrument flight, and many of these aircraft are not instrument aircraft, nor well designed or it. Some are unique enough that the ability to field personnel to check and test for them was very limited, leading to a system of the LOA and demonstrations in the aircraft, as opposed to checkrides.

One of the airplanes I fly is the largest single engine production civil airplane today; the air tractor 802. In the configuration I fly it, it's a 16,000 lb airplane, with a 1400-1600 hp turbine engine; normally that require a type rating. The 802 doesn't, but does operate under a renewable waiver with the FAA, and specific requirements for those flying the aircraft.

The 12,500 and turbine and turbojet requirements for a type are not hard and fast, and have a number of exceptions.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

MD-11 at the moment. The training, which was originally scheduled for 45 days, will wind up being right about 60.

Well, enjoy the plane! Don't believe the hype. It's a great flying plane and ridiculously smart in some of the design and human factors.

It's a bit smaller than what I'm used to. We have a couple of weeks left, three if they throw in days off, then hopefully home for a little bit. So far so good.

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by aileron:
That's less time than it took me for the T-6/P-51 checkout. No type rating required, but insurance and LOA was tough .

Enlighten me: why is LOA needed for these airplanes?

My guess is because of their experimentalness. I'm curious as well.

The bird I occasionally fly is registered in the Experimental category, and the LOA was required for low altitude Statement of Acrobatic Competency (SAC card) in waivered airspace.

No LOA required for Cavalier Mustangs as they have a TC, but most are registered in Experimental Exhibition. Insurance required 60 hours of T-6 time regardless of tail wheel time, and it took about 20 more dual in a TF-51. Sadly, the owner is selling the P-51 to buy a Viper engined L-29. I have zero turbojet time, so if I want to fly the L-29 it's another LOA and god knows what for insurance.

More than you want to know >> http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail...900.1,Vol.5,Ch9,Sec2

This message has been edited. Last edited by: aileron,

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
It's a bit smaller than what I'm used to. We have a couple of weeks left, three if they throw in days off, then hopefully home for a little bit. So far so good.

The plane may be smaller, but the cockpit is gigantic compared to the Boeings I've worked and ridden in. Especially the Whale.

quote:

Originally posted by Otto Pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
It's a bit smaller than what I'm used to. We have a couple of weeks left, three if they throw in days off, then hopefully home for a little bit. So far so good.

The plane may be smaller, but the cockpit is gigantic compared to the Boeings I've worked and ridden in. Especially the Whale.

The mad dog is definitely roomier in the cockpit. I keep asking for the flight engineer. Nowhere to be found. It would have been nice had Douglas kept one installed.

The 747 did have a smaller cockpit, but plenty large enough. The MD-11's gross takeoff is what the Whale's max landing was, and I grew attached to that fourth engine.