Kingairfirstofficer.com

yelkhettar

Well-Known Member
Hi guys. Anyone heard about this training school il California? Any reviews? Thks


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
 
No the king air thing is hard to explain but you can't log the time from the right seat of a King Air. In general.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Didn't the FAA relent on that and change part 61 to say that if an SIC is required by the company it's loggable?
 
Didn't the FAA relent on that and change part 61 to say that if an SIC is required by the company it's loggable?

Maybe?

I'm not certain but possibly the operators out there like Surf Air and stuff got this changed. But not for part 91!

I think it is just that they have an operable CVR and a few other reqs.

When I was a 135 King Air captain I offered to help set up a program like the one above for the other flight instructors. The difference was that those guys would have gotten paid! Alas we could not get around the issue of there not being a CVR and we had to have our more experienced pilots sit right seat to keep it warm. And they could not log the time.

But of course got paid.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
There's an NPRM for allowing qualifying 135 ops to have SICs log time in single-pilot aircraft. There are already a handful of times it can be done legally, but that's not the norm.
 
There's an NPRM for allowing qualifying 135 ops to have SICs log time in single-pilot aircraft. There are already a handful of times it can be done legally, but that's not the norm.
135 always requires two pilots under IFR. It could be a 172. You need the opspec and the associated equipment(ap) to fly single pilot. That said, if you company does have such things, then the right seat cannot log SIC.

Pt 91 is a pure no.
 
135 always requires two pilots under IFR. It could be a 172. You need the opspec and the associated equipment(ap) to fly single pilot. That said, if you company does have such things, then the right seat cannot log SIC.

Pt 91 is a pure no.

135 operations that require an SIC:
Takeoffs with RVR <1800
Autopilot inop (or no A015)
Eligible on demand
Planned flight time >8 hrs

BUT, the SIC must be trained and checked IAW the FAA approved 135 training program, AND a CVR must be installed.
 
135 operations that require an SIC:
Takeoffs with RVR <1800
Autopilot inop (or no A015)
Eligible on demand
Planned flight time >8 hrs

BUT, the SIC must be trained and checked IAW the FAA approved 135 training program, AND a CVR must be installed.
Remember, the default is no A015. A015 is the exemption.
 
Remember, the default is no A015. A015 is the exemption.


Very true, but A015 at a King Air or light twin operator is almost as routine as A001. :) I was simply listing scearios in which a pilot could legally log SIC time in a King Air.

I need to dig around and find that NPRM. It sounds like Amerifight and the like are trying to find a way for pilots to get experience and loggable time, however come to think about it, I seem to recall there is a limitation on what the time can be used towards.
 
Very true, but A015 at a King Air or light twin operator is almost as routine as A001. :) I was simply listing scearios in which a pilot could legally log SIC time in a King Air.

I need to dig around and find that NPRM. It sounds like Amerifight and the like are trying to find a way for pilots to get experience and loggable time, however come to think about it, I seem to recall there is a limitation on what the time can be used towards.
There is an exemption out there to allow them to log time. I'm fairly sure AMF has it.
 
To the blanket statement that King Air SIC's can't log anything, while true under Pt. 91, 135 is a different bowl of cereal. As long as OpSpecs require it and the SIC has a 135 checkride, the SIC time is loggable and legit.
 
Maybe it's just me. Maybe it's just my life experience. Maybe it's just that I've known people who, in their spare time using a really basic laptop, have created much more professional looking websites.

Not that a pretty website automatically equates to an upstanding operation, but this website's look and layout do not in any way inspire any confidence. As I said, maybe it's just me.
 
Back
Top