Newbie questions

[syncrofly]

Hello all,

I think I finally have a legitimate reason to get into small aircraft and am trying to do some basic research. Hoping to find the right board to discuss the kind of things someone new needs.

For example:

For my practical application I'd like to be able to fly between the SF bay area and Northeastern Washington roughly 800 miles by car... I'm sure there is a better way to calculate.

I'd like to get there on one tank of gas and in less than 4 hours in a single engine aircraft. Half the time lightly loaded but once skilled I want to bring 2-5 passengers.

From what very little I know it seems like Cirrus and Cessna aircraft are the likely options for something that may carry me the distance and manufacture a plane I may buy in the futyre. But not having faced headwinds and calculated gas, or the terror of facing down unexpected.weather trying to figure out whether this 'practical' use makes any sense.

Given time and expense don't want to.miscalculate... Figure ill have more time later in life if its just for fun.

There is a lot more on my mind than the limitations of the aircraft. Is there a better online forum for aspiring pilots like myself?

Any advice appreciated.

K

[lenhamlad]

Welcome Syncrofly.

Why do you want to get info from faceless strangers when a visit to a local flying school may result in a wealth of information and the opportunity to experience GA flying first hand?

[Sillert,V.I.]

Any advice appreciated.


By the time you'll have acquired the necessary skills to do what you're asking about, you'll have a far, far better idea of what you'd actually need or want to do it in.

But right now is too early to be talking about that - first of all, you need to find out if flying a light aircraft is for you. So the best advice I can offer is to drive on down to your local GA Airport & go for a trial lesson.

[cptkris]

if you have time to spare, go by air...

[syncrofly]

Thanks gents. I've taken an intro flight before, I have a list of local schools to check out, I'm simply trying to understand whether I can even get there and have no pilot friends. It's a business decision. And I can grab direct flights to bridge the gap. But if it longer than 4 hours or there isn't a simple aircraft that I can get there in, 16000 worth of school and a couple hundred hours becoming competent would be an indulgence.

[BackPacker]

If bridging that 800 miles (statue miles I assume?) gap is the only reason you would want to learn to fly and acquire an airplane, I'd say don't do it.

A PPL will set you back about 10.000 USD (very rough figure - I don't know the exact cost in the US). That will limit you to good weather as you can't go anywhere near cloud. An instrument rating on top of that will probably another 10.000 USD. Add in some experience and you'll be looking at maybe 25.000 USD before you are capable enough to make such a trip with confidence in most weather. Note: "most". Not "all".

The next thing you need to do is acquire an aircraft and train on it. If you can limit yourself to two passengers, a Cirrus SR-22 (new: USD 600.000 plus) will probably do nicely. Yes, it has four seats, but don't expect to be able to fill all four seats and take a full load of fuel - which you need for that 800 mile journey.

A Cirrus SR-22, according to the web page, does 185 knots TAS but that's assuming no wind, and optimum altitude. So your four hour limit for that journey might be doable on a good day, but it may take 4.5 to 5 hours on a bad day. And the SR-22 is arguably the most capable and sophisticated single engine piston aircraft available today. (The Cessna-400 is not far off these figures, by the way.)

Sure, there are more capable aircraft, such as the Piper Malibu Meridian or the JetProp conversion but these cannot be flown on a SEP class rating. I don't know the exact rules in the US but expect possibly another 10.000 USD just for the course and exam alone. If you go for a VLJ such as the Cessna Citation Mustang the course time and cost will go up even more dramatically.

Then comes the cost of acquiring, maintaining, hangaring and insuring the aircraft, including complying (and thus, keeping up to date with) all legal requirements, service bulletins and so forth. Before you know it, you are running a mini-airline. (Did you know, for example, that your basic PPL already comes with two or three different expiration dates? It only gets worse from there.)

So by the time you are capable of doing that flight in most weather, and have an aircraft capable of doing so, you are probably two-three years down the road, will have spent maybe 25.000 USD in training alone and a multiple of that in aircraft acquisition. And the time gained vs. going on a commercial flight will probably be an hour or so, door to door.

[sevenstrokeroll]

first off I learned to fly at palo alto (near san francisco). i know what you will face, and unless you spend a HUGE amount of money and put the priority on the way you fly over and above whatever you do for a living, I think you shouldn't bother...just pay for airline tickets.

to do it ''right'' you would have to get a private with instrument rating at the very least. on top of that there is the practical aspect of bad weather, personal fatigue and night flying.

on top of that the terrain can be less than fantastic along the way ( mountains)...and flying over the ocean is a little daunting if one went the coastal route.

so forget it. your responsibiility to your passengers would be so overwelming you couldn't get started on a practical level until you had over 200 flying hours.

now, you could take lessons, hiring a flight instructor and take people along with you...but you would have to pay the instructors time and hotel as he waited for the return flight.

business use of private planes and the practical aspects of flying make things rough.

fog in the bay area, ice enroute, fog in washington state...makes little sense.

