Ce-525 Pic / Sp

[PSL]

Two questions:

1) Is there any requirement that the PIC of a CE-525 occupy the left seat ?

2) Is there such a thing as a CE-525 Single Pilot Type rating ?

Thanks

 

[English]

Yes and Yes

 

[English]

I guess I should expand on that...

From the limitations section of the operating manual...

Minimum crew
Except where otherwise prescribed by applicable operating limitations,
Minimum crew for all operations:
1. Pilot, provided:
a. The pilot holds a CE525(s), single pilot, type rating.
b. The airplane is equipped for single pilot operations as specified in the KOEL (operable autopilot, headset with mic must be worn, checklist on board, 4-bug reference ring on pilot's airspeed indicator, and provisions available for storage and retention of nav charts accessible to the pilot)
c. The pilot must occupy the left pilot's seat.

OR
1. Pilot and 1 copilot, provided
a. The PIC holds a CE525 (s) or CE525 (second in command required) type rating.

 

[PSL]

Thanks English ...

Here's the specific example ....

A pilot (ASEL-IA) owner of his new CE-525 wants to fly the aircraft from the left seat. He plans to go to school for the type rating in the near future ...

With him, is a CE-525s PIC that has a CFI-AMEL ticket.

Can the owner legally fly the A/C from the left seat, given this crew pairing ? The way I read your response; the answer is No.

I was asked some years ago to teach an owner of a LR-JET who had no ME rating from scratch in his aircraft. I politely declined, based on many reasons; but principally the LR-JET is type certified for two pilots with no SP provision like certain models of the CE-500 series.

Obviously this owner can not serve as SIC because he doesn't have a ME rating.

Any thoughts ?

 

[501261]

NO, because the owner/pilot does not have a MEL. Without a Multi he can't legally be used as an SIC, without an SIC the PIC can't sit on the right side.

 

[English]

Ooh, that's a good one.

My initial response is to agree with you, that he cannot serve as SIC because he does not have a multiengine rating. If the owner had a multiengine rating, then the single pilot type-rated pilot could definitely utilize the crew provisions of his type (CE525s) to act as PIC from the right seat, or could utilize his CFI-AMEL to instruct from the right seat. But in the situation you give, I can't see a way to do it.

Maybe someone else could chime in.

 

[English]

Sorry 501261, we must have posted our replies at the same time!

 

[throttlejockey]

Provided the following:

1) the owner/pilot is receiving flight training for the purpose of receiving a new class and type rating,

2) The instructor is current and qualified in type,

3) the aircraft is configured with fully operable dual controls,

There is absolutely no reason why he cannot sit in the left seat of the aircraft and fly the plane.

Just think of the Citation as a large multi-engine training aircraft.

Its in the regs

 

[English]

throttlejockey,

We aren't talking about the Citation, we are discussing the Citationjet. It's an important distinction because the scenario given places a pilot with the CE525s type in the right seat. There is a limitation in the operating manual for the CE525 that limits the pilot's ability to operate this aircraft single pilot in any seat other than the left seat. This aircraft was certified single pilot. If operated single pilot the aircraft MUST be operated with the typed pilot in the left seat. Since the student is not appropriately rated in multi engine aircraft, doesn't that mean this is a single pilot operation? I think the most restrictive regulation applies. Since the operating limitation is more restrictive than the FARs, I would go that way.

 

[throttlejockey]

Guys:

If the requirements of the single pilot authorization cannot be met with the qualified pilot in the right seat, then the aircraft reverts to an aircraft type which requires a second flight crewmember. (The CE-525 is a two-pilot aircraft with a Single-Pilot Exemption).

In this scenario, FAR 61.55 applies:

FAR 61.55(d)(3) states that you can designate someone who does not meet the requirements of 61.55(a)(b) or (c) as the second in command of an aircraft as long as it is for the purpose of receiving flight training, and no passengers or cargo are carried on the aircraft.

Additionally, FAR 61.33 has various exemptions for the purposes of receiving flight training in aircraft requiring a type-rating.

As stated above FAR 61.55 requires that no passengers or cargo are onboard during the training. This holds true for FAR 61.33 as well.

Thus, only the owner/pilot and the CE-525 type rated, current and qualified instructor could be the only persons onboard. This will limit you to personal trips w/o passengers until he gets the type. (Which, BTW can be done in the aircraft as well.)

throttle

 

[throttlejockey]

Whoops! Forgot one more thing:

FAR 61.55(f) says that the flight must be conducted in day VFR, or day IFR.

throttle

 

[English]

If the requirements of the single pilot authorization cannot be met with the qualified pilot in the right seat, then the aircraft reverts to an aircraft type which requires a second flight crewmember. (The CE-525 is a two-pilot aircraft with a Single-Pilot Exemption).



Throttlejockey,

The CE525 is not a two-pilot aircraft. There is no single pilot exemption in the CJ. The aircraft was certified single pilot. I think you are confusing the aircraft with the 500 series, perhaps? With the 500 series, I believe, there is a waiver that allows one to fly the aircraft single pilot. This is not the case in the CJ. This aircraft was actually certified single pilot. The crew use is the exception, not the rule.

I agree with you that a CE525s type rated pilot can be the only pilot onboard and give instruction. BUT it must be given while the pilot sits in the left seat and the student in the right seat.

 

[throttlejockey]

I disagree:

The CE-525 requires a Pilot and Co-pilot.

Only when equippied as specified in KOEL (Kinds of Operation Equipment List) located in the Limitations Section of the AFM, it MAY be operated as a single-pilot aircraft with the pilot in the left seat.

