MEI Questions

[ALIMBO]

LOL but at least realize I'm right. Right guys unless I'm missing something.

 

[AC560]

LOL but at least realize I'm right. Right guys unless I'm missing something.

Just the fact that the OP is trying to get his MEI not a Multi Commercial Add On along with several other things.

 

[JAFI]

LOL but at least realize I'm right. Right guys unless I'm missing something.

Where to begin?

1. You want to write lesson plans but demonstrate little grasp of English or grammar.

2. You toss the PTS into a discussion with out reference. I wonder if you have really ever read just one complete PTS.

3. You have just begun Instructor training yet discount people who have taught for decades.

4. You state that because you never heard of a specific certification requirement, that it must not be important. As an Instructor, all requirements are important.

Aviation will kill you if you do not take it serious. If you want to just play around, take up dodge ball.

Folks, Alimbo is just playing around at your expense and is enjoying yanking your chain. He may learn enough to become an Instructor, but IMHO not anytime soon. It is your time to use, but I think you could spend it better elsewhere.

Never argue with a fool - people might not know the difference.
- anonymous

 

[JAFI]

I'm getting my MEI soon, should be an easy ride BUT...

1. Any advice you wish you would have known before hand?
2. How was your check ride, what maneuvers did you have to do?
3. What questions were you asked in the oral?
4. Was everything as expected or were you thrown a curve ball?

Thanks

If you go back over this site you may see that every 6 months or so a new group of pilots begins a new rating and asks the same questions. The fact that they ask questions is IMHO a good sign. If a student is defined as someone who seeks knowledge, then they are students. I keep getting the feeling that many are just looking for the easy way out. I had a student who asked me "what is the least amount of work I need to do to pass?" I told him I was impressed that he had a goal but wondered if to just pass in a subject that lack of knowledge or skill could kill you was a good idea. He thought about it for a second and sad "no I just wanna pass". I told him I would warn my friends to not go flying with him.

The short answer is that every exam should be easy if you are prepared for it. If you know the material and practiced the maneuvers the exam should be quick and a demonstration that you should hold the rating.

 

[Immune83]

Sa-weeet! I leave for a day to fly to families for Christmas and bashing starts in the forums. C'mon people we are all at different levels, and all learning, and no one will ever "arrive."

Thank you to everyone's responses, keep them coming.

As stated in my first post, Im just looking for advice from other pilots from all backgrounds and experience levels. I do and will continue to study, Im not looking for a rote memorization gouge to BS a DE w/canned answers.

We all joined this site for what...... to communicate and learn from/with other people in the same profession, so stop bashing each other and just respond with something constructive that others can learn from.

So, how else has some MEI info to share, lets hear it....

 

[J.Otto]

i think the signatures are funny between alimbo and avbug. i doubt this would happen in face to face communications.

the mei is a serious rating. not to be taken lightly, especially if you havent a lot of multi hours to begin with.

for those pursing it, make sure you know me procedures and aerodynmics, inside and out. like the old saying goes... "the turning engine will take you to the accident quicker. " students can do some very unpredictable things. even the good ones. never left your guard down. know the proceedureas cold. ive heard some scary stories here and there.

alimbo seems to be a very angry guy who wants to prove how great a pilot he is. alimbo, this will come in time. you should be a more humble pilot and student until you can be confident with what you state. it seems you have a strong desire to fly professionally, which is good. this will get you far. but you need to be a good solid instructor for now, until the outfits start hiring again. i think by late next yr, we'll see things pick up, but mostly for guys with more time.

 

[brokeflyer]

I had to do unusual attitudes in the sim for a plane im already typed in......

The commercial PTS is used and so is the Instrument PTS. The multi is "rating" that is added on to your cert (commercial). No different if you we're just getting a type "rating" for a plane. If you want to fly as a commercial pilot, with instrument privledges in a multi-engine airplane you need to demonstrate the PTS for commercial multi AND instrument. That is why you need to do 2 ils approaches and 2 non-precsion approaches and a hold.
I already provided the reference in the PTS for this.
It's was in my DE handbook as well, and I used to have them do it. It aint that hard to do.

Good luck with your ride, if you practice and just think things through instead of freaking out (a lotta people do) you'll do fine.

It's a tough ride but you'll feel real good about yourself, just don't go out and be stupid and have accident.

 

[brokeflyer]

I'm getting my MEI soon, should be an easy ride BUT...

1. Any advice you wish you would have known before hand?
2. How was your check ride, what maneuvers did you have to do?
3. What questions were you asked in the oral?
4. Was everything as expected or were you thrown a curve ball?

