FAA Helicopter Type Ratings

[ST&E]

Does anyone have a list of all helicopter type ratings currently issued by the FAA? (Make and Model)

Also, can you include the FAA reference?

Thanks!

[rick1128]

It is quite simple, if the helicopter has a gross takeoff weight of over 12,500 pounds it requires a type rating. You will find the information in AC61-89E.

One note: The FAA no longer does helicopter ATP types in helicopters of 12,500 pounds or below as discussed in this AC.

FAA AC61-89E (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/list/AC%2061-89E/$FILE/Ac61-89e.pdf)

[Peter PanPan]

"One note: The FAA no longer does helicopter ATP types in helicopters of 12,500 pounds or below as discussed in this AC"

Rick where does it say that AC61-89E is no longer current? Could you please clarify and say your source? Appreciate.

[Winnie]

I guess what he's actually saying is that the FAA no longer adds the type rating on your license, even if you have the ATPL, if it is one of the aircraft in the below 12500 lbs range.

Cheers
H.

[rick1128]

Winnie has it right. I did my ATP ride earlier this year. When we were doing the paperwork after the checkride, I asked the Examiner about it. He told me that the FAA has stop issuing helicopter ATP type ratings for 12,500 and below.

[Peter PanPan]

Well that's what I thought originally as well but Rick or any of you guys, can anyone provide a link to the FAA website where it is stated that type ratings are no longer provided on medium size Helicopters?

AC 61-89E is still current so therefore it should apply. Besides, doesn't § 61.31 (a) (3) Other aircraft specified by the Administrator through aircraft type certificate procedures, refer to AC 61-89E?

Um... lifting... I know what you mean I had the exact same problem trying to transfer a "type" onto a JAR license. It's quite an awkward situation trying to explain to the Aviation Authority (Because obviously they never know about this and suspiciously look at you) how you need to read the definition of a large aircraft on the General definitions in order to understand why the FAA does not issue type ratings for rotorcraft/helicopters weighing less than 12,500 pounds.

[TJohnson]

http://registry.faa.gov/TypeRatings/

[waydownsouth]

So... is it technically legal to jump from an R22 to a Bell 212 with no training at all? Or would you have to get an endorsement of some kind?

(don't worry, not actually planning to do it, just trying to understand US regs :})

[EN48]

is it technically legal to jump from an R22 to a Bell 212 with no training at all?

May be legal but unlikely you will find an operator or insurer that will permit this.

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

The funny thing is you can go from an R22 to a bell 212 but not from a bell 212 to an R22 :) robinsons do require type ratings

[GoodGrief]

Robinson don't require a type rating, they require SFAR73 training.

[Gomer Pylot]

If you have a pilot certificate valid for rotorcraft, you can legally fly any helicopter. You don't need an ATP, nor do you need a type rating in a heavy aircraft to fly it. You need the type rating only to be the pilot in command. For anything rated less than 12,500 lb, you can fly any of them as PIC as long as the owner allows it. You can buy your own S76 and fly it yourself if you have the money, with no additional training. It's not smart, but it's legal. It's also not often done, because the insurance company won't cover you. Many things are prohibited by economics rather than regulation. Plus, if you have the money to buy and fly a medium helicopter, you probably have enough sense, and money, to get proper training. But maybe not...

[Helinaut]

I If you have the cash, you can buy and fly any helicopter you like and since you have the $$ for that, you probably don't even need insurance. :cool:

The sky is the limit and that is the beauty of aviation in the US. However, there is always Part 91.13! If anything goes wrong, you will need all that cash for your lawyers. :E

Don't know 91.13? Don't think about it every time you go and fly? Don't fly!

Keep the blue side up!

[Niner Lima Charlie]

Under FAA rules, a Student Pilot can fly a Bell 214ST (17,500 lbs. GTOW) VFR, solo. Of course the owner and insurance company might have a problem with that, even if it is legal under the Type Certificate and FARs.

Not all aircraft over 12,500 lbs. require two pilots.
Not all heavy or large aircraft operations require an ATP with Type Rating.
Some pilots (like me, S-58) have Type Ratings on my Commercial license.

[Rotorgoat8]

If my memory serves me correctly the kind of operation you are doing is what determines whether you need a PPL, CPL or ATPL (you can add employer and insurance requirements to that also but it's not regulatory by the FAA). Pleasure = PPL, Commercial Part 91= CPL, Part 135 and 121= ATPL.


Type Ratings are required for all aircraft over 12,500# and TurboJets. Thus you can have a PPL with a Boeing 757 Type rating. Or you may have an ATPL with no Type Ratings and fly any non-turbojet aircraft under 12,500# for which you have a license for (as in Aircraft SEL, MEL, Rotorcraft-Helicopter, etc.).


The Type Certificate for the specific aircraft determines how many crew members are required. B-757 = Capt. & F.O., Bell 47G-2 = Single pilot, DC-7 Capt., F.O. and Flight Engineer. Note here: Only the Captain needs to be Type Rated. The F.O only needs to have a license in the category (Airplane - MEL for a say a B-757). In this case the FO could be FO in any multi-engine requiring 2 pilots but cannot be Captain in any over 12,500 or TurboJet aircraft until he is Type Rated.

[Gordy]

Part 135 and 121= ATPL

Nope......I run a part 135 operation and only have two ATP's on staff, the rest are straight commercial or commercial with instrument rating.

[Gomer Pylot]

In the US, an ATP is only required for Part 121 operations, of which there are essentially none. A commercial certificate is sufficient for anything else, unless the customer requires it. The customer can require an ATP certificate for the captain, or the entire crew, as part of the contract, as well as requiring almost anything else. But that's not a regulatory requirement, just an economic one.

[Rotorgoat8]

http://aviation-press.com/documents/chapter7.pdf


Peruse this link for more detailed info.

[Gordy]

Rotorgoat8

Just to clarify....you do realize you do NOT need an ATP for part 135 operations?

[Rotorgoat8]

Gordy, Sorry if I implied that an ATP is required for all P 135 Ops. It's not, but there are some circumstances where it is:


§135.243 Pilot in command qualifications.

(a) No certificate holder may use a person, nor may any person serve, as pilot in command in passenger-carrying operations—
(1) Of a turbojet airplane, of an airplane having a passenger-seat configuration, excluding each crewmember seat, of 10 seats or more, or of a multiengine airplane in a commuter operation as defined in part 119 of this chapter, unless that person holds an airline transport pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and, if required, an appropriate type rating for that airplane.
(2) Of a helicopter in a scheduled interstate air transportation operation by an air carrier within the 48 contiguous states unless that person holds an airline transport pilot certificate, appropriate type ratings, and an instrument rating.

[n5296s]

...and iirc the opposite of this is also true, i.e. you can be PIC of a Part 121 flight with only a CPL if the aircraft is smaller than this - which means that an ATP-ASEL is essentially useless. (I was researching exactly what you do need an ATP for a while back and I'm pretty sure I found this, though I can't say exactly where).

135.243(2) is kind of interesting... what happens if someone wants to operate scheduled interstate services in an R66, for which there is no type rating (assuming SFAR73 doesn't count) nor is it permitted for IFR operation. Hard to see why anyone would, but then rules aren't supposed to be written around what people actually want to do.