ATP-MEL: Checkride to operate SEL?

Granted, I don't know anything about your background beyond what was posted here. Personally for me, with a bunch of experience in a piston single, a power-off 180 can be easy or difficult, depending on the glide characteristics of the airplane. All of mine done in an Arrow were kind of a crapshoot, power off? Turn for the runway now.

As for how a 210 does, I have no idea, maybe a 210 pilot can chime in on that.

I haven't flown anything other than a Hawker 800 and Hawker 4000 in four or five years. Without some preparation, I could certainly see how I could blow a checkride in an unfamiliar aircraft. Years ago, my father owned a P210. It was a nice little pig of a plane.
 
Like many military guys, I obtained a Commercial-MEL and subsequently, an ATP-MEL. I don't have much of an interest in flying GA, but thought it might be fun to rent a plane while on a beach vacation. I've rented an SEL in the past with just a rental checkride, but I don't think that was legal.

If I take an ATP-checkride in a Cessna 210, would that give me SEL privileges in all SEL aircraft or would it be limited to just 210's? If I'm correct, PPL-SEL or Com-SEL would require both written and a checkride, as opposed to just an ATP checkride.

How did you meet all the requirements of 61.73 if you weren't a military pilot?
 
How did you meet all the requirements of 61.73 if you weren't a military pilot?

61.73 only applies to rated military pilots and former rated military pilots. I was neither. I obtained my commercial on my own. SIC time that I logged in the Navy was not used towards my commercial. It was included in my ATP application.
 
What Pilot Fighter is talking about is certainly correct. Historically, USN (and USMC, by extension) NFOs are treated FAR better as aviation crewmembers than USAF Navigator-rated persons are; and this even extends to career/command opportunities within aviation units in the respective services. NFOs do far more of a co-pilot type duty in Navy tactical aircraft than USAF Navigator-rated people do (of all disciplines: EWO, WSO, RN, Nav); whereas in larger aircraft such as P-3s and the like, they are more like the traditional USAF "table" Navigators.

In the Navy, and as PF alludes to, the S-3 became the first aircraft that an NFO had flight controls in front of him. Naval tactical aircraft don't have dual flight controls, with the exception of RAG F/A-18B/Ds where an IP trains another pilot (F-4/F-14s still never had them). But for fleet aircraft, the NFO has no flying controls: B/Ns in an A-6 right seat had no flight controls, neither do ECMOs in the right seat of an EA-6 or WSOs in back of an F/A-18D/F, nor did RIOs in F-4/F-14s, or RANs in RA-5Cs. Other NFOs wouldn't normally have flight controls in front of them as they're not necessarily in the cockpit seats in front of controls, such as E-2/E-6/P-3 NFOs.

For the longest time, the S-3 had a crew of two pilots up front, and two enlisted AWs in the back. Sometime in the late '80s, the single-anchor wearing aviator co-pilot in the right seat, was replaced by a double-anchor wearing NFO who was the COTAC. So the jet crew became one Naval Aviator, one NFO, and the back end guys. Being that NFOs were rated flight officers, were required crewmembers, and could fly as often as they liked since they had flight controls in front of them; many of them were able to log time this way, as well as apply it towards FAA certificates as flight time. I work with a former S-3 NFO who did just that, who ended up flying for Independance Air some time after he got out, and now works with me in Tucson.
 
What Pilot Fighter is talking about is certainly correct. Historically, USN (and USMC, by extension) NFOs are treated FAR better as aviation crewmembers than USAF Navigator-rated persons are; and this even extends to career/command opportunities within aviation units in the respective services. NFOs do far more of a co-pilot type duty in Navy tactical aircraft than USAF Navigator-rated people do (of all disciplines: EWO, WSO, RN, Nav); whereas in larger aircraft such as P-3s and the like, they are more like the traditional USAF "table" Navigators.

The "piloting" workload for an NFO can be pretty intense, as they take quite a load off the pilot. Navigation, communications, tactical coordination, checklist management, emergency management. The Navy has a long history of teaming up nugget pilots with experienced NFO's that know how an approach is flown and know the "numbers" for a given aircraft.

In the case of an in-flight emergency or even out-of-control flight, the NFO is responsible for knowing the procedure, including flight recovery procedures. Given what it takes to be an airline pilot (procedure-driven attention to detail), I think an NFO might be better prepared than a Naval Aviator in some ways.

SNA's are often surprised to see that their ground school instructor is an NFO, not a pilot.
 
Back
Top