Typed?

[TonyC]

So we come back to the $64 question. Why are military pilots being issued civilian certificates when it appears that they do not have even the most basic knowledge that the certificate states that they have?

Find me the question from the ATP question bank that tests the area of knowledge to which you refer.

(Since I don't have a statement on my certificate describing what knowledge I have, I must assume you're using the ATP question bank to make that determination.)

MY ATP oral was not a quiz about type ratings. It covered the systems of the particular airplane I was about to fly, and instrument procedures. The DE could not have cared less whether I knew the certification requirements for the airplane or how to put together the reverse side of my certificate.

Focus all you want on your $64 question - - your charge against fighter pilots is still bogus.

(Here I am still defendin' 'em, and I ain't even one uv 'em!)

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Find me the question from the ATP question bank that tests the area of knowledge to which you refer.

Well there are only two, both deal with Type ratings and what priviledges you can excercise.

But silly me, I was under the assumption that the military boys might actually read the regs and make an attempt to understand them, after all they will be flying under them for the next 20 years or so.

Any 9th grader can pass an ATP written, rote memorization is a skill that comes fairly early in life.

But hey, I like the idea. Know the bare minimum required, do as little as possible, why read the regs when I can ask someone who has already read them?

Hawg2hawk strikes me as a much more professional type of pilot. He is on another thread asking about a book that puts the regs in plain English. Plain English is not part of the FAA's plan, but we can all hope!!

I have nothing against Fighter pilots at all, I have been snot slinging drunk with lots of them!! My questions have been directed toward the people who are defending why a guy that should know a particular item, does not.

But do not worry, I am an equal oppertunity D!ck. I really have a problem with some of the RJ guys out there flying around a .80 jet and they cannot even tell you what a balanced field is or what part of a swept wing stalls first. And don't even get me started on some of the crap I have seen in the corporate world.

All this started with my poorly worded first post. I simply meant to relay that he might want to read or re-read the regs in case it comes up in an interview. There are several airlines out there that give a fairly comprehensive written test that is not based on the ATP bank.

The harshness of my original post came from my initial reaction when I read the question. The reaction was "YGTBSM, how does a guy have an ATP and not know that!" After our discussions, I now know how a guy can have an ATP and not know that. Thank you for educating me on the subject.

I guess it is the wave of the future, ATP's that do not know when a type rating is needed, Airline pilots that have very little aerodynamic knowledge, and corporate drivers that have no idea how to figure out if their airplane is going to clear that mountian on takeoff if an engine fails. No wonder the pay rates are going down the toilet!!


When I said "directly transferable skills" I am referring to his familiarity with large jet transports and experience with their performance and limitations. I never said that a fighter guy could not do the job. I have had newhires in the sim that haven't flown a multi-engine airplane in years. A V-1 cut in a Viper has a completely different procedure........mostly dealing with a gross weight reduction of his flying machine and a parachute.

 

[gunfyter]

I can tell you exactly why he is asking while filling out a SWA application.

Military logbooks have different headers on the logging of flight time.

FP... co-pilot AirCraft Commander time.

That has to be translated to PIC and SIC time.

The civilian way of logging time is screwed up.... You count taxi time. Two different definitions of PIC and strange rules on when you can log PIC and Instrument time. So you get a big headache when filling out airline apps. What do they want? Can you log it as PIC time if you don't have a type rating or since it is a military jet do I need a type to be PIC?

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

I can tell you exactly why he is asking while filling out a SWA application.

Military logbooks have different headers on the logging of flight time.

FP... co-pilot AirCraft Commander time.

That has to be translated to PIC and SIC time.

The civilian way of logging time is screwed up.... You count taxi time. Two different definitions of PIC and strange rules on when you can log PIC and Instrument time. So you get a big headache when filling out airline apps. What do they want? Can you log it as PIC time if you don't have a type rating or since it is a military jet do I need a type to be PIC?

No argument here on the screwed up regs. On the plus side, if the civilian world used just flight time and not taxi time it would be another excuse for managment to quit paying us for those hours sitting in line at LGA and BOS!!

