why is multi time such a big deal?

[Beefitarian]

In theory you're managing whatever engine makes thrust for the plane. Two or more of them could mean twice or more work.

Why is it a big deal to have or lack the time? Because the only way to get experience is to do something. Easily measured in time numbers scribbled on pages in a book.

[trey kule]

I still feel tha multi-shirt time is way more important than other time. Particularily with complex timepieces.

IFly said it well..As long as both engines keep working, flying a twin is really no different that a single.

As to turbine time, a bit different story..Fast hands and rote procedure over brains can cause some serious expenses....better to let someone else pay for the experience and weed out the flash-fingered ones.

For now however, it is what it is, regardless of how pilots feel about it.

[Taco Joe]

Reminds me of a friend who flew Navajos in the oilpatch but at the time couldn't get a job on King Airs without turbine time. He would say that the navajo made hime a better pilot since he couldn't outclimb the weather or descend through it as quickly, didn't have as much power to back him up in ice (or as effective de/anti ice equipment to rely on), or as much power for the heavy loads, and high density altitudes. He had piston reliability not turbine. He went into all the same runways the King Airs did without reverse thrust, without the same range and single engine performance. He flew single pilot cause the plane couldn't make money with a co-joe taking up useful load so had to work alone... And yet he obviously couldn't handle a big expensive turbine machine...

Its hard to argue with this bit, because it is true.

+1

[Check Pilot]

I rarely post here anymore now that I have retired but this subject kind of rusts my nuts. In my 40 years of aviation, getting multi-engine time was just a small step to gaining experience in the real world of aviation. The same as true for going from piston power to turbine. It's all those small steps that true professionals go through in a path towards any goal that a pilot might want to set. Some folks just want to stay on a job that is always the same and just love doing what they do. I met lots of guys that wouldn't change a thing in their flying career and I really admired those that chose that path. They were happy with it all. I also met a number of pilots that just wanted to go fuselage hugging and fly something that would challenge their ability to go further with a dream job in mind. Some made it, some didn't. Some guys like me just let nature take it's course. I started out as an instructor and crop sprayer/charter pilot and I had to get a multi rating so I could make a buck at the stupid aviation world in the 1970's. If I had not done that I'd still be instructing. Which was a job that I still have the utmost respect for when guys still stick with it. I miss teaching new folks how to fly. Eventually this dedication led me to the regulatory claws of TC and for the next 29 years I had to learn how to fly things like old clapped out Queen Airs and those funny modified Twin Otters that TC used to have and all their stupid SOP's designed for the lowest common denominator in the herd.

All this eventually led to flying jets after a stint on flying old clapped out A-90's which I never trusted because all the insulation on the wiring was crumbling to bits and I figured one of these days would short out and make a nice fire somewhere in the back of the plane an we would be suddenly NORDO and flying on nothing more that the makers name on ASI and needle/ball trying too get into who knows where on a bad IFR day. Luckily Garry Cooke helped us get rid of those pieces of junk when did a gear up in Regina one day and the management realized that things had to change.

So it's important to realize that it's not the multi time that's important but the time as a fully qualified Captain that has the experience skill and knowledge that is learned over the years.

I flew Citations of all kinds of models for a lot of years but I never thought of myself as some kind of hero 4 bars on the shirt kind of pilot. I just went with the flow that was dealt to me when I had to learn something new. It was no big deal. I have no idea how much multi time, jet time, turbine time, instructing time, aerial application time or total time I have. I quit logging anything in a log in 1980. In the long run it just doesn't matter. I just did a job to make some money.

[Beefitarian]

IFly said it well..As long as both engines keep working, flying a twin is really no different that a single.

Don't you have to prove you won't crash when someone pulls the throttle of one of the engines to idle once a year or something, to continue to write a larger number in the total of the column in the book at the bottom of the page?

[Colonel Sanders]

going from piston power to turbine

Anyone that tells you that operating a turbine is
harder than a piston engine is full of excrement.

