Co-pilot type ratings.

[SabreFlyR]

If you read the NPRM, the training for the new sic type rating is nothing more than what is required for a copilot checkout now. The difference is, that the type rated pilot or type rated cfi who gives the sic their training signs their log book as having been trained per the far. Then the sic goes to the FSDO and fills out an application, shows them the endorsment in their logbook and then is issued a sic type rating.

If I remember right a sic trained under part 135 or 121 will also be issued a sic type rating.

It clearly states that domestic operations are not affected by the proposed rule. This is only to satisfy the ICAO requirement for international operations.

That said, I agree, if you can afford to own it then you can afford to type the pilots.

 

[flyer172r]

Then the sic goes to the FSDO and fills out an application, shows them the endorsment in their logbook and then is issued a sic type rating.

Sounds like another example of the FAA doing nothing to enhance safety, but doing all it can to make life a hassle for pilots.

 

[Rick1128]

types

Consdiering that ICAO is HQ'd in Montrel, it is a good guess that they are an ICAO country. Their regulations are similar to ours in that rhey do not require a F/O type. Most European Countries, S. Africa, Australia, etc have separate types for PIC and SIC. With different standards. And the rating systems in these countries is totally out of control. Separate ratings not only for jets and TPs but SE a/c. Because you are checked out in a CE152, doesn't mean you can go out and fly a CE150. Lets hope that the FAA doesn't figure that one out.

 

[Headwind]

The way I understand it: The SIC Type will not be required in the USA, but will be available for people who travel internationally. It will be a way ( an inexpensive way) to meet some countries requirements that both pilots be Typed. If you read about it there is no practical test.

HEADWIND

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

I was reading about it on an Internet publication, I believe AOPA.

Cliff
YIP

 

[aeronautic1]

G200 Sic

I am a G200 SIC and last week flew an MMU - CYQZ - EIDW - return and was not asked about having, or not having a type rating. However, I understand that France has grounded US aircraft for single type equiped crew.

But, basically, when the new rule comes into play (and it will), I just have to take my sim training records from Flight Safety to FSDO and they add an SIC Type Rating to my records. No big deal. I don't know what all the squaking is about.

 

[G100driver]

I am a G200 SIC and last week flew an MMU - CYQZ - EIDW - return and was not asked about having, or not having a type rating. However, I understand that France has grounded US aircraft for single type equiped crew.

But, basically, when the new rule comes into play (and it will), I just have to take my sim training records from Flight Safety to FSDO and they add an SIC Type Rating to my records. No big deal. I don't know what all the squaking is about.

I think that the squawking comes from 3rd rate operators that do believe in training their SIC's. I have worked for operators that feel that an in-house ground school and 3 bounces and you set is an OK program. Yea right ...

PS did you go non-stop from MMU to EIDW?

 

[aeronautic1]

Non-Stop

Not this trip, we had 10 in the back so fueled at Gander. But, we have gone Teterboro to London non-stop with threei n the back.

 

[Flying Illini]

The co-pilots have gotten the same training as the captain, only difference was no oral or checkride. The cost was the same.

I don't believe that is true. One of our FO's that did his SIC training in the DA-20 at FSI also did the oral. Had to pass the oral as well as the SIC checkride to successfully complete training...Just no type.

 

[aeronautic1]

Actually

at Flight Safety G200 in October, the diff was that the SIC did not do a weight and balance, no circle to land, non-procession or single engine to landing. Oral is the same.

 

[HawkerF/O]

I think that the squawking comes from 3rd rate operators that do believe in training their SIC's. I have worked for operators that feel that an in-house ground school and 3 bounces and you set is an OK program. Yea right ...

EXACTLY!!! Let's take $$ out of the picture. My goodness, you are flying a peice of jet equipment; YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE BILLS!!!!!!!!! It's disgusting to see a decent operator doing this to their pilots. It's usually some egotistical jerk of a chief pilot that says no. If the boss knows that you are now technically qualified to do the job of the chief pilot, the CP will know that if he gets his a#@ canned, the operation will not come to a hault. From the things I have been a part of, the principle usually does not know enough about aviation to understand what is happening, and I have seen that happen, then the F/O quits for what ever reason, the principle calls his to ask what happened, and he explains in detail exactly what happened, and now the CP is in hot water, and rightfully so. On the other hand, you have operators that hire the low time guy, get him a Credit Card on day 1, and on day 2 he is in PIC school on his way to getting a type. That is how it should be done. For me, I would personally send a guy to SIC school if his jet time is minimal, and have him in the right seat for the 1st 100 hours learning. It amazing what you pick up just doing the job of a real F/O, not just talking on the radios. At 3 months, back to recurrent for 4 or 5 days, and now you are flying dead legs every chance possible. At 6 months, back to recurrent where you'll get typed. Walk out of there with your type and come home to more right seat work and dead leg flying. Start flying live legs as YOU and I, not just You or I feel comfortable. Nothing wrong with giving a guy a break, but so many EGO ladden pilots do not want anyone to get ahead.

 

[JediNein]

EXACTLY!!! Let's take $$ out of the picture. My goodness, you are flying a peice of jet equipment; YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE BILLS!!!!!!!!!

I know some that refuse to provide a second hotel room for their crew. It might cost 'em another 19.00 in a deductible expense.

I do wonder why the FAA is trying so hard to catch up with the rest of the world when we have more (and safer!) aviation occurring within our borders than the rest of the world.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[Lead Sled]

What about those bottom feeders that offer blocks of "copilot" time for so many $$$ an hour? Kind'a like PFT taken to a new low.

'Sled