It is very interesting and sad with what is happening in the profession. I meet more and more military pilots that are choosing to stay in due to the falling pay rates and QOL at the airlines. Good for the military, bad for the airline pilots. On the civilian side you are seeing the lowest common denominator being hired into the RJ's at certian carriers. Meaning that we now have guys running around in command of 70 to 90 seat jets that 10 years ago could not have gotten a job right seat on a 1900. More and more you see peeps out of the certificate mills and even some of the big aviation schools that have never been taught or even exposed to high performace aerodynamics. I never thought I would see the day when Captain on a 500 kt 70,000 pound airplane would pay less than a bus driver in a metropolitan city.

The expectation of what an airline pilot needs to be and what qualifications he must have is falling like a dog turd in a vacuum. It is becoming clear that the guy with the experience and training ie. military or experienced civilian pilots is not the first choice of the carriers, they are more and more looking for the cheapest warm body they can find. Progress I guess, as avionics become more advanced, the airlines are beginning to rely on electronics to conduct the safe flight rather the pilots skill and knowledge.

HMMMMM, bad thread creep here, sorry about that, must be the head cold. Feel free to go back to calling me a fighter pilot hating slimeball!!!!

 

[TonyC]

Well there are only two, both deal with Type ratings and what priviledges you can excercise.

Do you recall which ones they are, or can you point me in the right direction? It's been a while since I took it, (100%, thank you very much) and I don't recall studying that subject matter.

Thanks.

 

[milflyboy]

Must not have been a part of the few selected questions to study extra hard

No, actually in my case the two type rating questions where part of the "Study Hard" questions.

If the questions are the ones I think they are, they go like this: You are typed in this, this and this aircraft, but do your ATP check ride in this aircraft. What priviliges may be exercised regarding these airplanes: Airp1, Airp2, Airp3....

As you know, 121 ops are 10% stick and rudder and 90% covering your rear and keeping the flight legal.

True enough, but it is those 10% or should I say 0.1% where the **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** hits the fan that the Airlines are hirering for. Any Joe with a couple of hundred hours can be taught to fly the line (the 90%). But has he been proven under pressure?

 

[TonyC]

Must not have been a part of the few selected questions to study extra hard

If you're implying I used one of those specially focused weekend cram sessions, you are incorrect. I used the King videos, and the accompanying book and computer testing disk (I believe it ran on DOS 3.2 or so). I covered every question in the entire bank. I learned the subject matter; I did not memorize any answers. I took dozens and dozens of randomly generated practice tests, and I covered each question several times.

If it was covered, I have forgotten. I'd still like to see the specific question or questions from the bank, and the specific subject matter area. I don't think they're there.

 

[qmaster3]

I used the King videos

Tony C she looks like your avatar

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

If it was covered, I have forgotten. I'd still like to see the specific question or questions from the bank, and the specific subject matter area. I don't think they're there.

The newest ATP book I have is from 1994 so I do not know if the question numbers will match anymore. Anyhow 9328, and 9329 deal directly with type rating privileges, specifically asking what privileges can be exercised under various conditions. There are probably others, but it's been a long day and I would rather pass out in a rack, than look for more!!

I no longer have a Commercial question book, but I think it deals with the type rating requirements in more detail than the ATP does. It also occured to me how we may have the disparity between civilian and military knowledge on this subject. As a civilian you must hold a commercial certificate prior to being eligible for an ATP (FAR 61.153 d 1). The military can skip the commercial ticket and move directly to the ATP provided they meet FAR 61.153 d 2.

Since the commercial written deals with the basics of flying for hire more than the ATP does, The ATP bank leaves out a good deal of the stuff that is considered to be common knowledge by that point for the civilian pilot. Hence the ATP bank stresses the 121 stuff a little more and leaves out items covered on the commercial written. Also a civilian pilot has probably spent a couple of years working 135 charter or flight instructing prior to having the time required for the ATP and may already hold a type rating for a light jet prior to going for the ATP. It does appear that by skipping the previous writtens (what I get from a bleary eyed peek at the regs, correct me if I'm wrong) that would explain why the military guys have questions about certian subjects that an equally rated civilian pilot finds odd.



