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

Turbine Time

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
flight junkie,

sar·casm Pronunciation Key (särkzm)
n.
A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

I believe that 5280 understood my post. It was an attempt to use sarcastic language, intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

The victim is anyone who is infuriated by someone with low time having turbine time or infuriated by someone with low time who isn't intimidated by said aircraft.

RT
 
Tumbler,
Was that sarcasm? Sounded like someone trying to get in his $.02 and that what it's worth.....$.02. Since I'm relaxing on days off, I thought I'd see what other golden nuggets of advice you've given elsewhere on this board. Can you imagine my disbelief that other's bashed almost all your advice and thoughts. How dare they, eh? I even read one from your wife. Guess she loves your sarcasm. As far as intimidation, I guess I wouldn't hold a candle to your 70 hours from 20 years ago. Anyway, I'd love to sit here all day and argue and have us belittle one another, but I'm sure with the quality of character you display on this board, and the added bonus of your wealth of aviation knowledge.....you're most likely too busy for all that, with tons of offers from airlines and charters. Oh, just saw your profile....nevermind! You didn't take offense to this post did you? After all....it's all just sarcasm.
 
Rumple..................

You don't know what you're talking about............

...and were you confused and maybe talking to your wife ... the whole weeping thing........?????????
 
Actually 5280High, it was a FedEx DC-10 off the right wing not a -9, but who's keepin' track anyway:D
 
There is absolutely nothing wrong with legally logging sole-manipulator PIC time under the regs. Many single pilot turboprops have an eager low timer sitting in the left seat, flying a dead leg and being helped along by the guidance and encouragement of an experienced high-time pilot. It's fun, legal, and great experience.

Now the bad news. Some potential employers are very specific about the turbine PIC time they will accept for interview purposes. Often, these folks use FAR Part 1 as the standard for being pilot in command of an aircraft. It's a higher standard than being appropriately rated and sole manipulator. Get it out and read it.

Now, put down the book, go find someone who flys a King Air C 90, and start getting used to turbine flying. I did the same thing with a friend in a Conquest, the Cessna version of a King Air. It has Garrett engines (most of the time) and if you fly one, beg borrow or steal some ANR headsets, as those puppies are NOISY.

You never know, the experience you gather under Part 61 may help you to get a 135 SIC job later, leading up to Part 1 PIC time.

Experience is like a ladder. Take it as you can find it, one rung at a time...
 
Last edited:
DC-9...DC-10..alll the same :D

my mistake hahah but it was still sweet....oh well man just remeber be safe you are only a 500 hr pilot hahah what a pile see ya mane......
 
Loging time

Just re-read 14CFR91.51 (f) to remind myself what the requirements were. To log SIC time an SIC must be required by aircraft certification or by regulation. According to a couple of legal interetations from FAA Legal, if you meet all the requirements for an air carrier (Pt 135) you can log SIC time if you are assigned to the flight. There is no free ride.

Good luck.
 
It depends on the operation. In my case it was a part 91 operation in an aircraft that required two pilots unless the PIC was type rated for single pilot ops which he wasn't.

RT
 

Latest resources

Back
Top