The same sort of idiot might tell you that it's
harder to navigate with a GPS than without one,
and that you have to be a real hero to push the
buttons on a GPS

Fact: a Maule M4-210C is more challenging, and
requires more skill to start, takeoff, fly and land,
than an L39. And a Pitts makes the L39 look like
a 172. I teach people to fly all these types (and
many more).

All the F-104 pilots that I have checked out on the
Pitts say that it's much harder to land than an F-104
(170 knots short final).

So please, don't buy into the male bovine excrement
fed to you by morons and idiots, that what they are
flying is much harder than what you are doing.

[trey kule]

Well, CS, as this was quite clearly directed at my post, I should clarify it and let others decide for themselves.. I will not challange your comments about male bovine excretement..I have read your posts and acknowledge your experience and expertise in that area.

Like many things in aviation , there are turbines and there are turbines..Some of the nice new modern ones start by pushing a button.. But this thread was directed at the progression to multi time. The typical pilot moving up will get their experience on a PT 6.
The PT 6 is rather old technology.. As a result there are many limitations that are not computer protected. A pilot can overtorque the plane on take off..Forget to allow for bleed air/air conditioners on. Overtemp on the climb or in cruise, and forget about Ng limits. There are not one, but several Itt limits for example. for a pilot who has spent the first part of their career only concerned about rpm or rpm/MP on take off and climb, the challange is to be aware of all the limitations.
So allow me to start.
1. Starting the PT6 is simple enough.. If you actually look at the guages and know when to abort if things are not as they should be..Lots of cooked engines by young new pilots trying to start an engine which was almost there.
2.Our new inexperienced ones do not monitor several guages well in alot of cases..I have sat and watched a pilot advise they have done a "climb check" and the ITTs are well over the limit.
These are big expensive mistakes..
It takes a good deal of training to get all the little nuances with these engines implanted in a transitioning pilots brain, and some experience to get them to apply them, particularily as many only apply infrequently..And in many cases, the transition to turbine is just a part of learning about pressuarization, radar, de-ice/anti ice...It can be an overload and it does take time for the average new pilot to get it all in order.

The only reason I can fathom for your rather derogatory comments is that you dont have enough experience yourself transitioning pilots and so have not seen the common mistakes they make.

But it is true, that once you get past the small turbines , the new bigger non prop ones are simply push button and monitor. and there are more computers than the space shuttle had on board to monitor and make sure the pilots dont do anything to hurt the engines.
The older style jet engines, or at least the ones I have experience with, are actually much simpler that the Pratts.

No question though, the Pitts and the Maule are fire breathing dragons that only real pilots can fly..at least that is what the cock of the walk in Possum Falls would have us believe. Share with us CS.How many thousands of hours do you have on turbine engines? Exactly How many pilots have you transitioned from piston to turbines.?..

[Colonel Sanders]

CS, as this was quite clearly directed at my post

No, it wasn't. Calm down.

Any airplane will have strengths, and weaknesses. It pays
you to learn about both. Generally this is not rocket science.

What disappoints me is that so many people will tell you that
their airplane is a fire-breathing dragon but they won't
tell you why. Probably because they either don't know themselves
or they want to obscure the truth and present themselves
as some kind of high priest of something terribly difficult
and mystical. Either way, my BS detector is clanging non-stop.

If someone can't tell you simply and clearly what they
are doing and why, walk away.

[shimmydampner]

Reminds me of a friend who flew Navajos in the oilpatch but at the time couldn't get a job on King Airs without turbine time. He would say that the navajo made hime a better pilot since he couldn't outclimb the weather or descend through it as quickly, didn't have as much power to back him up in ice (or as effective de/anti ice equipment to rely on), or as much power for the heavy loads, and high density altitudes. He had piston reliability not turbine. He went into all the same runways the King Airs did without reverse thrust, without the same range and single engine performance. He flew single pilot cause the plane couldn't make money with a co-joe taking up useful load so had to work alone... And yet he obviously couldn't handle a big expensive turbine machine...