MILF,

I disagree, That 10% stick and rudder does include the .01%.........but it's what you know (the other 90%) that will save your butt when the sh!t hits the fan. Any trained pilot can wiggle and jiggle......it's when the crap that is supposed to work to correct a situation doesn't work and you have to fall back on your aviation and aircraft knowledge to figure out why......thats what the airlines are hiring you for! The first real engine that I had come apart in my career did not go anything like what the training said it was supposed to.....of course the training never seems to cover an engine blowing its guts out when you are in ice. Pretty much the book went out the window, since not only did the anti ice systems not perform as well on one engine as the book claimed, the collateral damage from the engine failing took a couple of other items out as well. One good pilot brain is always better than 10 foot stompers. I can only remember one emergency that went like the sim said it was supposed to, too bad management seems to think that airplanes fly themselves anymore and that pilots are a redundancy.



If I ever find the little weasel engineer that wrote the part about "ANTI ICE SYSTEMS ARE FULLY FUNCTIONAL EVEN WITH ONE ENGINE FAILED" in the POH, I am going to wring his scrawny little neck!!!!!!

 

[milflyboy]

Tony C

Just meant as a joke

.......but it's what you know (the other 90%) that will save your butt when the sh!t hits the fan....

....... The first real engine that I had come apart in my career did not go anything like what the training said it was supposed to.....of course the training never seems to cover an engine blowing its guts out when you are in ice. Pretty much the book went out the window, since not only did the anti ice systems not perform as well on one engine as the book claimed, the collateral damage from the engine failing took a couple of other items out as well.....

So you agree knowing your FARs and systems is not the only key to the answer? 99.9% of the military pilots I have come across know their systems thoroughly. Why? Because they have most likely been in several situations like you describe, where the real world doesn't look like the training at all.
Experiences like the one you are describing are the ones that build excellent aviators. By selecting a military pilot with 1000 hours they know you have seen stuff like that. I am not saying the civilian with 1000 hours haven't seen his share, but it is possible he hasn't. I have seen 1k civilian pilots on this board describing going missed approach and have to hold as the toughest act during their flying.
It all boils down to experience and discipline. If you are coming across so many military pilots that don't know their FARs as you describe a reason could be that they have their ATP, but are not actually using it (Not talking about the part of the FARs that apply to everyday military flying). Believe me, when the time comes they will refresh their memory, but right now they have far more complex manuals and procedures to memorize

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

By selecting a military pilot with 1000 hours they know you have seen stuff like that. I am not saying the civilian with 1000 hours haven't seen his share, but it is possible he hasn't. I have seen 1k civilian pilots on this board describing going missed approach and have to hold as the toughest act during their flying.

Pilots are like any other commodity. You have good ones and bad ones. I have seen both civilian and military guys that couldn't fly themselves out a of a paper bag. They are like anything else, every now and then one slips through that should not be there.

Military does not automatically make one a good pilot, nor does civilian. We had a KC 135 commander that barely made it to the line on a 737 due to the fact that he would crash 7 out of 10 V-1 cuts(not popular in the base, consistantly scared Captains with his lack of skills, but would be the first to tell a guy how to fly). On the other side of the coin, you see some of the civilian guys that supposedly have a couple thousand hours in type and can't scratch their balls without a diagram.

Then you can go the other way, Back in the regional days we had 2 new F/O's in base, 6months out of newhire school. Both about 1500 hours or so, One kid was probably the smoothest stick and rudder guy I ever saw BUT, he would screw up the paperwork so much that you had to double check everything that he did just to make sure that you did not get violated. I would have trusted him fully to fly an airplane with a dead engine.......just what ever you do, don't let him make a safety of flight decision...99% percent of the time his choice would be the one that would kill you the quickest. On the other hand, the other kid wasn't quite as good stick and rudder, but he had a good decision skills.

To tell you the truth, out flying the line at a major, you cannot tell who was military trained or not. You fly with so many different folks that you really only remember your good buddies, and the idiots. And of the idiots that I flew with it was split just about right down the middle. 50% civilian and 50% military. But that 100% of idiots, only made up 1% of the total guys you flew with.


