Minimum experience requirements for cessna 340

As for your personal comfort it depends on what your flew (did you fly a 310?), the multi-engine instruction you received, and the quality of the time you have (is much of that 50 MEL safety pilot/sand bag time?).
Most insurance today will require type specific training by an approved instructor, a minimum amount of dual and a minimum amount of PIC prior to carrying passengers. I would say get the instruction time with a MEI who knows the airplane and can teach it, not someone who will sit there wasting oxygen for 15 hours+-.
 
amm1209 said:
I've got 550 total, 50 multi, 100 hp, quite a bit of x-c time, and CFI, CFII, MEI and an A&P.. Just wanting to ask around...maybe for a confidence boost since the boss is looking to upgrade to a 340 someday soon.
Click to expand...

More multi and high performance time would be better. I think that you can find an insurance company would be ok with SimCom and 10 to 25 hrs with an instructor or mentor. They will probably also require some type of formal recurrent every year until you get a few hundred hours in the airplane. Make sure your insurance agent checks several underwriters.

A thorough prebuy by a shop that is sharp on the 300/400 twin Cessna series can save you a lot of money.
 
Chief Captain said:
Is that from an insurance perspective, or from an aircraft handling perspective?
Click to expand...

Both.
The pilot is going to be learning a lot about several things. Weather radar, icing, and maintance to name a few. The exhaust system must be visually check every 50 hours and be pressure checked every 100 hours for leaks/cracks. Chances are this pilot has never messed with weather radar and may have never been in icing. The FAA is talking about taking away “Flight into known icing” for most if not all of the 300/400 series. http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2011/110609faa_proposes_ad_for_twin_cessna_icing.html

I forgot to add that you might not like the cost for the insurance.
 
That might piss off some 135 operators. Maybe requiring more training for icing would help more, at least from what the cause looks like.
 
Almost all of my ME time is pretty legit. I've got right seat time in a Navajo and a Turbo Commander, but I haven't logged that time.
 
z987k said:
That might piss off some 135 operators. Maybe requiring more training for icing would help more, at least from what the cause looks like.
Click to expand...

It's because the affected airframes were certified before the more modern and more stringent icing certification regs were written. This entire time, the airplanes have been operating in a loophole; it was legal to fly in ice simply because there was no placard or limitation that stated you couldn't. This AD closes that loophole.
 
Our insurance company won't let anyone fly our airplane unless they have time in type and approved school in the previous 12 months. I have to go to recurrent every year and that's with over 200 in type, more than 1000ME + ATP.
The 340 is pretty easy to fly, but it can be a handful for someone who isn't thinking way ahead. I'm guessing in this case they will require a mentor pilot for a number of hours before they cut loose.

Bp244
 
Baronpilot244 said:
Our insurance company won't let anyone fly our airplane unless they have time in type and approved school in the previous 12 months. I have to go to recurrent every year and that's with over 200 in type, more than 1000ME + ATP.
The 340 is pretty easy to fly, but it can be a handful for someone who isn't thinking way ahead. I'm guessing in this case they will require a mentor pilot for a number of hours before they cut loose.

Bp244
Click to expand...

Same down here most twin prop operators require 200 Multi for a Navajo or 402, I know its not the same but similiar. Insurance? Expensive as hell in that plane no matter what your times are...
 
Baronpilot244 said:
Our insurance company won't let anyone fly our airplane unless they have time in type and approved school in the previous 12 months. I have to go to recurrent every year and that's with over 200 in type, more than 1000ME + ATP.
The 340 is pretty easy to fly, but it can be a handful for someone who isn't thinking way ahead. I'm guessing in this case they will require a mentor pilot for a number of hours before they cut loose.

Bp244
Click to expand...

This is what our insurance company requires.
It is warranted that the aircraft will be operated in flight by a pilot in command while holding a currently effective pilot’s certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and who has successfully completed with the preceding 12 months an Instrument Proficiency Check ride in the Cessna 340 model aircraft and provided he or she has been approved by the Named Insured’s Chief Pilot, or designee.
 
Corporate Pilot said:
This is what our insurance company requires.
It is warranted that the aircraft will be operated in flight by a pilot in command while holding a currently effective pilot’s certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and who has successfully completed with the preceding 12 months an Instrument Proficiency Check ride in the Cessna 340 model aircraft and provided he or she has been approved by the Named Insured’s Chief Pilot, or designee.
Click to expand...

Down here to sit left seat in a twin prop going VFR to the islands and back most companies want to see 200 or so Multi. And with all the accidents over the years down here if you meet the minimum experience qualifications to fly as PIC it doesn't matter if you meet it with 2000TT and 100 on type, or 10,000 with 5,000 on type. The insurance is a flat rate across the board no matter what the experience. This is what I have seen anyways.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
It's because the affected airframes were certified before the more modern and more stringent icing certification regs were written. This entire time, the airplanes have been operating in a loophole; it was legal to fly in ice simply because there was no placard or limitation that stated you couldn't. This AD closes that loophole.
Click to expand...

What loophole? We've been operating under 135 regulations the whole time. This grounds about half our 402 fleet.
 
jhugz said:
What loophole? We've been operating under 135 regulations the whole time. This grounds about half our 402 fleet.
Click to expand...

The loophole that allowed an airplane not properly equipped for icing conditions to fly in icing conditions simply because there was no placard or AFM limitation prohibiting you from flying in icing conditions.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
The loophole that allowed an airplane not properly equipped for icing conditions to fly in icing conditions simply because there was no placard or AFM limitation prohibiting you from flying in icing conditions.
Click to expand...

No placard, and No AFM limitations and we met 135.227...now with these new placards, 135.227 means notta and half our fleet will be unflyable come this AD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top