What's the CL-65 type good on?

wheelsup

wheelsup

Well-Known Member
What aircraft would a CL-65 type allow you to operate as PIC without any further training?

Anyone know?
 
wheelsup said:
What aircraft would a CL-65 type allow you to operate as PIC without any further training?

Anyone know?
Click to expand...
CRJs. Although I've heard many insurance companies will credit CL65 time towards the insurance requirements required to fly a CL60 (Challenger 600 series.)
 
Unfortunately I think its just the CRJ200-900. I am constantly hearing how the Challenger type is the hardest one to get. But at least I would think you are in a good position to get typed in that plane easier then most since you have all your CL-65 time.
 
Thx guys, I finished my left seat career with 278 PIC in 'em, that and $4 will get me a gallon of gas I guess :D!
 
CL-65:
CRJ-100/-200/-440/700/705/900

CL-600 (challenger type):
Challenger 600

CL-601:
Challenger 601

CL-604:
Challenger 604

CL-605:
Challenger 605

BD-700:
Global express

CRJ 800 series:
Poor man's global :)



I am working on a corporate gig (again after waiting to upgrade :banghead:) and they fly the CL-604's and a 605. 2 type ratings although VERY similar. But its only the "short course" to transition- much like differences training between the CRJ's.
 
Thanks man! I knew it was different but never knew what the other types were for certain. I'd say it should be easy for you to transition having your PIC time and passing a type already. So look for some gigs and see what you can find. I'm sure you will be fine!
 
Please do not pay for your own transition course, unless you are becoming a contract pilot. Paying for training for a job is ridiculous.
 
meyers9163 said:
That is correct, but I am pretty sure the TYPE is a different type rating. Anyone out there know a diffinitive answer on this?
Click to expand...

They sell it as a different type rating, however the training is the same. There are some minor differences in the looks of the center pedestal and some switches for obvious reasons. Basically, they take things out of the "standard" CRJ, you just need for an airline operation and certification.
 
higney85 said:
CL-65:
CRJ-100/-200/-440/700/705/900

CL-600 (challenger type):
Challenger 600

CL-601:
Challenger 601

CL-604:
Challenger 604

CL-605:
Challenger 605

BD-700:
Global express

CRJ 800 series:
Poor man's global :)



I am working on a corporate gig (again after waiting to upgrade :banghead:) and they fly the CL-604's and a 605. 2 type ratings although VERY similar. But its only the "short course" to transition- much like differences training between the CRJ's.
Click to expand...
Where did you find this out. Is there a source? The only thing official i could find is an old FAA Advisory Circular from several years ago. That cleary showed the 600 series was different from cl65 crj. Nothing on the 850 or GE.

Not saying you are wrong, just wanting to know if there wasnt something official.
 
The Challenger 850/870/890 is the same type as the CRJ. Not sure why there is so much confusion over this.

It's the same airplane with an "executive" interior, and maybe bigger fuel tanks.


Keep looking for a different type for the CRJ/Challenger 850, and you will NEVER find it.
 
Ive heard it both ways. I wanted to know if anyone had any definitive source like an updated FAA AC or literature from Bombardier.
 
I mistyped on the 800's. They are not considered crj's- they are challenger 850's. I found out the other ones by chatting with a corporate guy who was typed in the challengers and global. You can find the stuff online in addition to what requires a long or short course. I won't have the time though tip this weekend- I'm at work.
 
I just got a "dear john" email for a job flying an 850. Reason: CL65 type is not an 850 type. I thought it was interchangeable because it's a converted 50 seater. Apparently it's a different type. Maybe it's due to having longer range fuel tanks or other slight differences. Maybe it's an airline conspiracy to make a CL65 type even more worthless;)
 
bobsakamano said:
I just got a "dear john" email for a job flying an 850. Reason: CL65 type is not an 850 type. I thought it was interchangeable because it's a converted 50 seater. Apparently it's a different type. Maybe it's due to having longer range fuel tanks or other slight differences. Maybe it's an airline conspiracy to make a CL65 type even more worthless;)
Click to expand...

I just called the St. Louis FSDO, and spoke to two inspectors who had me on a speaker phone, and they knew for sure, FlightSafety says so also, and since some type of work is done on the Challenger 850 right there near St. Louis, that the....


Challenger 850 is the same type as the CRJ-200

CL-600-2B19 // CL-65


The amount of misinformation on this website is absolutely ridiculous.
 
joliet said:
The amount of misinformation on this website is absolutely ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Probably because if you called of another FSDO they would tell you it's not. And then if you called a third they probably would tell you it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top