Need a quick answer! Help!

[Eric]

This board is proving to be a great research tool.

Ok, anyone on here late tonight?

A gentleman called me today and needs a flight review. He has a bonanza with a throw over yoke. I don't have a high performance rating. Is there anyway I can give him a flight review?

I told him I thought I could as long as he was still current and would be the PIC. If he isn't current, either medical or flight review, then I'd have to be the PIC and I know I can't do that.

Any thoughts? I'm off to DOC's FAR forum.

I told him I'd call him tomorrow after I did some research.

Thanks
Eric

 

[avbug]

You've got it.

I did an instrument rating for someone last fall in their V tail with a throwover.

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

you just have to observe his/her flying. i did one in a tail dragger a few years back and it was my first time in a conventional gear airplane.

 

[bobbysamd]

Throwover controls

You can do it. 14 CFR 91.109(a) addresses flight instruction given in aircraft with throwover controls:

Sec. 91.109 - Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls. However, instrument flight instruction may be given in a single-engine airplane equipped with a single, functioning throwover control wheel in place of fixed, dual controls of the elevator and ailerons when --

(1) The instructor has determined that the flight can be conducted safely; and

(2) The person manipulating the controls has at least a private pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings.

(emphasis added)

This is not exactly on point. The key, however, is the manipulator of the controls must have at least a Private for you to give instruction.

Hope that helps some more.

 

[TAG2]

I don't think you can give instruction in an aircraft for which you are not current and rated. I think you need a high perf. signoff to instruct in one. I don't have time to look this one up, but I'm pretty sure.

Being a CFI I suspect you took your Comm. in a complex aircraft with less than 200 HP? Maybe a 172RG?

Never get into an airplane with somebody you don't know unless you are completely confident that if needed, you have the ability to take over control of the airplane and not let somebody kill you. I have had too many people try to do that over the years.

 

[avbug]

Tag,

You're correct that you need to be rated, but an endorsement isn't a rating. A turbojet airplane such as the eclipse is a different matter, as one requires a type rating.

You don't need an endorsement to give instruction, only to act as pilot-in-command. As the instructor isn't necessarily PIC, nor is the instructor required to be (except in cases where the student is not qualified to act as PIC), the instructor doesn't require the endorsement to instruct.

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

" A turbojet airplane such as the eclipse is a different matter, as one requires a type rating."

Avbug- no type rating required in the eclipse jet.

 

[varicam]

" A turbojet airplane such as the eclipse is a different matter, as one requires a type rating."

Avbug- no type rating required in the eclipse jet.

FAR 61.31 (a)(2) requires the PIC of a turbojet airplane to hold an appropriate type rating. Are you saying the Eclipse isn't a turbojet airplane?

 

[A Squared]

At this point I don't think that the Eclipse has a type certificate. If I'm correct about that, then I don't think a type "rating" exists for the eclipse.

 

[varicam]

At this point I don't think that the Eclipse has a type certificate. If I'm correct about that, then I don't think a type "rating" exists for the eclipse.

Maybe not, but the PIC would require a LOA for any flying done before the type certificate is issued. After that a type rating would be required.

 

[A Squared]

Maybe not, but the PIC would require a LOA for any flying done before the type certificate is issued. After that a type rating would be required.

Yes, I agree. A type rating will be required once the aircraft is certificated.

regards

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

boss has an eclipse on order. as of this date, no type required.

 

[A Squared]

boss has an eclipse on order. as of this date, no type required.

That's odd, the Eclipse Aviaton website says that the Eclipse will require a type rating. Does your boss know something that Eclipse doesn't.

I suppose that in a sense, you are correct in saying that "as of this date, no type required", because as of this date, you can't fly an Eclipse and you only need a type rating if you're going to fly one.

 

[varicam]

Here's some relevant info cut and pasted from the FAQ section of Eclipse Aviation's website:

"I understand that some jet aircraft require a type rating. Will one be required for the Eclipse jet?
Yes, the Federal Air Regulations dictate a type rating for any multi-engine, turbo-jet powered aircraft. Although the Eclipse 500 jet will be much easier to fly than most twin turbo-jet aircraft, the Eclipse factory training will qualify our owner/pilots for a type rating in the Eclipse 500 jet.


I've never flown a jet airplane. Would I be able to fly an Eclipse 500?
Contrary to what the jet pilots would have you believe, a jet is easier to fly than most piston aircraft. There are different techniques required, and the Eclipse factory training provided with each aircraft will address these. Also, jets fly much higher and faster than piston aircraft, so our customer training will include information about the high altitude environment and management of an aircraft at higher speeds.


Is pilot training included in the delivered price?
Yes, a factory-training program to obtain a type rating for 1 pilot is included in the price.


