Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Is a light twin below 200HP considered "high performance"?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

dragland

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Posts
33
Just wondering what the correct way to log this time was.
Thanks...
 
Nope, the engines can not be added together to make one giant 400hp engine. So put it under the AMEL, Total, PIC if appropriate, and complex if that applies. I hope that helps.
 
I'm not trying ot pick on dragland, or anyone else for that matter, just trying to give some information that may help folks trying to sort out what regulations mean:

Don't try to read something which isn't there. In most cases, the plain english meaning of the actual words of the law or regulation is what it means. This is one of the fundamental rules of construction (no, not building houses, how a law is "construed") If the words of a law (or regulation) are clear and unambiguous, that is what the meaning of the law is. Usually, this is assigned more importance than even the intent of author of the law (or regulation). Generally, only when the meaning of the words are unclear, is the intent considered. I say generally, as nothing is ever simple, but it is pretty rare to see a regulation interpreted in a manner contrary to the plain english meaning of it's words.

So if you're wondering what a regulation means, the first step is ask "what do the words say"?.

So in this case the words of the regulation say "...an airplane with *an* engine of more than 200 horsepower." Is that ambiguous? no, "an" means one, singular. so you go out to your seminole, you look at the left engine. Is that engine more than 200 hp? nope, its 180. you look at the right engine, is that engine more than 200 hp? nope, 180 again. are there any more engines? nope. Well it's obvious that airplane doesn't have *an* engine of more than 200 hp.

Now you might say that it sounds reasonable that the combined HP of the engines is what counts. Sure, I'll agree that could make sense, but that's not what the regulation says.

Hope this helps.

Edited for typos resulting from writing as I was out the door for a 0300 show. (yawn)
 
Last edited:
Kream926 said:
800 hours and a mel comm and youhave to ask this?
That is exactly what I was thinking.
 
Who cares anyway? Are you logging "high performance" time?
 
Guys, go easy on dragland. You guys ripped on him over the whole alternator/Seminole question earlier, but he still decided to follow up and ask another question.

Maybe the guy should know these answers by 800 hours, but if he doesn't - through whatever reason - don't you think we should help the guy out, and atleast make an attempt at "bringing him up to speed" and improving areas he's not strong in. Rather then ripping on him and belittling him about "you should know this... you should know that by now..."

We're not all perfect, do the guy a favor and help him out.
 
you're right user, maybe i am a little harsh. i still havt realized how huuuuge my brain is compared to others
 
Kream926 said:
i still haven't realized how huuuuge my brain is compared to others
I know, I'm the same way, and it can be really tough to remember that sometimes. :D
 
User997 said:
Guys, go easy on dragland. You guys ripped on him over the whole alternator/Seminole question earlier, but he still decided to follow up and ask another question.

No, that was a different guy on the seminole alternator thread. I'm more that willing to cut someone some slack on the hp/twin question, because it certainly would make sense if total horsepower was used. That's why I took the time to explain how to construe the reg.

However, thinking an alternator failure would cause you to lose the vacuum pump is is *waaaaay* over the top. Sorry, that *is* private pilot stuff, and there is something seriously wrong witht hte process if someone makes it to MEI/CFII with this bad an understanding of systems. Sure, we're not trying to build an airplane, but get real.
 
Loss of an alternator doesn't cause a lose of a vacuum pump???? ;)
 
wait wait wait...

so whatyou're saying is if my battery and alternator dies my propeller will still keep turning???:confused:

wow this flying machine thingy is real hard....

reminds me of a student i had that didnt want to know what engine and oil she had cause thats not her problem its the mechanics
 
I thought that if your alternator went out your mains went flat.
 
but when the mains go flat the altimiter reads higher than actual right?
 
No, no, no.. When the mains go flat you get an INV light and your yam damper stops working...

The altimeter only reads higher when the strobe fluid gets low..
 
It's all relative to the person...really. All the guys who drive 747s call 767s "light twins". So it all depends on who you ask;)
 
So that's why it seems like I've been flaring too high--I must have low tire pressure.
 
A Squared said:
No, that was a different guy on the seminole alternator thread.
You're right, my bad. I must've just automatically associated the two. You guys must've ran the Alternator guy far away with the beating he received...

A Squared said:
Sorry, that *is* private pilot stuff, and there is something seriously wrong witht hte process if someone makes it to MEI/CFII with this bad an understanding of systems.
I'm not disagreeing with you for a second on this issue. But I do feel that we have an obligation to help out a fellow pilot whose unfamiliar with something (through whose ever fault it was) no matter how mundane, and atleast educate him to the degree asked or needed.

You don't want to create an enviroment where people are afraid to ask questions. Something they may want to know, but is to intimidated now to ask, could save their lives one day, or keep them out of big trouble having known what we can teach.

Unlike SOME of you on here, we're not all God's of Aviation, some people squeek by the process, yet their still going to fly and they still need to be educated one way or the other.
 
if he was a student pilot maybe....

but this guy has a MEL
 
User997 said:
I know, I'm the same way, and it can be really tough to remember that sometimes. :D

Know the feeling. Speaking of that, I took my ME training in a Travelair, with 2 x 180 HP engines, and it was the first complex aircraft I had flown, so I got my complex endorsement, but couldn't get my HP endorsement. When I started flying the 337, I got my HP endorsement.

It's the rules. Granted, a Travelair goes a heck of a lot faster than a 182, but it's still not a HP airplane.
 
So, wait a minute. So, I could have gotten my alternator to work, just by pumping up the mains?? Why didn't my mechanic think of that??
Could have saved myself a ton of money. Well, not actually a ton, unless of course I paid him in pennies, but then I would have had to pump up the tires in the car, but then the list goes on, of things that would have gotten fixed, by just pumping up the tires.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom