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

Type Ratings!!!

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


Well-known member
Dec 15, 2001

Check that its three greens......
Waste of Time

Spending your hard earned money on a type rating, I feel is a waste of money. With only 1,000 hours it's not really going to seperate you from others since odds are, you will have very little time in type to go with the rating. Lets say you got hired as a SIC in a Citation and the chief pilot would get you some left seat time, maybe just maybe I would consider the type. But its a lot of money ($6,000-10,000).

Joyous Holiday Season
I agree, a Type Rating without any time in type (I mean at least 100 hours in type) is a waste of money.... and at 1,000 hours, you won't even have ATP Privledges in Type....

Save your money and wait for your future employer to buy your rating for you....

If you feel you must buy a Type Rating, then I would suggest a Citation (CE-500) or a Lear (LR-Jet) Type Rating as it would give you the most aircraft per type...

I honestly think you are wasting your money... If I were hiring someone and there was a guy with 2,000 hours and no type or a guy with 1,000 hours and a type (but no time in type) I would more than likely go for the guy with 2,000 hours....

Good Luck!
Well! thanks to Falcon Capt. as always and to humble pilot. Its good to know that the views r the same not to waste money on type ratings unless sometime in type. I know its really a hard time for us low time guys trying to get a real job but i'm sure that something will come up. Nobody answered my question about cheap and good type rating companies. There is a company in Miami, Eagle Jet. They offer quite a few programmes building time as SIC or PIC and type ratings as well. Is that thing worth doing, does anybody care if u bought the time? Thanks again.....
Merry X mas

Check that its three greens....
ipilot.... you have 1,000 hours... be patient... you have spent plenty of cash getting all your ratings as it is... "Buying" flight time shouldn't even be a consideration for you right now... Focus your energy on doing the best you can at your current job and also looking for new opportunities.... it will happen... I was in your shoes back in 1991-1992 when pay-for-training was rampant throughout the industry and new commuter F/O's typically had 2,500 TT ( and that was to fly right seat in a 1900).. I knew a 1900 Captain who had nearly 10,000 hours!

Be patient... I never paid for an hour of flying after getting my CFI-ME.... I had about 260 hours back then... Be persistant and make the most of your current situation... When I was a CFI we encouraged the owner to pursue a 135 certificate, we got that and eventually leased a C-414A.... using that experience I moved on to a large Charter company and started flying KingAirs and Lear (and another CFI moved into the C-414)... be creative, you never know what might come of it....

Don't "buy" time, you are wasting your money.... And I know a lot of employers out there who frown upon that kind of "experience"... again, it is like flying for free (actually worse, because you are paying someone to let you fly) it only hurts the Profession.... When was the last time a Doctor paid YOU to give you a check-up??? Or a Lawyer paid YOU to defend you.... it just doesn't happen, nor should flying for free as a Professional...

Just my $0.02 worth....

Good Luck!
Thanks Falcon Capt. for the long reply. I surely will try and be patient untill the opportunity comes to try something else. I'm really very happy at my current positions as a CFI and i'm building up some good hours. I think it will be better to get a 135 job and get the hands on a turbo prob A/C. Build sometime and then look for a Jet job somewhere. I'm not going to buy the time. Thanks again.....
Merry X mas

Check that its three greens........
To give you a frame of reference... I CFI'ed until I had 2,450 Total Time and 850 Multi... (I have over 1,650 dual given)... I didn't touch a turbine until after this...

At 1,000 hours I was happy to just being allowed to teach in the twin... our school had a 1,000 TT minimum to teach in the twin...

Patients is a requirement in this industry!

Good Luck and Merry Christmas!

Falcon Capt.
Dear ipilot,

i was a 800 TT commercial multi engine pilot when i first heard the noise of PT6 on each side of my ears instead of flying by my ears. How did i get there you might ask,
Well, be at your flying school or FBO, go to small airports where you know that a guy owns a King Air, Cheyenne (in my case), ...

Sooner or later he will take you on a flight. It's flight time that you cannot log in most cases but its experience. Most important you will have an idea about what to expect and time to adapt at the speed at which things go. Then i got a job offer for a right seat on a Be1900, followed four months later by the Metroliner. Then i got the opportunity to fly jets. I have been flying Learjets for a year now and i will be upgraded by april. It took 2 years from 800 TT to 2200+
You can log King Air 90/100/200 time if its Part 91 (repositioning, ferry, maintenance check, etc) with just a Com Mult. The 350 requires a type rating. That goes for any turboprop under 12,500 gross
Flydog is correct provided you have done you're 3 TO/LDGs etc. Until then, you may not. Also, when thinking about logging time, even though you don't require a type rating in the 90/100/200, you may still wish to only log it as SIC (this opens another can of worms...). If the airlines are you ultimate goal, really look into how each like you to log time! If they look back at your logbooks (and MOST DO!), and see at 700 or 800 hours Total Time you were logging BE200 PIC time, they will become VERY skeptical. That might get you a question such as "Tell me about the hydraulic system on the King Air 200 you've flown?" If you were just looking to log turbine time and didn't learn about the airplane (I mean dig into an initial manual or AFM and LEARN about it), and you fumble that question, well...it's all uphill from there.

Now, the SIC can of worms: Since an SIC is not required by certification on King Airs, you can't just ride with a buddy and log SIC time all day long. Here if I remember correctly (someone help me out f I'm wrong), you can only log SIC time if it's the company policy to require a second pilot. If they DON'T, just because the guy asked you to "ride along" doesn't mean you can log SIC. Again, if the airlines are you're long term goal, really look into how THEY want you to log time. Though each vary slightly, you'll get an idea of what they're looking for. And, most if not all DO look at your logs. I interviewed with an airline last year (hired but I declined the offer), they started with my first log book, first page, first entry, and that was over 20 years ago!

