z987k
Well-Known Member
Or catpower.Maybe calories.
Or catpower.Maybe calories.
Or catpower.
They measure different things so it's kind of tough to make the conversion. However the general rule is that 105 pounds of thrust is equal to 1 hp.
No, I flew a full year in RJs without a HP signoff.Don't most, if not all airlines require a HP sign-off prior to hire even as SIC? If all you needed was a type to act as PIC then the HP requirement probably wouldn't be needed.
No. I'd imagine the HP endorsement is aimed at rich people bring forced to get at least basic instruction in a HP aircraft before they fly it all over the place.Don't most, if not all airlines require a HP sign-off prior to hire even as SIC? If all you needed was a type to act as PIC then the HP requirement probably wouldn't be needed.
Here's an article on it, although it doesn't come up with the 105 figure.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/propulsion/q0195.shtml
No, a 135 or 121 check counts as your high altitude endorsement.
This. There's nothing about high performance in Part 3.
Not if you've done a 135/121 check in a pressurized aircraft in the past at any point.I was talking about the high performance, not high altitude endorsement. After re-reading I think I answered my own question about the part 91 operation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you are flying anything part 91 only, no matter if you have the type or not, you still need the endorsements because you would not have the PIC proficiency check?
I was talking about the high performance, not high altitude endorsement. After re-reading I think I answered my own question about the part 91 operation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you are flying anything part 91 only, no matter if you have the type or not, you still need the endorsements because you would not have the PIC proficiency check?
Not if you've done a 135/121 check in a pressurized aircraft in the past at any point.
You are right, you just plain need the high performance endorsement regardless, except I have no idea how that applies to jets and/or SIC.
Completely impossible. That would mean a 115000 lb thrust GE90 is equivalent to a 1095 hp PT6A.They measure different things so it's kind of tough to make the conversion. However the general rule is that 105 pounds of thrust is equal to 1 hp.
This passes the sanity check.Thanks, I skimmed through it, and it seems to vary greatly. In one example they give, the ratio would be about 1.58 times the thrust gives you horsepower. So a Mustang would have something like 1400 hp equivalent for the 900lb thrust engine? Rough numbers and all but it seems to make sense I guess. I'll read it a little more in depth later.
I missed out on my high performance endorsement back in the day because the Piper Arrow variant I was flying had 200 SHP, which wasn't 201 or whatever to meet the requirements. As such, I am not legal to PIC any high performance aircraft. Would I be able to show a CFI my logbook and get a pity sign off, or would I have to go out and do a practical? What say ye legal/FAR experts?
I think we could work something out where you take a pilot for a ride in your airplane... give the endorsement based upon observing you meeting all the requirements.I missed out on my high performance endorsement back in the day because the Piper Arrow variant I was flying had 200 SHP, which wasn't 201 or whatever to meet the requirements. As such, I am not legal to PIC any high performance aircraft. Would I be able to show a CFI my logbook and get a pity sign off, or would I have to go out and do a practical? What say ye legal/FAR experts?