King Air 350 Type Rating

John and Jim, correct me if I'm wrong, The King Air 200 is in the same boat with the 300 and 350; a second in command IS required if an approved autopilot is NOT installed. I was sure this was true for 135 pax ops, but maybe even for 91. But hey, I've been wrong a few times.......
cool.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he's right Jim. My type for the 1900 says "Second in Command Required."

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand corrected, Thank you. My BE-200 or CE 500 type ratings don't say anything about second in command required ...

Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

The FAA sorta' changed this a while back I think. Aren't the single pilot Citation types CE500S? I know for the Starship you could either get a 'BE2000'(sic required) or a 'BE2000S'(single pilot). With the 300/350 type they did away with the 'seperate' type ratings and simply added the verbage if you got a '2 pilot' type. I also have a BE300 type with 'SIC required for BE300' in the limitations section of my certificate. Not a big deal to remove it and make it a single pilot - I just never got around to doing it.

Jason
 
John T.
With respect to your position, maybe I am misinterpreting what you said. Could you clarify a few things. I have worked for 5 different 135 operators, one out or Orlando FSDO, and I have NEVER heard of a PIC designating his own SIC (Part 135).

Here's an example:
One of your part 135 Be99 (Be200 or whatever) PICs is on his nightly freight run alone. During one of his stops he meets a local CFI with a ME rating. Are you saying, that PIC can designate said CFI as his SIC and blast off and let the "SIC" manipulate the controls and log time???? No SIC training, no checkride??

My interpretation, is that if a person is not trained and checked by the specific 135 certificate holder, that person is NOT authorized to touch the controls, and therefore not able to log the time.

All King Airs, even the 1900, are single pilot certificated. Here are the type certificates from the FAAs site.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/1E7FD607B43EE8F186256F5C0074EB08/$FILE/A24CE.pdf
page 22 for the 1900C
page 27 for the 300
 
[ QUOTE ]
John T.
With respect to your position, maybe I am misinterpreting what you said. Could you clarify a few things. I have worked for 5 different 135 operators, one out or Orlando FSDO, and I have NEVER heard of a PIC designating his own SIC (Part 135).

[/ QUOTE ]

No not under Part 135! I am only referring to part 91 operations for self designation.

We had a lengthy discussion about this one day at an ESP program seminar, a safety program for CFI prospectives.

All of the FAA Inspectors present agreed that SIC time is not really necessary for any FAA required rating, with the possible exception of ATP, but it is VERY necessary for insurance requirements. Therefore the consensus was that logging SIC time was not a violation of any regulation, since the regulation is vague - "under the rules of this part, no one may log SIC unless the particular rules of that operation require an SIC."

Since the rules of the operation could be anything, it was decided that if a PIC designated a qualified copilot as SIC under Part 91, it was not only legal, but legally binding as well, including sharing the liability should any arise.

I hope that explains it a little better. This is a complicated subject - agreed?

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an example:
One of your part 135 Be99 (Be200 or whatever) PICs is on his nightly freight run alone. During one of his stops he meets a local CFI with a ME rating. Are you saying, that PIC can designate said CFI as his SIC and blast off and let the "SIC" manipulate the controls and log time???? No SIC training, no checkride??

[/ QUOTE ]

No not in this case, unless the leg is operated under part 91. Part 135 specifically requires training, background checks and a current form 8410 in order for a pilot to act as PIC or SIC. I'm sorry if I was vague on this one before.

A footnote however, by default ALL 135 ops specs require and SIC for ALL aircraft, and the SIC requirement is waived if an approved and qualified autopilot is substituted for the SIC. Our POI further stated that even if the autopilot is approved, working and in use, it is still leagal to have a properly trained and checked SIC in the right seat, logging the time.

[ QUOTE ]

My interpretation, is that if a person is not trained and checked by the specific 135 certificate holder, that person is NOT authorized to touch the controls, and therefore not able to log the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Seems we were saying the same thing after all!

[ QUOTE ]

All King Airs, even the 1900, are single pilot certificated. Here are the type certificates from the FAAs site.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/1E7FD607B43EE8F186256F5C0074EB08/$FILE/A24CE.pdf
page 22 for the 1900C
page 27 for the 300

[/ QUOTE ]

Well yes and no. The default 300 and 350 type rating check ride is NOT single pilot. There are additional demonstrations performed to have the "Second in Command required" clause removed, such as single pilot ops, radio, proper headset usage. Minor stuff but it cost more
smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
They are 100% in agreement that an SIC can be designated by the PIC in any operation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have realized I was in error on this statement. The "any operation" should be replaced with "any non-air carrier operation."

My apologies. I was completely wrong.
 
[ QUOTE ]
This is a complicated subject - agreed?

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. I'm with you now.
Of course if you want to make it really fun....Part 91 turbojet SIC gets a little more complicated.

[ QUOTE ]
Seems we were saying the same thing after all!

[/ QUOTE ]
Agree again.

[ QUOTE ]
The default 300 and 350 type rating check ride is NOT single pilot. Minor stuff but it cost more
smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]
I think here, you were talking about "pilot" certification, where I was talking about "airplane" certification.
I'm still with you there.


By the way....
Merry Christmas to everyone.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I think here, you were talking about "pilot" certification, where I was talking about "airplane" certification.
I'm still with you there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm - well I'm not 100% familiar with Part 23 or SFAR 43, so I'm not exactly sure what the wording is, but we were told in Mesa groundschool that the 1900 is a two pilot airplane, but is certified for single pilot operations under part 91 only, and with special, extra training. There were a few guys out there that had the single pilot type and they would often get the middle of the night call to reposition an aircraft. I was given the option of getting the single pilot type, but my DE talked me out of it. His exact words:

"You want it? I can give it to you if you want, but think about it. Do you really want to fly from Orlando to Farmington or Phoenix all by yourself without an autopilot?"

Tod Marcus is not only a great pilot and great DE, but also a very wise man!
 
[ QUOTE ]
John and Jim, correct me if I'm wrong, The King Air 200 is in the same boat with the 300 and 350; a second in command IS required if an approved autopilot is NOT installed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Naw, I was baiting the line so to speak, My King Air 200 type is good for nothing, as it is not required for civilian flying as the 200 has a 12,500lbs. MGTW limitation, I got the type because we are allowed to operate our Military King Air 200 at 14,000lbs MGTW. You can fly a 200 without an autopilot or a copilot. It is regulated the same as a seminole or any other light twing under part 23. The only thing the 200 type helped me with was insurance ( they aren't as smart as they think they are) and in getting my first jet rating without an operational limitation without flying the actuall aircraft for the checkride.

Jim
 
I've run into a few C12 guys that the FSDO wouldn't let them have a B200 type. They said it would encourage them to fly a civie King Air 200 over 12500#. Gotta love that logic.
 
It shouldn't be up to the FSDO, The Military has a letter authorizing it. The problem is that not all C-12 pilots qualify. The authorization is for the "newer" C-12s and are identified by serial number, the pilot applying for the type rating must show 10 hrs of PIC time is such an airplane.
Fly a civialian King Air 200 over 12,500 ... never, who would do such a thing ... its against regulation.

Jim
 
The problem there the FAA doesn't recognize the RC-12 because it's not a "clean" BE-200. All the add ons and mods make it more of the experimental classification, where as my C-12 with the exception of a few radio mods is an off the shelf BE-200. I know it aint fair ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top