Didn't mean to get long winded here. Hope this helps.

Good luck!


I would generally agree with the advise given on this thread.

However there is one thing to consider. When you obtain your ATP mins you might want to consider getting your ATP in a Citation for example as opposed to say an Aztec or Baron. This way you will kill two birds with 1 stone.

The Citation is an easy plane to fly and there are schools where you could get the training for a few K.

No disrespect intended but at your experiance level a B-737 Type might be biting of more than you can chew!

BTW. I got my ATP in a Citation in 1979 and it worked out well for me.

Good luck
SIC time

There are only a few ways to log SIC, and whether a Part 91 Company has a policy to have two pilots fly does not enter into it whatsoever. The only way(s) to legally log SIC that Iam aware of are:

1) As a SIC in an aircraft whose type certificate requires a SIC, or

2) Under regulations that require a SIC.

For example, under Part 135 or 121, an aircraft in scheduled pax service with more than 9 pax seats requires a SIC. This SIC must have completed a prescribed amount of ground school and flight training for the company, and have taken a 135.293 checkride in the past 12 months.

Under Part 91, since a Safety pilot is a required crewmember when the sole manipulator is under a hood, you could log that time as SIC time if you really had some burning god-awful desire to put something in that SIC cloumn in your logbook, but most people designate the safety pilot as PIC and he logs it that way.

Not to muddy the waters too much, but you may be interested to know that there is actually a difference between ACTING as PIC and SERVING as PIC. That is fodder for another string, but basically, the Regs say that there must be a PIC designated for the flight, that person must meet certain recency of experience qualifications (IFR currency, or 3 takeoffs/ldgs in 90 days, for example) but that person may or may not manipulate the controls. You may have another pilot, actually fly the airplane. If the airplane is a C90 that does not require two pilots, the holder of a multi-engine rating could be PIC, SERVING as the sole manipulator, while the other pilot ACTS as PIC. Most people believe that although this sort of time may be legal, it is not very honest, and most airlines specifically state that all PIC time must be as the "signer for the aircraft" or the person ultimately responsible for the flight.

One more thing- to ACT as PIC of the King Air, you would also need to have a high altitude endorsement too. Technically, if the other pilot was fully current and qualified to ACT as PIC, and you had a multi-engine rating, you could SERVE as a PIC without the endorsement, simply logging it a PIC- sole manipulator, appropriately rated, but, again, most prospective employers will look down on ths type of time.

If it were me, I would simply log the time as "aircraft familiarization" and "aircraft training" and make an effort to learn about the aircraft- its numbers, operating limitations, normal, abnormal and emergency procedures- but I am sure you would do this anyway, as a future professional.

Check out 61.55 and 61.57 for further info, also FAR Part 1, definition, (pilot in command).

Good Luck!
SIC Discussion


Thanks for clearing up the SIC question. The reason I mentioned "required by the company" is I had a friend flying for a corporation that operated Citation I SPs and BE300s. Two other pilot's where typed in both aircraft and had single pilot endorsements for the Citation. Therefore, no copilot (SIC) was required per certification or regulation (Part 91 flight department). The buddy of mine flew for them for six years and, until typed, logged his time as SIC since he was a hired crewmember on the aircraft. The way I read your post, since it was a part 91 flight department AND per cert/regs no SIC was legally required, he shouldn't have logged his time as SIC? Thats where I thought a "required crewmember as listed in their department manual" could be counted as SIC. I'd sure hate to tell him his logbook is about 2000 hours in error!

Again, thanks for the post as it's a good discussion for those who are up and coming in the aviation profession. To be honest, after interviewing with airlines, fracs and corporate jobs, I sure wish 20 years ago someone...ANYONE...would have been more clear on how to log time. Sure would have made filling out applications SOOOOOOO much easier!!!


Well, here I thought I had ONE **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** reg figured out, you have come up with a whole new facet to it that I hadn't even considered. Hmmnnn, I do not know the answer to this one. Maybe some Citation pilot could clarify this for us.

My guess, and it is only a guess, is that the Citation SP's are operated under a waiver, or authorization, to be operated SP, and that a SIC could still be utilized, simply by not using that waiver (or authorization, whichever it is, I don't know for sure).

While we're on the subject, recent accident statistics printed in one of the Industry rags (forget which one, maybe BCA) showed that single pilot t-prop operations and single-pilot jet operations each had a safety record that was 30% worse than two-pilot Ops. That is, you were 30% more likely to get an accident or incident when operating single pilot. Makes you wonder how much more likely you are to get violated, too.

Just food for thought, but in any jet I would be flying, an SIC would be a required crew member, if I had anything to do with it.
I have a single pilot type in the CE525. I can fly single pilot all day for my company as long as I am doing part 91 flights. Our 135 ops specs require two pilots, so in that case, we use two pilots who are both typed with single pilot authorization. When the two pilots fly together on part 91 flights, there is a PIC and a "copilot" - no one logs "SIC" time on the part 91 flights. That is reserved for our 135 operations where it is spelled out that two pilots are required for the operations. We could probably log SIC time on the part 91 legs and justify it by operating all part 91 flights under 135 regs, but that's a road I don't want to go down. Me, personally... I want everything in my logbook to be self-explanatory if I ever get the chance to interview with Alaska...