Of course, one always needs to be sure that he is not one of the idiots!!! Guy checking his idiot status: "Hey how are you doing Bob?" Bob: "Fine, good to see you again. Sorry, what was your name again, all the faces blend in after a while" Guy just confirmed as not being one of the idiots: "WOO HOO!"

Now if guys who you have never flown with, greet you by your first name when the release only has an initial listed !!!...........DOH!!!

 

[milflyboy]

Yes you are right there are good/bad pilots both civilian and military. But on the military side we at least have the opportunity to weed out the worst. I can only imagine it must be a little tougher on the civilian side.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Yes you are right there are good/bad pilots both civilian and military. But on the military side we at least have the opportunity to weed out the worst. I can only imagine it must be a little tougher on the civilian side.

It's tougher at the regionals than the majors. By the time a guy gets to a major he has been through several companies and 10 years of professional flying on average. That has the same effect as going through a stint in the military.

There are very few bad apples left by the time you get to that level. Most of the morons either picked up a violation or two, killed themselves, or gained a "reputation" prior to making it that far. With only about 600,000 total pilots in the US, and only about 150k to 200k or so with the ratings and experience needed for the majors, you cannot piss off or scare too many people before you become "known"

Being professional and laid back will normally get you far in the industry. There are the select few that make this profession much much more stressful than it needs to be. And in the aviation community, the A-hole Captain may be the Junior new hire at the stroke of a Backruptcy or furlough pen!! Never ever burn a bridge just because you can!

 

[NTS ALL 4]

I can only imagine it must be a little tougher on the civilian side.

It's called a checkride, just like the military.

 

[milflyboy]

It's called a checkride, just like the military.

Everybody can pass an initial checkride. It is just a matter of your wallet size right

Of course after you make it to the Airlines your employer wouldn't like it if you failed a check, but at that time we are talking about checking in a discipline you are flying every day and yes , failing it then would mean that you would really suck or had an extremely bad day and probably shouldn't have been flying in the first place.

How big a percentage of Airline pilots fail a check ride after their initial ATP? How many manages to pass the next one and how many loose their job as a result?

The Air Force weeds out like 10-15% of their fighter pilots during FTU and here we are talking about pilots who have allready gotten their wings and have gone through a significant selection/weed out process.

 

[TonyC]

The newest ATP book I have is from 1994 so I do not know if the question numbers will match anymore. Anyhow 9328, and 9329 deal directly with type rating privileges, specifically asking what privileges can be exercised under various conditions. There are probably others, but it's been a long day and I would rather pass out in a rack, than look for more!!

I no longer have a Commercial question book, but I think it deals with the type rating requirements in more detail than the ATP does. It also occured to me how we may have the disparity between civilian and military knowledge on this subject. As a civilian you must hold a commercial certificate prior to being eligible for an ATP (FAR 61.153 d 1). The military can skip the commercial ticket and move directly to the ATP provided they meet FAR 61.153 d 2.

I didn't relish the thought of actually digging up the Airman Knowledge Test Question Bank, but it's been nagging at me, so it had to be done. The King Materials I have are probably the same vintage as yours, but it might take me a while to find it. Hence, the numbers you gave don't mean much. Never fear, however, because the FAA has moved into the computer age, and the current question bank is probably more relevant to the origin of this thread anyway.

Looking at the current Question Bank found at http://av-info.faa.gov/data/airmanknowledge/atp.htm I find a few occurrences of the word type that are relevant to certificates or ratings.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]

19. [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]E07 [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]ATP[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]To serve as pilot in command in an IFR operation, a person must have passed a line check[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A) within the past 12 months, which include a portion of a civil airway and one instrument approach at one representative airport, in one of the types of aircraft which that pilot is to fly.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]B) since the beginning of the 12th month before that service, which included at least one flight over a civil airway, or approved off-airway route, or any portion of either, in one type of aircraft which that pilot is to fly.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]C) consisting of a flight over the route to be flown, with at least three instrument approaches at representative airports, within the past 12 calendar months, in one type of aircraft which that pilot is to fly.