Here is a link to the CE-525 TCDS:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...Model.nsf/0/C5DDF12C273BDBD686256A9A00541859/$FILE/a1wi.pdf

If you cannot get a good link, go to www.faa.gov

throttle

 

[501261]

Throttlejockey,

You can't use 61.55 in this case! For some one to receive SIC training under 61.55 s/he has to be appropriately RATED for the operation. 61.55(1)"At least a current private pilot certificate with the appropriate category and CLASS rating". In this case class means s/he needs a MULTI.

Again without an appropriately rated SIC, the PIC can NOT sit in the right seat per limitations.

"Just think of the Citation as a large multi-engine training aircraft."

Fine, but it’s also the only multi that I can think of with a limitation of PIC sitting on the left, I don't know how you can avoid that limitation to give instruction. And I don’t know how the student can complete the PTS standards sitting on the right side (engine start and shutdown switches are in the left corner).

As far as giving MULTI instruction in a CJ, here's MY interpretation, it can be done provided the student is on the right side; the PIC has a C525S type, and a MEI. Now can the multi student get his AMEL in a CJ? I don’t know, at the very least the DE needs a C525 on his authorization; I would speculate that s/he would also have to go for their C525 type also when getting their multi, since the multi student needs to be sitting in the left seat to complete the PTS standards for Multi and I believe the only way s/he can sit in the left seat is to be going for their C525 rating.

PS I'll agree with you that both the C500 and C525's are certified 2 pilot airplanes. It's really just a play on words though. What confuses people is the word OR in the TCDS. Paraphasing - Minimum flight crew 2 pilots OR 1 pilot and KOEL. To me that means its certified for 2 pilots, other people think because it can be flown SP that it's certifed for Single Pilot Ops. Really splitting hairs there, for practical purposes if a properly certified PIC and SIC are on board its a 2 pilot airplane, if its flown SP it's a SP airplane.

PSS The single pilot waiver to fly the C500, C550's and C560's SP also require that the PIC sit in the left seat.

 

[throttlejockey]

Here's my take:

Your first point:

"You can't use 61.55 in this case! For some one to receive SIC training under 61.55 s/he has to be appropriately RATED for the operation. 61.55(1)"At least a current private pilot certificate with the appropriate category and CLASS rating". In this case class means s/he needs a MULTI."

My response:

If you look at 61.55(a)(1) which you are sighting, the FAR specifies "except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section." Paragraph (d) says, "this section does not apply to a person who is (3) designated as second-in-command for the purpose of receiving flight training".

Your second point:

"Fine, but it’s also the only multi that I can think of with a limitation of PIC sitting on the left, I don't know how you can avoid that limitation to give instruction. And I don’t know how the student can complete the PTS standards sitting on the right side (engine start and shutdown switches are in the left corner)."

My response:

True the CE525 is certified as a single pilot aircraft when properly equipped, and it is also a two pilot aircraft as well (we both agree on that). BUT, the TCDS does not specify which seat the PIC needs to sit in when the aircraft is flying as a TWO-CREWMEMBER aircraft.

I think that if you can agree with me on two points then you may be able to see it my way:

1) The TCDS does not specify the seating position of the PIC when operated as a two-crew aircraft. Therefore, with two-crewmembers, the PIC can sit on the right side.

As an example, I have flown the CE-525 about 12 hours from the left seat even though I did not have a type rating. The guy in the right seat was a Cessna Aircraft Company Pilot. (We flew the aircraft to Europe together). There was never an issue regarding where I sat.

2) 61.55(d)(3) allows (for the purpose of flight training), anyone to act as SIC as long as no passengers or cargo is onboard. 61.55(d)(3) is the relevant FAR here not 61.55(a)(1).

I really do enjoy this discussion. The FAR's have been and will always be a source of much consternation for us pilots because they can be read so many different ways.

The funny thing about this is you could go ask your FAA inspector what he thinks and he may agree with you. But, ask the next FAA Inspector and he may disagree with you.

throttle

 

[501261]

"1) The TCDS does not specify the seating position of the PIC when operated as a two-crew aircraft. Therefore, with two-crewmembers, the PIC can sit on the right side. Originally posted by throttlejockey

I couldn't agree with you more!

"2) 61.55(d)(3) allows (for the purpose of flight training), anyone to act as SIC as long as no passengers or cargo is onboard. 61.55(d)(3) is the relevant FAR here not 61.55(a)(1)."

What does the rest of that 61.55(d)(3) say? "Designated as second-in-command for the purpose of receiving flight training REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION". I interpret this to mean 61.55, SIC requirements. In other words I believe that 61.55(d)(3) is the no sh!t clause, meaning that you do not have to already have to be SIC qualified to receive SIC training!

Since the owner/pilot does not have a Multi he can't become an SIC, since he can't become an SIC, he can't get training for it.

As an example, I have flown the CE-525 about 12 hours from the left seat even though I did not have a type rating. The guy in the right seat was a Cessna Aircraft Company Pilot. (We flew the aircraft to Europe together). There was never an issue regarding where I sat.

This is not a good example because you already had a multi! What you did is perfectly fine and legal under 61.55, but if you didn't have a Multi you wouldn't have been able to do it! This whole thread is about receiving MULTI training in a CJ, getting flight or SIC training in a CJ is another, much easier, subject

And I completely agree with you on different interpretations, everybody has a different opinion, but unless it’s from FAA legal it really doesn’t matter.