[obgraham]

I assume you want to go somewhere near Spokane.

So if you "have" to get there, you'll need to be instrument rated, and have an airplane at least as capable as a Cirrus SR22, or maybe a C-182 Turbo. Even then, flight into icing conditions (which we get a lot of up here) isn't a go until you have a lot more airplane. We're talking about a lot of money here. And it still will take 4-5 hours of flying time.

Economically it's a no go. However, if you've cash to spare and a bit of flexibility it's do-able.

Graham, in E. Washington

[AdamFrisch]

Let me be a lot less pessimistic than the other posters here.

Yes, it will cost about 20K to get a PPL with an Instrument Rating, but that's not that much money in the grand scheme of things. The IR is essential for all weather dispatchability. But here's where it differs - you can get into a very capable all weather twin, with weather radar, full de-ice, even pressurisation, that will cost 100K to buy. That's a savings of 500K compared to a new Cirrus. Not only will it be faster and more capable, but also much safer. A multi engine rating is a quick rating and can be done in a few days. I would never fly mountains or oceans in a single, especially not at night. Downside is that you'll be paying a little more in fuel and maintenance, but that's a small price to pay for your safety. 500K buys you a lot of fuel and maintenance, btw. Twins are dead cheap at the moment and you get insane amounts of aircraft for your money if you go down this route. In fact, you can get a fully de-iced and pressurised Cessna 337 for 80K at the very bottom of the market. Aero Commanders, Aerostars, Senecas, P-Barons, 310s, 414's, 421's await you just in the bracket above.

You will have to build some experience and some confidence (it's no joke doing hard IMC and approaches to minimums when you're green), but part of your training will build that and the rest will follow naturally over time. I wouldn't bring loved ones along on the first hard IMC rides, though. Take your time to build your skills.

[sherburn2LA]

Want to have fun - get a PPL
Want to travel - use Southwest .

I travel weekly between S.Cal and the Bay Area a much more benign route than you are suggesting and I would not dream of trying it to a schedule in a light aircraft for safety reasons even if expense was not a consideration.

Admittedly I am a pretty cautious person but it seems to me that for regular PPLs (I am closing on 500 hours) that thinking of flying as a means of transport is the first step on the road to ruin.

[obgraham]

A Cessna 337 will do the job. But the maintenance and insurance will break the budget.

[AdamFrisch]

You can never save money flying yourself in pure dollars from point A to point B. Except for the very occasional multiple stop trip once in a blue moon to places with bad connections. That's the first thing one needs to understand. Aircraft ownership makes no financial sense. However, if you start factoring in other things - time, hassle, convenience, stress, unscheduled changes, change of plans etc, and if you put a price on that, then it can make a little bit of sense.

I'll give you a good example. I'm in Vancouver for work right now, which is 900nm away from where I live in LA. I wanted to fly myself up, but my plane is still getting her annual. The fuel cost back and forth (I don't ever count anything else) would have been about $1600. My employer has $1100 in airfare money set aside for me. So, had I flow I would have had to paid $500 out of my own pocket. This is something I'd gladly put up with for the freedom of flying myself there and the hassle free travel it entails and not being bound by schedules. Hell, just skipping security and TSA pat-downs is worth $500 alone. Yes, it would have taken 6hrs, but accounting for 2hr to get to LAX, 2hrs spent at the airport for check-in, 3hrs flying and 1 hr to go through customs, I would have done this trip in the same amount of time in my own plane door-to-door. Fort me personally, it would have been worth it. It might not be for others. Guess what - the job might now extend and the non-refundable ticket would have to be re-bought by my employer. In that scenario, my airplane and me flying would actually be a cheaper option, as I'm not bound by schedules. So, it's not as clear cut as it always seems always.

[syncrofly]

First off, let me thank everyone for the very thoughtful replies. And I appreciate that many kind strangers are helping gain insight and experience in such an accelerated fashion. It really does seem like this is a foolish thing to chase. For the sake of curiosity let me rattle off the basics and see if you agree and if you want to read my long a$$ version its below my sincere appreciation, and my apologies for the grammar and poor editing.