Its hard to argue with this bit, because it is true.

+1

Funny, in another thread someone put forth that that Navajo time should only count for half towards an ATPL. Less valuable than twin turbine FO time.

[iflyforpie]

And I'm willing to bet that person was a turbine F/O with no command time..... not a humble Navajo captain doing more with less.


I think that my 337 time should not only count for double the hours towards an ATPL, it should also make me a sky god. Single pilot, no autopilot, flying close to terrain all of the time, unique configuration..... plus even though it flies like a big 172 it can be a fire-breathing dragon if you aren't careful. Trust me.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Funny, in another thread someone put forth that that Navajo time should only count for half towards an ATPL. Less valuable than twin turbine FO time.

Aviation is arguably one of the most fu.ked up occupations on earth because the culling process allows such myopic stunningly stupid thinking to prevail.

The ATPL should be predicated on flight time and passing the tests on transport category aircraft not driving in circles in Cessna 150's.

*****************************************************************************

I don't think I am going to be very popular here for such heretic thinking.

[seasonaldriver]

Seems like people generally sort of agree with me. ME time is mistakenly regarded as much more valuable than SE time by those in the hiring seat. I've got about 8k hours in a variety of SE aircraft, including a few turbine complex aircraft but very little ME time. The hiring seat guys only see the lack of ME time as near as I can perceive when I apply for an ME job.

Ah, well, I'm having waay too much fun flying a turbine on floats to really care about it anyway, but I was curious about what people think.

thanks for your thoughts!

[traveller123]

What is the most difficult flying?

Flying a Navajo SPIFR without an autopilot, always stuck in the couch or flying a brand new Citation X two crew under the sun at FL340????

All the pilots I know who flew turbines told me that in general case, it's a lot easier to fly a turbine/turbofan than a piston.

[Colonel Sanders]

it's a lot easier to fly a turbine/turbofan than a piston

uh huh.

PS A Citation X will go supersonic

[vcollazo]

I think part of the problem is insurance companies. They really frown/sky high premiums for pilots flying ME that don't have a fair amount of ME time.

[Colonel Sanders]

An insightful comment on the poor training
that they have received - according to them.

[co-joe]

Ironically after years of not being able to break into turbine flying, that same Navajo pilot I knew got on with Conair to fly the Aerostar because of his piston command time. His first turbine time at all came in the left seat of a Commander 690 and he's made a good deal more money in aviation that I ever did.



Check Pilot, it's a shame you don't post here more often, I really enjoyed your words. It's good to think about what REALLY matters once in a while, and just multi for the sake of multi sure isn't it.

[station60]

I'll tell you right now... if I get a resume from someone who has had lots of engine failures over their career I'd probably toss it.... either for their poor aircraft operation or continuing to fly for operators who run such lousy equipment.

Who puts that on a resume? Lame!

[sstaurus]

going from piston power to turbine

Anyone that tells you that operating a turbine is
harder than a piston engine is full of excrement.

The same sort of idiot might tell you that it's
harder to navigate with a GPS than without one,
and that you have to be a real hero to push the
buttons on a GPS

Fact: a Maule M4-210C is more challenging, and
requires more skill to start, takeoff, fly and land,
than an L39. And a Pitts makes the L39 look like
a 172. I teach people to fly all these types (and
many more).

All the F-104 pilots that I have checked out on the
Pitts say that it's much harder to land than an F-104
(170 knots short final).

So please, don't buy into the male bovine excrement
fed to you by morons and idiots, that what they are
flying is much harder than what you are doing.

Ok, I agree with all that but gotta call BS on the GPS thing, I don't think anyone would claim that it's harder to navigate with GPS whatsoever

[LousyFisherman]

Ok, I agree with all that but gotta call BS on the GPS thing, I don't think anyone would claim that it's harder to navigate with GPS whatsoever

There has been more than 1 pilot around here who has got into trouble by using the GPS to navigate in the mountains.

LF