Type Rating Question 61.157(g)(ii)(A)

[Amish RakeFight]

If he is that close to ATP times it would be much better to build the 200 hrs and take the written before the type rating. Then upon completion of the Type ride he would get his type and ATP in one shot. The type ride will be to ATP stanadards reguardless. To me it would be silly to get a type rating then 200 hrs later take a seperate check ride for the ATP.

I was gonna suggest it too.

...but yeah, the TYPE on a COMM is good for when you acquire your ATP. It transfers, like ASqrd said. As a matter of fact, I recall one of the questions in the ATP bank addressing this as a question.

 

[A Squared]

A free type is a free type regardles of aircraft. my 2 cents.

There's no such thing as a free type rating, someone's paying for it.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Unfortunately, this "SIC type rating" foolishness has created a huge mess, because it bends the definition of "type rating" and the other regulations have not reflected this change. Eventually, this (hopefuly) will all get straightened out. In the meantinme, consider that the "sic type rating" is not a type rating at all and has absolutely no significance unless your certificates are being examined by an official of a foreign country where the SIC is required to be "rated" Other than that the "SIC type rating" counts for nothing, not even bragging rights.

A Squared, based on what you just said, what is the purpose of an SIC rating supposed to be and why does the FAA offer it?

I was recently reading about SIC ratings being offered in the DC-3.....now, in an aircraft like the DC-3 that requires 2 pilots and meets the criteria for requiring a type rating, is the SIC 'type rating' a valid credential for the second pilot or not?

 

[A Squared]

A Squared, based on what you just said, what is the purpose of an SIC rating supposed to be and why does the FAA offer it?

I was recently reading about SIC ratings being offered in the DC-3.....now, in an aircraft like the DC-3 that requires 2 pilots and meets the criteria for requiring a type rating, is the SIC 'type rating' a valid credential for the second pilot or not?

Some other countries requre both pilots in an airplane to be "rated" in the aircraft. A few years back, some started enforcing this on US airline crews. In response, the FAA created the "SIC type rating" to meet that requirement. The rating has absolutely no significance if you don't fly outside of the United States.

 

[Fearless Tower]

So, in an aircraft such as the DC-3, both pilots need to be PIC type rated, or am I misunderstanding the FARs?

 

[Fearless Tower]

A squared, I've been away from the forum for a while, but I just noticed your Current Position is listed as Herc FO....you're not flying the -6 anymore?

 

[WMUSIGPI]

No both do not need to be PIC typed. In fact if you do not fly outside the US the SIC does not need the "SIC type rating" It's just the required training like the past. The SIC rating is to meet ICAO needs just like the English proficient statement on pilot certificates that takes effect next month. Most airlines and charter companies (and probably most corporate jet operators) put the SIC type on during initial because they can fly international trips.

 

[A Squared]

So, in an aircraft such as the DC-3, both pilots need to be PIC type rated, or am I misunderstanding the FARs?

No, within the US, for a DC-3, the PIC needs to have a DC-3 type rating. THe SIC only needs to be qualified under teh relevant regulations for SIC qualification of paer 91/121/135/125, whichever the plane is being operated under. No rating is requried for hthe SIC


If you operate into one of hte countries where both pilots are requried to be rated, then yes, the SIC needs to have the "SIC type rating" on his certificate.

A squared, I've been away from the forum for a while, but I just noticed your Current Position is listed as Herc FO....you're not flying the -6 anymore?

Nope, I gave that up for Lent. Seriously, though, I took a position flying L-382's, and left my former employer behind. I really enjoyed the DC-6, but I'd had enough of the company.