Which is better- Multi-engine or Single Engine Turbine

[propilot1983]

What looks better on the resume?

 

[kingaira90]

I would say if you want to fly aircraft with more than one engine in the future, get multi time. Some ex caravan, pc-12, or tbm 700 guys would probably know better how their time was viewed. I know plenty of places have multi time requirements because of insurance companies. -kingaira90

 

[Kawasumi_Kichou]

IMHO if you have a choice, multi is always better.

 

[Purpledog]

Unless your single eng turbine is a jet I would go for the multi. It just depends on where you want to fly.

 

[S2R]

Go with the multi first. Then, everyone will want you to have turbine, then turbine multi, then jet time, then heavier jet time. Then, the next company will wonder why you have no space shuttle time. Seems like a never-ending battle sometimes huh?

 

[greygoose]

The advantage of getting the turbine, single or not it meets the 1000 hour turbine pic requirement that everyone has a hard time to get.

 

[HMR]

Plus...in a single you're twice as likely to get some glider time than in a twin.

 

[The Natural]

single or multi

Thats easy... Single engine turbine or multi-engine turbine??? Hands down the twin time is better on the resume.

The real question is multi-engine turbine SIC vs. Single engine turbine PIC


The complexity of the aircraft plays a role to insurance companies too...
ie. retractable gear, pressurization.

I would take a MET SIC position if I was going to be a part of a large flight department with many aircraft, some of them being jets.

 

[greygoose]

Thats easy... Single engine turbine or multi-engine turbine??? Hands down the twin time is better on the resume. QUOTE]
Sherlock, he means multi piston or single turbine LOL

 

[wingnutt]

i did both, got a few hundred multi piston, followed up by a few hundred of turbine single. then it was quite easy to walk into the local king air operator and score a left seat gig.

 

[The Natural]

Thats easy... Single engine turbine or multi-engine turbine??? Hands down the twin time is better on the resume. QUOTE]
Sherlock, he means multi piston or single turbine LOL

yeah ur right.

 

[speedbird1974]

Unless is between a DC-3 and a Caravan. I would take a DC-3.

 

[wingnutt]

i dunno, that DC3 would more than likely be right seat time, and the van would be PIC...

 

[speedbird1974]

You are right, unless the upgrade is quick.
A fast way to get PIC jet could be USA Jet. I heard upgrades can be just a year.

 

[propilot1983]

Ya, the choice is to stay where I am at and possibly get into a baron or change companies and fly a caravan. Thanks for the replies.

 

[wingnutt]

stay there and upgrade, get a few hundred, then swap to the van...it worked for me

 

[Snoopy58]

What do you want to do, where do you want to end up?

If the answer is "the airlines," then there's no question: go for the turbine PIC. Right or wrong, "turbine PIC" is the gold standard that airlines use for evaluating applicants, and multi-engine time counts for not very much. Now, I'm not telling you that with 1001 hours PIC in a caravan you'll be set for every airline you might dream of applying to, but in a few years, when you have a broader, deeper resume, I think that you'll look back favorably on having an extra X hour in the "turbine PIC" column instead of having them in the "multi" column.

By the time you're applying to the airlines, the top of the resume won't say "Beech Baron" nor "Caravan," but something like a Lear or a Gulfstream or a King Air... so having "enough" multi time will be pretty much a given. At that point, you'll be competing against a bunch of other pilots with probably similar top lines on their resume, and what will help you stand out will be the numbers at the bottom of the grid: the guy with 1800 turbine PIC (900 in a Lear & 900 in a caravan) will look a lot better than the guy with 1200 turbine PIC (even if it was all in a Gulfstream). If total times are comparable, nobody will care that the 1200 hour TPIC guy has more multi time... he has 1200 and the other guy has 1800. Go turbine.

 

[fokkers&beer]

I flew multi piston, got into the Caravan because it was clean, and did'nt break all of the time like my Beech did. Now look at me I'm a 5 year loser in a Feeder. September 11 sucks.

 

[350DRIVER]

This one is a no-brainer, the multi-engine turbine time by far will open many more doors in terms of career advancement. This can be a "show-stopper" when X company requires X amount of hours of multi-engine turbine PIC time, the single engine turbine stuff isn't going to cut it nor get you the job if you don't have the multi-engine time. Maybe in terms of building time, gaining experience, etc, but I surely would not pick the single if given the choice. The insurance companies pretty much dictate what is required to be in the left seat and over the years they have seemed to throw the single engine turbine time out the window since they want X amount of hours in multi-engine turbo-prop equipment.

 

[DOVPILOT]

Pic Vs Sic

Thats easy... Single engine turbine or multi-engine turbine??? Hands down the twin time is better on the resume.

The real question is multi-engine turbine SIC vs. Single engine turbine PIC


The complexity of the aircraft plays a role to insurance companies too...
ie. retractable gear, pressurization.

I would take a MET SIC position if I was going to be a part of a large flight department with many aircraft, some of them being jets.

I know of a guy who's son had 6000 hr PIC in a SE turbine agcat. He worked at Peidmont for a couple months, and then was hired by SWA. SWA took his 6000 SE and told him they would assume he had 3000 ME time. I guess PIC SE turbine is ok as long as you got the right number of hours.