[/size][/font]
The subject matter in this case is E07, 14 CFR PART 135 - Operating Requirements: Commuter and On-Demand Operations -- Crewmember Testing Requirements. Since "in one type of aircraft which that pilot is to fly" appears in all three of the choices, knowledge of type ratings serves no purpose in discerning the correct answer here. The subject here is really line checks.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]59. [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]E05 [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]ATP[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]What are the minimum certificate and rating requirements for the pilot in command of a multiengine airplane being operated by a commuter air carrier?[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A) Airline transport pilot; airplane category; multiengine class.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]B) Airline transport pilot; airplane category; multiengine class; airplane type rating, if required.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]C) Commercial pilot; airplane category; multiengine class; instrument rating; airplane type rating, if required.[/size][/font]

The subject matter in this case is E05, 14 CFR PART 135 - Operating Requirements: Commuter and On-Demand Operations -- Flight Crewmember Requirements. Albeit this question tests the applicant's knowledge of whether an airplane type rating is required for a PIC of a commuter multi, the "if required" still leaves a lot to the imagination.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]121. [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]D15 [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]ATP[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]What are the line check requirements for the pilot in command for a domestic air carrier?[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A) The line check is required only when the pilot is scheduled to fly into special areas and airports.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]B) The line check is required every 12 calendar months in one of the types of airplanes to be flown.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]C) The line check is required every 12 months in each type aircraft in which the pilot may fly.[/size][/font]

Here's a question from D15, 14 CFR PART 121 - Certification and Operations: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental Air Carriers and Commercial Operators of Large Aircraft -- Crewmember Qualifications. While testing the distinction between line checks in one type or each type, there is still no requirement to necessarily know what a type is.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]135. [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A20 [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]ATP[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]Unless otherwise authorized, when is the pilot in command required to hold a type rating?[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A) When operating an aircraft that is certificated for more than one pilot.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]B) When operating a multiengine aircraft having a gross weight of more than 6,000 pounds.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]C) When operating an aircraft having a gross weight of more than 12,500 pounds.[/size][/font]

A20, 14 CFR PART 61 -- Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors -- General. Here's a question that directly addresses the issue at hand. This question would have the applicant know what conditions require the possession of a Type Rating, and applicants should know. In this case, they should be able to select from more than one pilot, multiengine w/ GW > 6,000 lbs, or GW > 12,500 as the conditions that trigger the requirement.

However, in defense of viperdriver who began this thread, there is no discussion of how this requirement applies to military aircraft. Certainly there is no discussion of whether a military operator of a 737 is required to possess a Type Rating for the 737. Sure, there's the caveat that begins the question, but can you honestly say you fully understand each and every implication of "unless otherwise authorized"?!?!

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]151. [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A25 [/size][/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]ATP[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A commercial pilot has a type rating in a B-727 and B-737. A flight test is completed in a B-747 for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate. What pilot privileges may be exercised regarding these airplanes?[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]A) ATP - B-747; Commercial - B-727 and B-737.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]B) ATP - B-747, B-727, and B-737.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=-1]C) Commercial - B-737; ATP - B-727 and B-747.[/size][/font]

Subject matter code A25, 14 CFR PART 61 -- Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors -- Airline Transport Pilots. Again, while the Type Rating is discussed in the context of privileges, there is no discussion of those airplanes that require a type or those that don't, or how any exceptions might apply to military airplanes or military versions of commercial airplanes, or the military operating "off-the-shelf" commercial airplanes.


Now, that's all I could find regarding Type Ratings or Type Certificates in the current Airman Knowledge Test Question Bank for ATP. None of those questions, in my opinion, require the knowledge to answer viperdriver's questions. If you have a definitive exposition on the meaning of "unless otherwise authorized," I would hope you'd be so kind as to share it with us. Otherwise, you might review your initial response to viperdriver and reconsider your harshness.

Now, as for the military pilot skipping the Commercial on the way to the ATP: The more common route for military pilots is to take the written exam (Military Competency? Military Equivalency? I don't recall) to obtain the Commercial and Instrument, but that doesn't really matter. In any event, the lack of emphasis on the specific requirements of the Type rating is, in my opinion, appropriate. If there were a reasonable danger of a military pilot accidentally operating an airplane that required a type rating without first going through the process to obtain that rating, I might think otherwise. On the contrary, a military pilot would more likely overtrain and overdocument.

