checkout

[Lands Like Brick]

how would you go abouts getting a checkout on a privately owned plane to be put under insurance? its a c182 equipped with a G1000? who needs to do the check out? just a class 4 instructor?
any help would be appreciated

Thanks
LLB

[Ref Plus 10]

I would think that as long as your license has the basic non-high performance single engine land aeroplane rating on it, you should be able to have your name on the insurance. When I put my name on insurance for a 182, I was required to do 10 hours with the owner of the airplane, and then to have 25 hours on the plane before the premiums went back down to normal.

[EPR]

It may have changed,but I seem to recall valid Instructors just need to be named on the insurance.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

You don't need an instructors rating to do a check out.

[Lurch]

You don't need an instructors rating to do a check out.

Ah cat I thought you had this system figured out by now

Insurance companies love instructor ratings, an instructor can do a check-out on any aircraft as long as they have time on category. I have done Check-outs on planes I have never flown before, now before I take a bashing it was with a pilot who already had 300 hours on type and it was just re-currency check.

Most insurance companies I have dealt with require new owners/renters to do a checkout with a "pilot" who has more then 10 hours on type. Unfortunately it is usually easier to get an instructor then it is to get a "private" pilot to do the check with you.

Best bet is to ask the insurance company what they require, if you already have time on type you should be good to go. If not they will have requirements for the person doing your check ride. I have never heard that it has to be an instructor.

Now to throw a WTF at you guys, Insurance for Cirrus requires the instructor to be a Cirrus certified instructor to do any of the required training. This includes initial, bi-annual, and annual training. I have done instrument training in the Cirrus but can't log it because of insurance requirements and they won’t insure me because I haven’t gone down for specific Cirrus Training at a cost of $2500.

Lurch

[Oil Burner]

Sounds like an excellent reason Not to buy a cirrus...

[groundtoflightdeck]

Its up to the insurance company. Usually someon with 50 hrs on the advanced instruments can give the next guy his 50 hrs and so on. I used to do insurance check outs on Cirrus' but that was based on my experience not on credentials.

[trey kule]

Lurch wrote:

I have done Check-outs on planes I have never flown before, now before I take a bashing it was with a pilot who already had 300 hours on type and it was just re-currency check.

Let me see. NO time on type. So exactly how do you tell if the pilot is doing everything correctly, understands the systems, and emergency procedures and is using the appropriate speeds for flaps/gear etc, and power settings.
Because he has 300 hours on type and will not have forgotten anything so the recurrency check is just a ride around the patch with him? What if there was a real emergency and your recurrent one had forgotten the proper response. How much help would you have been?

Oh wait....I forgot.....you can log it as PIC time and put it on your resume.

As to the original poster. If you have a license you do not need a checkout by an instructor on a 182. Imagine the expertise you are going to get from an instructor who has no time on type. Get a pilot with experience and the ability to share it properly and get a proper checkout. Posts to the contrary, insurance companies dont hold instructors in that great a stead unless it comes to simple aircraft. Having said that if an instructor really has non-instructional PIC time on type and an instructors rating that can be a real benefit in terms of a more structured professional checkout.

Like many similar planes, it does not take a great deal of skill to fly a 182 safely, but it takes some experience and skill to fly it properly without beating it up.

[MichaelP]

My understanding since we're buying a DA40-180 with the G1000 is that the insurance companies specify 14 hours training in the use of the G1000.
You can get this training at Empire and Galvins among others.

With the DA40 coming on line we will be offering a similar course too...
I was surprised at what Galvin charge for the course, and shocked at the cost at Empire, to me the system is not that complicated... I had a couple of days groundschool on the G1000 and then was up in the IMC of Shijiazhuang in the aeroplane.

We will offer the groundschool, and when the DA42 FTD comes online too we'll have much more hands on.
Groundschool is fine, but using the system is better.

[trey kule]

Micheal P.

I have never had any experience with the G1000, but the pilots here who have tell me that is, like all Garmin systems of the last few years, very user friendly. They also said it kind of a layered system. That is, easy to use, but you can increase the usefulness of it by using the enhanced facilities. It might be a good idea to send one or two on the course and then have them, in turn use it for awhile, and then teach the others in your company.

And now , I ask myself, why am I giving you advice? Oh well, its free so you can take it for what you are paying for it.
BTW...all the people who I know who have flown with the system said nothing but good about it...a real bonus for your students. Nice to see flight schools investing in the latest technology. And actually going about learning properly to teach it properly. Potential students take note.

[MichaelP]

There are a lot of features in the system and like all systems it is subject to the problem of pushing the wrong button.

For the student pilot the G1000 can easily develop the habit of 'head in cockpit', and this is not desirable.
Many of the earlier students in China had a serious head in cockpit problem... They'd learned the SOP's and these specified the pitch attitude expected for each manoeuvre, 5 degrees nose up on the G1000 PFD AI for example.
The GPS was set Direct to ZBSJ and the GPS OBS set to the runway heading.
All of these G1000 specific numbers meant that the student's attention was focused inside the cockpit.
When I had students from the first two groups and who had been there for over a year already, I would dim the PFD screen, and switch the MFD to the traffic page (blank), and tell the student to fly a visual circuit... This was usually accompanied by serous complaining by the student, "What did you do that for?", and even some yelling at me!

But the system is very easy to use... Too easy.
A PPL holder doing his night rating with me was due to fly with me one night. The intention was to send him solo at night.
The cloud base was 400 metres, there would be no solo tonight, and so we cancelled.
Dispatch called the student to say the cloud base was now reported by the tower to be 1,600 metres; why isn't he flying?
I had instructed the student to call me if the weather got better... Unlikely!
Dispatch was insistent the student go flying and so he did...
The cloud base was in fact still 400 metres, and the student was off on an unauthorised solo, his first at night.
ATC had incoming traffic and instructed the student to hold at the NDB at 900 metres... and he did!
He was observed to make a wobbly approach to land afterwards...
I grounded him for a week, that's all I could do.

But it illustrated the fact that the G1000 could give guidance to a pilot with limited experience and extremely poor PDM skills and he didn't lose it!

Yes we have the new stuff coming, and yes I intend that it be used appropriately...
For basic training I want to stick with the bog standard Katanas with their economical Rotax engines, and no big PFD and MFD displays to distract you from your lookout.
For touring and IFR there's the G1000 equipped DA40 and DA42.