Thanks

1. not really

2. know what EVERYTHING is on the plane....like all the little drain masts, radio antenna, etc.

3. Regualtions about instruction, SE stuff, airplane systems

4. No curve balls, but then I've flown with and sent this examiner many students so we had a good relationship.

 

[ALIMBO]

Where to begin?

1. You want to write lesson plans but demonstrate little grasp of English or grammar.

2. You toss the PTS into a discussion with out reference. I wonder if you have really ever read just one complete PTS.

3. You have just begun Instructor training yet discount people who have taught for decades.

4. You state that because you never heard of a specific certification requirement, that it must not be important. As an Instructor, all requirements are important.

Aviation will kill you if you do not take it serious. If you want to just play around, take up dodge ball.

Folks, Alimbo is just playing around at your expense and is enjoying yanking your chain. He may learn enough to become an Instructor, but IMHO not anytime soon. It is your time to use, but I think you could spend it better elsewhere.

Never argue with a fool - people might not know the difference.
- anonymous

I dont care wat I type on a forum this is not my lesson plan.
I tried to reference the PTS but could not copy it. Look under ratings held and what you need to do you will find your answer.

Im discounting avbug who is a huge tool. Never will I listen to him ther is plenty of other ppl to reference than him.

I've never heard of it and if its important I will be taught it. If not then I guess afer 6 or so instructors its not important. Those instructors ages vary from 21-65+ So hey I dont think its to important.

Yes I am yanking ppl's chain at times but not right now.

 

[ALIMBO]

alimbo seems to be a very angry guy who wants to prove how great a pilot he is. alimbo, this will come in time. you should be a more humble pilot and student until you can be confident with what you state. it seems you have a strong desire to fly professionally, which is good. this will get you far. but you need to be a good solid instructor for now, until the outfits start hiring again. i think by late next yr, we'll see things pick up, but mostly for guys with more time.

Im not angry at all Im a pretty happy guy, and I would say im very humble at least thats wat most of my instructors tell me. I do have a strong desire to fly. I wil try my best to be a solid instructor hence why I asked questions on here to be a humble student. As for your MEI seeing your tt time op I think you will be just fine.

 

[JAFI]

Immune, if you follow the program you Instructor has, you should do fine.

IMHO teaching in a light twin will kill you quicker than any other airplane. It is normally an underpowered trainer with a student of sometimes unknown ability. Plus, you are maneuvering low and slow and you will be dealing with asymmetrical thrust low and slow.

1. As always - know your aircraft. You cannot teach an aircraft if you do not know that aircraft. With each type, model, engine mfgr, engine model, factory or after market modification you could have a different animal and can and may be operated differently depending on many factors. This is where you dig into the aircraft manual(s) and talk to the mechanics and other pilots.

2. Always expect your student will do something you do not want them to do. In a twin (unlike a single engine trainer) the CG may not put you nose down during a stall (or just send you in a flat spin) especially if you have some one ride in the back to watch. (In a light twin some one in the back watching primary training- NEVER a good idea IMHO).

3. With bigger aircraft you need to know: In a turn on the ground - Will the tail clear if the wing tips do? Some aircraft have longer wings (or a longer tail) – find out. It could save you a dinged aircraft and some money.

4. In any multi-engine aircraft I have found that when an engine quits sometimes either too much gear or too much flaps will kill you. If you have an aircraft with long gear that create too much drag or if the flaps are too large for the single engine power you may have to retract the gear or reduce the flaps. This may not matter unless you are above a certain airspeed, weight, or temperature. Any good aircraft check out could show you the specific flight abilities of that aircraft. But keep in mind that if the aircraft is not performing – you may have missed something – think gear – flaps – cowl flaps –power setting - Prop pitch - etc.

 

[AC560]

In a twin (unlike a single engine trainer) the CG may not put you nose down during a stall (or just send you in a flat spin) especially if you have some one ride in the back to watch

Can you give an example model of twin aircraft which will not recover a stall if it is within CG limits.

 

[sqwkvfr]

2. Always expect your student will do something you do not want them to do. In a twin (unlike a single engine trainer) the CG may not put you nose down during a stall (or just send you in a flat spin) especially if you have some one ride in the back to watch. (In a light twin some one in the back watching primary training- NEVER a good idea IMHO).

Not true in a Seneca II. 2 people up front will require 50-100 lbs of ballast in the rear luggage area.

....or another student in the back...which I find is a VERY good idea IMHO, since we need ballast anyway and that kid will get more than his money's worth out of watching that lesson and learning from his flying partner's mistakes.