If you're interested, Start at your 61.153(d)(2), follow its reference to 61.73, and study Type Ratings there. You'll find "if applicable" used several times.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Also on other applications it asks for aircraft and if a type rating is required for that aircraft. When is it required? Is it required on an Air Force 737?

Tony,

His second question "When is it required?" should have been easily answered by his knowledge from his civilian ATP, as you have shown in your research.

His third question "Is it required on an Air Force 737?" Should have been easily answered by his Knowledge of military regs.

His question regarding F-16's ,B-52's etc, was valid, given that there is no civilian counterpart to those aircraft, Notice I tried to give an answer to those questions as best I could. (LOA's and such.)

So I stand by my original statement. IF he really did not know the answer, it would probably be in his best interest to re-read the regs before his interview. Since knowing when a type rating is required is about as basic as you can get.
It would imply that he may have forgotten some of the more complex civilian regs. He may, or may not ever be asked at an interview, but anything is fair game to an interview board. He is applying for a civilian pilot position, and every other applicant in the room will know the answers to the questions that he posed. Add to that, the fact that a very large percentage of the group will be pilots from other major and regional airlines that have years of 121 experience. Something as simple as this could exclude him from the position.

I have already said that my response could have been worded in a less harsh manner. But the fact remains, he should have known the answer based on the civilian certificates that he holds. Or at the very least, know where to find it in the regs.

Of course, I may be one of the other guys in the interview class, so by all means please feel free to be as ignorant of the regs as you like!!!! I'll take every advantage I can get!

 

[TonyC]

His second question "When is it required?" should have been easily answered by his knowledge from his civilian ATP, as you have shown in your research.

His third question "Is it required on an Air Force 737?" Should have been easily answered by his Knowledge of military regs.

I know it must be hard to bow out gracefully, so I won't continue to press this much further. His "second" and "third" question were the same, the "third" being just a more specific phrasing of the second. I've "re-read" the regs, namely Part 61, and the answer is not clear. There are plenty of "what about?"s that do not collect a straightforward answer from the reg.

I haven't kept up with all the changes to all the military regs as you must have, but I feel fairly certain that they still do not address type rating requirements of 737s. Rather than ask you to point to the Air Force directive that easily answers that question, I'll bow out of the conversation. The last word is yours.

Cheers!

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

I've "re-read" the regs, namely Part 61, and the answer is not clear. There are plenty of "what about?"s that do not collect a straightforward answer from the reg.

????? 61.31 about as straight forward as the FAA gets!!!
Type rating is required on:
1. Large Airplane
2. Turbojet powered.
3. Other aircraft specified through type certificate procedures.

So through all this you have argued that an Air Force fighter pilot, in command of one of the best performing airplanes on the planet, and entrusted to deliver thousands of pounds of high explosive ordinance when called upon to do so, cannot read and comprehend a simple 7 line paragraph in a book?

Tell me Tony, what do you have against fighter pilots??

There is absolutly no reason why an ATP should not be expected to know when a type rating is required. It is the highest civilian certificate available.

I will now bow out of the discussion.

 

[JAFI]

Gentlemen, Not that I want to get in the middle of this "discussion" but I would like to add some information. Type ratings listed in the FAA Inspector Handbook Order 8700 are under Figure 9-2 in this link (you need to scroll down about 9 pages to see the figure 9-2):


http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/faa/8700/8700_vol2/2_009_00.pdf

That is "the" list current as of today. I did not say up to date, because it is not, but this is the current publication.

Aircraft like the B-52 and F-16 do not have a FAA certification because the manufactures did not submit the aircraft for certification (read no civilian aircraft sales or market). There fore the aircraft are not certified under FAR 23, 25 or the CAR's. Many of the military fighter guys (ego's aside) have no background in transport aircraft (some sneer and call then "trash haulers") so they do not know the status of FAA type rating required aircraft. In the same light, I do not know beans about a F-16, etc. or fighter ops.

However, the first poster did ask a valid question and I think we should answer as best we can.

JAFI