There is a 220hp C172. Would also make things like a C206 or a GA8 "high performance" which they certainly are not! King Air 100's are single pilot and are not high performance under those regulations.
You are showing your ignorance there.
I am just trying to help you out by not being laughed out of the building when you are sending your resume out. But by all means carry on. I have a flying job. Do you?
You just said "which they certainly are not!". Now, this depends on one's definition of high performance.
I just showed you according to FAA they are high performance. May be not according to TC.
I have flown in states, So they say them high performance there, Now that's a fact.
Because you need a separate "high performance" endorsement to fly those aircrafts in US. That's why I wrote "high performance" in my resume.
I understand your point. But you see, I am not wrong in writing that too.
And can you tell me the names of some COMMON general aviation aircrafts which according to TC or you are "high performance"..??
Well , Ya I don't have a flying job right now. I got Indian License last month, Right now there are almost no jobs in the market, here in India. So, looking out.........
hey wxy, i don't think you are getting the gist of lilflyboy262's comments. He's not trying to rope you into an argument or challenging you to an air law showdown. The point he is trying to make is that, while the FAA air law may say one thing, the chief pilot of a place where you are applying for a job may read something totally different in your resume. I actually have some time in a piper dakota as well. Great aircraft and lots of fun to fly! :-) moving up there from the C172, C72R and the C182 I guess i could call it high-er performace, but really...in the grand scale of things, nobody will see it that way. and once I got pushed onto the C208 I understood why. It still is a light, single engine piston <5700kg. So if I was you, I would actually take the 'high performace' of my resume. but hey, that's just me!
flyboy, under FAA regs you need a 'high performance' sign-off / endorsement in your logbook to legally fly anything over 200hp. Doesn't necessarily make a C182 a hot rocket ship, but hey, that's the regs, like 'em or not.
The point wasn't about the legal definitions of a high-performance aircraft. What lilflyboy is trying to point out (politely, unlike myself) is that stating 'High Performance" for that model of aircraft on your CV sounds ridiculous and means it is unlikely to be taken seriously...only likely to get a laugh out of most Chief Pilots, no matter how technically correct it may or may not be.
If it's required in the US then by all means but elsewhere just leave the high-performance part out. Keep the CV simple and avoid candy-coating it.
Kind of like over egging the pudding and calling a CPL with ATP subjects passed a "frozen atp".
Unless you've actually completed a JAR/EASA or the new 43 AS direct ATP course or another like those, it's precisely what it says on the tin - CPL holder with ATP subjects passed.
Yup. Its not a rocket science to fly something above 200hp, Its just a simple additional endorsement in your logbook. I understand that part, chief pilots outside US might misunderstand that in resume. I ll not write it.
Even inside of America, most people in the industry will see the cherokee experience and think.... oh ok, not "Nice! He has high performance experience!!!" You will probably get laughed it in most small operators if you have high performance there. Do yourself a favour, only have Total times, PIC, Night, Multi and IFR times in your resume, and then personalize your cover letter to highlight applicable flight hours towards that companies operations.
I use the TC regs as an example as they are what I am freshest on, but in the other countries I have flown in, they either have individual type ratings for every aircraft, or blanket ratings for complex or non complex (CSU, retractable etc).
And to answer your question for common GA aircraft that are high performance. Just off the top of my head... King Air 200, 300 and 350, PC12, PC12NG, B1900C, B1900D, Embraer 110, and Metroliners are all from memory.
I'm sure there is less common ones flown as well. Whether or not they are flown single crew due to local regs is another matter.
Normally I dont put any of my endorsements (minus tailwheel time) on my resume.
As far as high performance, if you are going off a FAA license anything over 200hp counts, don't care how you feel about it, what you think about it, it is what it is. Anyone who would laugh at someone who LEGALLY counts high performance time in a plane over 200hp, I'd stay away from.
It's all the same idiotic self flatulent adoration that one finds in ex air force pilots who wander around aimlessly telling everyone they were fast jet pilots. As though anyone ever heard of a slow jet! If what the bonzos really mean is that they flew supersonic fighters, then why not say so in the first place and quit the dissembling?
wxy, they are all able to be flown single pilot. It is countries regulations that stop them from being flown single pilot in air transport operations.
@93K If you went to work for a operator who flies something like C421's or other "High performance" planes with time on something like a cherokee, and think you have an entitlement to fly them... just because you have "high performance time", then yes, you will get laughed out of the building. Ok maybe not that harsh, but the guys who do the hiring weren't born yesterday, and they know what a cherokee is, and what it counts for.
High performance means anything over 200hp, if the chief pilot was indeed not born yesterday he should know this, this ain't one of those ink blot tests with a "what do you see", it's a technical/legal term meaning anything over 200hp.
Funny you said "entitlement" maybe this is where all these cheif pilots laughing comes from, I don't believe I'm entitled to fly anyones plane, be it a 1.5m Thrush or a little C150 used to take photos. I approach each job the same and I treat every one of them as if the plane was my million dollar baby.
I think the point I am trying to get across is that high performance classification is only in FAA. High Performance in other countries means something totally different. And makes sense.
93k try to understand what he is saying. This is not an attack on you...it is how it is in Africa (this is the jobs in AFRICA thread) and yes you could possibly get laughed at.
Experienced 30 year old UK ATCO with valid ADI and APS licenses. I also hold a valid OJTI Endorsement.
Total valid experience of nearing 7 years in a busy TMA Environment working all types of IFR & VFR Commercial, GA and Military Traffic, both inside Class A & D Controlled Airspace and outside up to FL165.
hello guys........i have an ICAO/FAA CPL with around 500 hours total time and am DO-228 type rated....i am looking for a job as a first officer....i have been unlucky so far....could anybody tell me where i can land a job as a dornier co-pilot in africa or anywhere-else or any aircraft for tht matter.....i am ready to sponsor for the type rating....thanx....
