Co-pilot type ratings.

[340drvr]

Uh-oh, just saw this posted in AvFlash.


http://dms.dot.gov/search/document.cfm?documentid=304025&docketid=19630

 

[Lead Sled]

Some countries require type-rated copilots. In the past, it hasn't been much of an issue for US crews, flying US registered aircraft. Every once in a while you'd run into a problem but is was rare. Lately, there's been more insistance, on the part of those countries, that we fully comply with their regulations when we're in their airspace. In the same way what we've converted to METARs, the "Class System" of airspace designation, and adopting RVSM, we will also end up requiring type-ratings for copilots.

'Sled

 

[Flying Illini]

excuse my ignorance...why not just get a normal type rating instead of an "SIC type rating?"

 

[kevdog]

excuse my ignorance...why not just get a normal type rating instead of an "SIC type rating?"

Don't most Flag operations to Europe require both pilots to be typed? Maybe it has something to do with that.

 

[g159av8tor]

Yes, air carrier Flag operations reguire both pilots to be typed for a myriad of safety reasons and regulations. If the PIC dies over international waters, for example, the relief PIC (if there is one) or SIC can assume command and make the big decisions. That is why you see high time SICs at large airlines with minimal PIC time typed in larger transport category airliners like B-747-400, B-757/767, B-777.

Tailwinds...

 

[Flying Illini]

Our company has two typed FO's for our falcon 900's (due to ICAO regs) and I have a type in the falcon 10 but they aren't SIC type ratings...just standard type ratings. Maybe I misunderstood what is being proposed but it sounds like they are developing a totally different type rating so that there will be a PIC type and an SIC type? My question is, why not just let the SIC get the "PIC" type? Is it a cost thing or a way to prevent the SIC from heading to a different company where they could be PIC on said aircraft?

 

[gear_guy]

Looks to me like they are trying to add an extra class (so to speak) of type ratings. An SIC type rating would fill the ICAO requirement but still not qualify the SIC to act as PIC with his rating in the US. Notice the requirement is to only complete the SIC training.

 

[CaptSeth]

Yes, air carrier Flag operations reguire both pilots to be typed for a myriad of safety reasons and regulations. If the PIC dies over international waters, for example, the relief PIC (if there is one) or SIC can assume command and make the big decisions. That is why you see high time SICs at large airlines with minimal PIC time typed in larger transport category airliners like B-747-400, B-757/767, B-777.

Tailwinds...

Not accurate. A relief pilot must be typed if he is to occupy the left seat, otherwise a first officer need not be typed for international air carrier operations, and in my operation frequently isn't.

 

[Flying Illini]

Looks to me like they are trying to add an extra class (so to speak) of type ratings. An SIC type rating would fill the ICAO requirement but still not qualify the SIC to act as PIC with his rating in the US. Notice the requirement is to only complete the SIC training.

That's what I was wondering about gearguy. I think it's a little rediculous to even have SIC only training to begin with. Since the only difference in getting the type and only doing the SIC training is what is involved on the checkride. All through sim training you perform everything but when you get to the checkride you only perform half of what the Type rating training requires therefore no type. Why not just do it all (you'd better be able to perform it all in case the captain becomes incapacitated for whatever reason) to begin with?

-end rant-

 

[Lead Sled]

...I think it's a little rediculous to even have SIC only training to begin with. Since the only difference in getting the type and only doing the SIC training is what is involved on the checkride. All through sim training you perform everything but when you get to the checkride you only perform half of what the Type rating training requires therefore no type. Why not just do it all (you'd better be able to perform it all in case the captain becomes incapacitated for whatever reason) to begin with?

Valid points, but you'd be surprised just how many employers won't allow their new employees to type first time through. The cost is the same, type ride or not. I guess that a few too many companies have been burned when a newbie got his/her type then said "Adios" within the first 12 months. It happened to us last year. The guy got the company to spend $$$ on his type and when Jet Blue came knocking he left. We didn't blame him, after all, you've got to do what you feel is best for you and your family; but he sure left a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Unfortunately, I hear of several examples of this every year.

