Single Engine ATP? What good is it anyway.

[UndauntedFlyer]

As far as I know without research, a single engine ATP really has no purpose from a regulatory standpoint. And for that matter what good is a multiengine ATP without a type rating either?

So I guess the question really is: Are there any Part 121 operations that fly single engine airplanes? And are there any Part 121 operations that fly multiengine airplanes that are less than 12,500 pounds. If so can someone please post information on where and what type of airplanes are used?

Or has there been a change in Part 135 so that an ATP is required for some of those operations under the FAA's "Equal level of Safety" concept? I really don't keep up very much on Part 135.

 

[NoahWerka]

SE ATP Keeps you from having to take the ATP written if you don't, or can't get the practical done for the ATP-Multi within the 2 year limitation. If you can get the ATP SE within the time frame, you won't have to take the ATP written again.

 

[j41driver]

I knew a guy that owned a C210 and did his ATP in it so he could qualify for reduced insurance rates.

 

[Geronimo4497]

91K requires an ATP when operating a multi engine aircraft, no matter the weight.

Singed,
Loser with a SE ATP :0

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

91K requires an ATP when operating a multi engine aircraft, no matter the weight.

Singed,
Loser with a SE ATP :0

Sorry but what is 91K?

 

[FlyingFisherman]

Sorry but what is 91K?

Open up the book that is FAR away and take AIM at the words. Whole lot of neat stuff in that thing.

 

[sleddriver71]

Open up the book that is FAR away and take AIM at the words. Whole lot of neat stuff in that thing.

Could you post that again in English? What are you trying to say? Where I work, you don't need an ATP but they pay you more if you have one.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Or has there been a change in Part 135 so that an ATP is required for some of those operations under the FAA's "Equal level of Safety" concept? I really don't keep up very much on Part 135.

§ 135.243 Pilot in command qualifications.
(a) No certificate holder may use a person, nor may any person serve, as pilot in command in passenger-carrying operations -
(1) Of a turbojet airplane, of an airplane having a passenger-seat configuration, excluding each crewmember seat, of 10 seats or more, or of a multiengine airplane in a commuter operation as defined in part 119 of this chapter, unless that person holds an airline transport pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and, if required, an appropriate type rating for that airplane.

Only been that way for 25 years that I know of.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

So it looks like Part 135 scheduled passenger flights in multiengine airplanes require an ATP rated pilot. That seems reasonable. Thanks for the information Mauleskinner.

Any information on the single engine ATP? Is there any operator that requires an ASEL ATP by FAR?

 

[FlyingFisherman]

Could you post that again in English? What are you trying to say? Where I work, you don't need an ATP but they pay you more if you have one.

Was getting at that all the info on 91(k) can be found in the FAR/AIM. Lots of neat stuff in that little guidebook of guidelines and suggestions.

 

[minitour]

As far as I know without research, a single engine ATP really has no purpose from a regulatory standpoint. And for that matter what good is a multiengine ATP without a type rating either?

So I guess the question really is: Are there any Part 121 operations that fly single engine airplanes? And are there any Part 121 operations that fly multiengine airplanes that are less than 12,500 pounds. If so can someone please post information on where and what type of airplanes are used?

Or has there been a change in Part 135 so that an ATP is required for some of those operations under the FAA's "Equal level of Safety" concept? I really don't keep up very much on Part 135.

Well lets see...where to start?
An ATP is required to operate as PIC under part 121, but part 121 prohibits single-engine aircraft operations (121.159)...so that's out.

How about part 135?
Well, you only need an ATP in certain situations. One of those is acting as PIC of a turbojet airplane(or an airplane with passenger seating of 10 or more, or an airplane in a commuter operation). I have a feeling when Diamond's DJet hits the market and the "air taxi" companies get started, the single engine ATP will become a bunch more popular than it is right now.

What good is a ME ATP w/o a type rating?
I'm sure there is a 121 operator out there that operates small, non-transport category, piston powered multi-engine airplanes on their certificate. No type rating required, but you'd need an ATP to be PIC.

-mini

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

No ATP for Caravan Captains

Just got an email from a young man who is a friend of mine that flies for a scheduled airline in Hawaii. His airlilne operates Caravans under Part 135. He says they fly single pilot and that an ATP certificate is not required. The Caravan has 9 passenger seats. I guess that if it had 10 passenger seats (plus the pilot) then an ATP would be required.

Does anyone know of a single engine airplane that even has 10 or more passenger seats?

 

[RipCurl]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Straight from Cessna's website:

[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Commuter seating for 12* passengers and two pilots is available, with four rows of double-bench and single seats. Large windows and plenty of headroom and legroom make travel extremely comfortable. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]* See FAR Part 23[/FONT]

Also, the PAC website claims their 750XL to be capable of lifting 17 jumpers to altitude... what that equates to in regular seating I don't know, but there must be quite a bit of room in there. They say the cabin is about the same size as a Beech 18. Again, I don't know how many seats that would be, but it seems like a good candidate for 10+.