Kinda like getting two lessons for the price of one and it makes things easier on the instructor...since the student that has already back-seated has seen the maneuvers before strapping himself into the left seat, I only have to repeat myself 20 times per day instead of 25 or 30.

 

[Immune83]

Thanks everyone,

Now, does anyone know the BE-95 like the back of their hand?

Yes, I have a POH/PIM but there are little things those dont tell you only experience does.

Who else has some good info?

 

[JAFI]

Can you give an example model of twin aircraft which will not recover a stall if it is within CG limits.

Off hand, no. I do recall reading accident reports many years ago about flat spin light twin fatalities in training. And I recall a story about a training sesson that went badly and the aircraft stalled flat so the Instructor reached back and pulled the student watching from the back into the front seat to recover from the stall. Sorry too many years and moves to keep copies.

 

[JAFI]

Not true in a Seneca II. 2 people up front will require 50-100 lbs of ballast in the rear luggage area.

The Seneca II was never meant to be a primary trainer IMHO. There is a balance problem but the II will climb out on one engine when others will not. Be careful with the extra 200 pounds (one person) of dead weight if you have to climb out on one. I know of a training crash that had an observer. When the engine quit on go around the student almost stalled the twin, the Instructor took over (too late) advanced the throttle and the second engine just took them to the scene of the crash. Had the observer not been there they may have climbed out or may not. I like to err to the safety side. IMHO too many schools "sell" the idea of watching to reduce their training time. I agree watching is a good training method but not in a light twin.

I am not the end all to be all in training. I have my opinions like every one has. I have a "want to live a long time" desire and have been at the outer edge of the line too many times to keep doing it. I have been in situations that later I was told "the aircraft is not suppose to be able to do that whatever bad thing" but it did and the aircraft doesn't always follow the book. In Light twin training - be very careful.

 

[sqwkvfr]

The Seneca II was never meant to be a primary trainer IMHO. There is a balance problem but the II will climb out on one engine when others will not. Be careful with the extra 200 pounds (one person) of dead weight if you have to climb out on one. I know of a training crash that had an observer. When the engine quit on go around the student almost stalled the twin, the Instructor took over (too late) advanced the throttle and the second engine just took them to the scene of the crash. Had the observer not been there they may have climbed out or may not. I like to err to the safety side. IMHO too many schools "sell" the idea of watching to reduce their training time. I agree watching is a good training method but not in a light twin.

I am not the end all to be all in training. I have my opinions like every one has. I have a "want to live a long time" desire and have been at the outer edge of the line too many times to keep doing it. I have been in situations that later I was told "the aircraft is not suppose to be able to do that whatever bad thing" but it did and the aircraft doesn't always follow the book. In Light twin training - be very careful.

I agree that the PA34 wasn't meant to be a trainer, but I've come around to really liking them. You won't find a light twin that is more stable when flying on a single engine, and I really like that fact that I can still climb on one engine all the way up to 8 or even 10K on a single engine during the hot summers in Phoenix.

Reference single engine go-arounds. We do them all of the time. They are required for the UK-CAA CPL skills test and the Seneca handles them very nicely if properly executed, even in the heat and more often than not with a back seat passenger. It's also very forgiving and tame if the student isn't perfect with the rudder pedals...of course, I'm always right there to prevent a true test of the aircraft's forgiving nature....or lack thereof.

I remember reading the article of which you speak. It was written by an instructor who was doing some work with a student in a Beech Travelair when they entered a spin. The instructor tried everything under the sun to get that aircraft out of the spin, but failed. The aircraft spun to the ground killing the student(IIRC), but the instructor survived to write a fascinating article. It was a goood read and a real eye-opener. I read it on the recommendation of the DPE with which I took my MEI ride. If I can find it, I'll post a link.

EDIT: Here it is.

 

[AC560]

In Light twin training - be very careful.

On this I can agree I think some of your other statements though are bit disingenuous on the verge of fear mongering.

 

[JediNein]

In a few months time, every multiengine trainer available for rent at KVNY crashed. Different instructors, different students, most pilot error, and the one mechanical, that pilot shoulda rejected the aircraft.

Light twin training is not for the complacent, sloppy, or careless, unless you are really lucky.

 

[JAFI]

On this I can agree I think some of your other statements though are bit disingenuous on the verge of fear mongering.

Just go back to the NTSB accident reports. Keep reading, from what I have read and lived through I think what I said is not "fear mongering". When you read the reports keep a record of how may times the pilots lived. It will be a short list.

Most MEI's are young pilots tring to fill up their logbook. They can and do press safety/legality for an extra hour of time logged or a few more bucks.

Go read 50 or so light twin training accident reports and decide for your self.