What are Eclipse’s minimum requirements of training necessary to fly the Eclipse 500?
At a minimum, we will require pilots to have a private pilot license with instrument and multiengine ratings prior to entering the Eclipse factory school. The Eclipse, like all turbofan aircraft, will require a Type Rating to act as Pilot-In-Command. A commercial license would be beneficial and would improve insurability. Some high altitude right-seat jet time would be beneficial if the opportunity is available. "

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

i am only repeating info from my boss. from what i have been told regarding the eclipse jet, a type is not required. but i dont know how old my info is. my boss seems to be up to date on it though.

 

[varicam]

i am only repeating info from my boss. from what i have been told regarding the eclipse jet, a type is not required. but i dont know how old my info is. my boss seems to be up to date on it though.

I give up, surrender, wave the white flag, and whatever else:

Because your boss says so, no type rating is required. The FARs and Eclipse management are absolutely wrong and Eclipse's inclusion of a type rating with the purchase of one of their airplanes can't be right because there isn't such a thing. Forgive me for previously believing my own lying eyes instead of your boss.

 

[patq1]

Eric,

You have a commercial multiengine rating according to your profile. I think that will cover the high performance sign off.

pat

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jet_Dreamer
i am only repeating info from my boss. from what i have been told regarding the eclipse jet, a type is not required. but i dont know how old my info is. my boss seems to be up to date on it though.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I give up, surrender, wave the white flag, and whatever else:

Because your boss says so, no type rating is required. The FARs and Eclipse management are absolutely wrong and Eclipse's inclusion of a type rating with the purchase of one of their airplanes can't be right because there isn't such a thing. Forgive me for previously believing my own lying eyes instead of your boss.
___________________________________________________

easy there varicam, i did not want to start some flaming match about a stupid thing like "my dad says this". excuse me for spreading ill info. i can safely say you are correct after i reviewed the fars. i will simply question my recent info from my boss.
peace.

 

[avbug]

A multi engine rating doesn't automatically cover the high performance endorsement, because the multi engine training and practical test may be taken in an airplane with less than 200 horsepower (that's per engine, not total).

The high performance endorsement is required, not implied. In other words, if you obtain a rating, you still need the endorsement. A rating doesn't replace it.

The eclipse jet is the BD-5 of the new millenium. It's been nothing but lies and misinformation. The fact that they still release information to the flying public is only an insult to intelligence.

Wait! Let's tune in this week and find out how many tens of thousands of airplanes they're gauranteed to deliver, and if the potential cost hasn't risen again, or if they've found that the new powerplant selection still won't cut it for their airplane, again. I'm sure it will eventually fly, but the credibility of that program is in the toilet.

 

[Eric]

Thanks guys

Thank you for all the responses.

Turns out the guy's last flight review was over 24 months ago. Looks like I just need to bite the bullet and get the high performance endorsement.

Patq1, I got my multi rating in a Seminole. It only has 180 HP per side, so I didn't get the endorsement.

Did my instructor rating in the Arrow, 200 HP. Still didn't qualify. If I had only had one more horsey......

 

[Timebuilder]

Find an instructor friend with a Cherokee Six. Get the signoff, and you're done.

 

[English]

Or, if you have any C172 time, find an instructor with a Cessna R172K (Hawk XP), 210 HP, and get the endorsement that way. Cheap and easy.

 

[embdrvr]

you just have to observe his/her flying. i did one in a tail dragger a few years back and it was my first time in a conventional gear airplane.

Hmmm....this sounds like something that is legal but not smart.
I have a fair amount of time in taildraggers including some experience in the squirellier ones like the Pitts, Christen Eagles, and even a few times in warbirds. I've had to take the controls away from someone that would have converted a taildragger into a ball of crumpled aluminum. If JetDreamer found himself in the same situation I suspect that he'd have an accident on his record. When I was a CFI I used to do a lot of BFR's for taildragger owners because I was the only guy with a lot of tailwheel time. There is nothing difficult about becoming a competent taildragger pilot but I really suggest you become comfortable in them before giving a BFR. Just my .02

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

embdrvr- this ride in the tail dragger was with a good friend and i had never been in the type before. it was a bfr and a bit of flight instruction for me. never continued with the tail dragger because i didnt care for it.

i certainly would NEVER jump in a unfamiliar airplane with someone i dont know. just doesnt sound smart.

 

[embdrvr]

embdrvr- this ride in the tail dragger was with a good friend and i had never been in the type before. it was a bfr and a bit of flight instruction for me. never continued with the tail dragger because i didnt care for it.

i certainly would NEVER jump in a unfamiliar airplane with someone i dont know. just doesnt sound smart.

So who was really getting the BFR?
People you know can kill you just as easily as a stranger.

Just curious. What didn't you like about flying taildraggers?

 

[Jet_Dreamer]

embdrvr- i was giving the bfr in my friend's greatlakes. cfi doing a favor for a cfi. i didnt care for the feel of the airplane during landing, a little squirrley. anyways i enjoy my tricycle landing gear airplanes a lot better.

 

[avbug]

That's okay. Not everybody is comfortable when one takes away the training wheel.

Conventioal gear isn't squirrely, it just reveals deficiencies that the nosewheel tends to hide. So long as one is content to live with that, it's no problem at all.