My personal opinion is this - if a guy is serious about a certain position being "long term" then what difference does getting the type rating off the bat really make? Invest 6 months in the company, show them that you are a team player and that your are there for the long haul. Do that and you will never have another issue with that particular company when it comes time to upgrade. However, if you're one of those guys that can't hold a job for more than 6 to 8 months, then don't be surprised when you're asked to sign a training contract or wait for the type. The aviation industry is a small world. To one degree or another, everyone knows everybody else. If you dump on an employer or two, word will get around.

'Sled

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

ICAO officially requires that both pilots be type-rated. I read that England was grounding some American business aircraft that only had 1 type-rated guy. The cos. had to fly another captain in to get their plane out.

Mexico is ICAO and technically requires both pilots to be type-rated. They haven't been enforcing it, but it sounds like that's going to change soon. Canada is NOT ICAO, so doesn't require 2 type-rated pilots, as far as I know.

Cliff
GRB

 

[Flying Illini]

Mexico is ICAO and technically requires both pilots to be type-rated. They haven't been enforcing it, but it sounds like that's going to change soon.

Do you have a source that states this? We go to mexico alot and it is usually in the -20...which i don't have a type in. Just curious and looking for more info.

 

[G100driver]

Do you have a source that states this? We go to mexico alot and it is usually in the -20...which i don't have a type in. Just curious and looking for more info.

YES you do need a type rating. I am not sure of the ICAO reg, however. Just call Universal for back-up. They can give you the info.

On the same note. Time for the US to catch up to the rest of the world on co-pilot type ratings. If you can afford a jet, you can afford to train. If you cannot afford this, fly the airlines.

 

[CaptSeth]

It seems that air carrier operations are treated differently from Pt. 91 operations, thus the potential type-rating problem for Pt. 91.

 

[gear_guy]

For companies on a full service contract it does not cost more to get a type rating. Therefore it's not a money issue.

Now, what if you sign a 2 year contract and they still don't give you a type right off the bat. What does that tell you? They have absolutely nothing to lose. IMO that speaks volumes.

Am I missing something?

 

[G100driver]

It seems that air carrier operations are treated differently from Pt. 91 operations, thus the potential type-rating problem for Pt. 91.

Federalie (sp) with a bug in his a$$ and you can get fined or violated. The violation will count against you FAA licence.

 

[slickmagneto]

Looks like a way for the training companies to beef up their profits. The co-pilots have gotten the same training as the captain, only difference was no oral or checkride. The cost was the same.

 

[sydeseet]

Picture a new-hire Lear FO going for his 135 check for the first time. A type sounds like a good idea but what if he only has 1200TT and no jet experience? It's not that he couldn't pass a 135.293 with some training but asking him to perform a captains checkride with so little experience is a bit much in my opinion. The proposal of a SIC Type may be a "Type Rating Light" to make type specific SIC training a little more official. We all know of 91 operators who send a guy out for 3 bounces and then call him a co-pilot. Yes, this new theory has it's faults but so does the current practice. In fact, find me an entire chapter in the FAR/AIM that doesn't make you go "hmmmmm......"

 

[flyer172r]

It seems to me that this "SIC type" is basically a dressed up version of the already required SIC endorsement. I went through Beechjet 400A SIC training a few months ago and they said we saw everything that was on the type rating ride. Am I way off base thinking that this is just a re-naming of something that already exists?

 

[Flying Illini]

Picture a new-hire Lear FO going for his 135 check for the first time. A type sounds like a good idea but what if he only has 1200TT and no jet experience? It's not that he couldn't pass a 135.293 with some training but asking him to perform a captains checkride with so little experience is a bit much in my opinion.

Did my type with 900TT in the DA10...to 135.293 standards. If you're in the plane, you'd better be able to do it. Not trying to be a hard-a$$ but why would you put someone in the aircraft as a crew member if they aren't able to function as a "complete" crewmember. It's a safety thing in my mind.
That said (here's where I sound like a hippocrite)the company I work for is one that will send a guy out with some groundschool under his belt for an hour fam flight and 3 T and G's and call him a pt. 91 FO. Do I agree with it? No, I don't think it's safe. What will it look like in an NTSB report? "
Capt. went through recurrent at FS 3 months ago. FO has 200hrs in type and went through in house pt. 91 training 1.5 yrs ago which included just over an hour of flight training." It don't sound good!

All I'm saying is that if they are going to be in the front seat, train them appropriately. If the pay and bennies are in line with the industry, you usually don't have to worry about people leaving.