Dual Received in King Air 350

[aroundtheblock]

Asquared,

[/QUOTE]If you really are getting instruction, that raises the question of *why* you are getting instruction. You say that you have 35 hours logged. I think that it's safe to say that a large portion of this time is enroute, on or off the airways, so why do you have 25-30 hours of instruction logged on flying in a straight line? Are you really so inept that you need constant instruction to stay on an airway?

Somehow we jumped from saying a guy had 30 hours to a guy having 1000 hours dual given in a King Air. Nowhere did I say Paul here should log the rest of his pilot career as dual given. All my references were for a low time pilot. As in Paul's example, 400 total time and a fraction of that being multiengine is low time in my opinion. The average flight department logs around 300-500 hours a year. Lets hope that Paul has moved over to the left seat well before 1000 hours or 2 to 4 years of instruction. Hey, I found we do agree on something. As the MEI, as I stated before, as long as I believed he was learning under my supervision then I'd be happy to help him out by signing his logbook, if he so desired. I'd say in reference to your hypothetical situation that I have done a great job and a great service to aviation.

 

[Workin'Stiff]

All models of Kingair (and the Beech 1900) are Type Certificated for One Pilot. The only time SIC can be logged in a Kingair is for the type of operation. IFR Passenger carrying operations under Part 135 would be the most common example. In order to log SIC in such a manner, you would need to be trained and checked in accordance with the operating company's approved training program for that aircraft. That is how "charter" companies do it. How "fractional" companies do it, I do not know.


Ray

The only time that logging SIC in the KA type aircraft would be during Part 135 IFR pax ops. However, you would only be able to do this if the aircraft did not have an autopilot and/or the Op Specs did not have an authorization for the SIC exemption due to autopilot installation/usage (Reference 135.105). I have seen very few KA's that did not have an autopilot with the appropriate authorizations utilized in 135 (except for GLA and that being Part 121/135). So you would even still be hard pressed to log SIC in a King Air during P. 135 IFR Pax ops... That's my take on it atleast....

 

[aroundtheblock]

Very true Workin'stuff. Back when I flew a 200 Part 135, The autopilot was acting weird. I told the chief pilot at the time that if it did it again I'd have to write it up. I told him that unfortunately that would ground the airplane. After the funny look he gave me I told him that without the AP we would need a SIC in lieu of it. Unfortunately, none of our pilots were trained as a crew or as an SIC and our POI said we couldn't do it. Our POI said 2 captains couldn't go together because in our King Air, none we trained as a crew. We always flew a 2 crew, but as far as the FAA was concerned the right seater was a passenger not a crewmember. I looked it up and he was right. To add to this neither King Air had a CVR wich is required for a King Air 200 2 pilot crew Part 135.

 

[Workin'Stiff]

It's a very tricky issue logging SIC in those type of aircraft. I'm kind of glad that I never had those opportunities so that I didn't lose sleep at night worrying about my logbook's integrity. That aside, best of luck out there to everyone with those prospects.

 

[A Squared]

Somehow we jumped from saying a guy had 30 hours to a guy having 1000 hours dual given in a King Air. Nowhere did I say Paul here should log the rest of his pilot career as dual given. All my references were for a low time pilot.

Around the block. I realize that you're not going to be flying with someone for 1000 hours. I was using an extreme example to make the point that at some point, it becomes a stretch to call it "flight training". Sorry if I didin't explain that clearly. Anyway. It's a tough situation, in something like the king air the experience can be valuable (depending on whether the captain views the right seater as a crewmember or a seatcover), and you want to give credit for that experience, but it's not always easy to do that. There's a lot of bad advice out there on how to do it. I think we agree more than we disagree on this whole thing.

 

[samoores]

Just to add a different wrinkle to this issue, I flew C-12C's for the Air Force back in the Gulf War (over 1000 hours in 14 months). The C-12C is a King Air 200 (MGW 12,500), yet the Dash 1 (operating manual) states that the required minimum crew is two pilots. Therefore, SIC time would clearly be legal in the C-12. I believe the Army flies the U-21 (similar/same as King Air 90) with two pilots as well.

 

[A Squared]

Just to add a different wrinkle to this issue, I flew C-12C's for the Air Force back in the Gulf War (over 1000 hours in 14 months). The C-12C is a King Air 200 (MGW 12,500), yet the Dash 1 (operating manual) states that the required minimum crew is two pilots. Therefore, SIC time would clearly be legal in the C-12. I believe the Army flies the U-21 (similar/same as King Air 90) with two pilots as well.

Yeah, that's thing, C-12 co-pilot time is legit, beech 200 co-pilot time at a part 91 operator probably isn't. Same airplane, different organization.

 

[STINKER]

I agree that dude needs to be teabagged!! Dork!

 

[Kingairrick]

If we put in wing lockers, or 2 more seats, then it would require an SIC per FAA regs.

Wing lockers don't have anything to do with it. They are a factory option now, still single pilot airplane. What you are thinking of is the baggage compartment seats. Because the 350 is Cert. under Part 25, the baggage seats make it have "10 or more passenger seats." That's where the sic required comes in.
Interesting side note: the 300 (same type rating) is cert. under SFAR 41C (not part 25,) still legal with the baggage seats single pilot, even though it brings the total to 10. It makes no sense, but those are the rules...