-I can afford 2-300,000 worth of plane or downpayments next year, but I can afford 3500 maximum monthly on average for everything else if I'm spending that much (insurance, taxes, inspections, fuel, repairs). It seems like I'd be burning most of the time by myself at least 120 gallons of fuel twice a month.... that's almost a third of my budget in a thrifty plan, it seems more just averaging on what little I've seen/know a 160 gallon roundtrip in a small plane pushing 165ish knots.
-I have a couple of years before I need to invite anyone into the plane, but would like to be proficient in under 5 with an average of 160 hours a year presuming I can get back and forth in 8 roundtrip of airtime.
-I want to fly 2 times a month, in the fairer 9 months of year for at least 5 years possibly 20 plus more (i'm 38 now)
-I really only have one place to go and back at least for the first many years, it's a 20 hour roundtrip commercial/rental/drive etc and including a handful of family flights and a bunch of solo flights at $500 each I expect to spend somewhere around 20,000 a year on commercial flights to get there.
-I believe it saves 10 hours on each round trip if from arriving at the airport I can check out in 30 minutes and presuming if I can get there in <4 hours flight time, and put it away in 15 minutes - I've effectively cut my roundtrip time in half.
-I have some flexibility, at least for now, over where I am at so extreme weather and what not I don't have to be stupid - but I do relish a short commute and last minute options.
-Because I'm tunnel visioned, I can see a world where I'm learning a specific route, in a specific plane gives me an advantage, I think that plane may be the sr22 which seems like the most sensible thing to train in and build solo time in. I believe I have a certified instructor friend I can convince to help me out a half dozen times (after getting my license).
-I do not know how to figure out the best route.... however, based on what little I know it would seem if I am essentially flying to Spokane (Colville, etc) from someplace like Gnoss Field in Marin County my hope is I can fly north into Eastern Oregon and then hang a rightish basically along the Columbia river gorge.... there are a lot of small towns and flat ground. Never having to gain much altitude unless I need to get above weather - which I presume eventually if I have passengers who will be freaked out by bumps or oxygen masks is something worth mentioing. Anyway that side of the mountains is very arid which I assume produces storms and therms but the ground seems flatish.... I'm hoping to be able to fly above the weather in a pressurized craft some day. I think but for some parts near lassen and I won't really ever need to be crossing anything more than 3 or 4,000 feet from sea level.... unless the route were more direct.
-the SR22, P210, and P337 seemed the obvious choices, but only the SR22 seems new enough to have reasonable maintenance costs, but as someone else put it I'd be pushing it get there with more than 2 or 3 people.
-At least in the near term the sr22 given its availability at ground schools seems a logical way for me to train... that said maybe if I have limited time and concentration should I be trying a 6 seater that can actually get me there after my first 20-30 hours.
-I realize this is a lot of conjecture for someone who has only been up 3 times and taken the controls twice. I do have "time" to invest in this learning curve, but I also don't want to chase down a fools path.
- I don't ever expect to make enough money where a 500,000+ ever makes any sense.... but I could see starting small and upgrading to something near that.

So I guess the question remains - I think - Can I get basically the Canadian border in under 4 hours flight time in something that will eventually haul my family (sans most luggage). That family being 4 people + friends later etc.

Can you believe that was the short version?

I've always wanted to fly, and my fascination at least a decade or so ago was to fly a 337 around my West Coast neighborhood, the dual engine being reassurance for my wife who has always thought small planes the worst possible pursuit. I made the mistake of taking my future wife on an intro flight in the sierra's in a 152 with a bad intercom panel with a 200 pound instructor. He was perfectly comfortable but after handing over controls and me missing 2 out of every 3 of his sparse commands and my future wife being the only one to really understand what was happening.... lets just say we were fine, but she was not. So as a youngster with no military background or history with it, and living in San Francisco it was daunting, and as a near 30 year old, while making some coin it just wasn't practical. So the mere earlier mention of a 337 and my prior fantasies makes me wonder how practical a low time late model 337 maintenance bill would be with pressurization and extra fuel seems to me like it would make the distance, eventually over some/most of the weather..... but I have no practical background with wind, weather, or calculating routes, wind speeds, researching weather along the way, and the myriad of other factors I need to learn.

Now I'm 10 years older, a father, and looking at the last 30 years of my life and have a young daughter (4). I'm in the process of closing on a piece of property in the boonies of Northern Washington 2.5 hours drive from Spokane, 45 minutes drive from Colville (which has an airstrip) near the border for a variety of reasons i won't bore you with, but in summary I'm moving my impoverished wife's parents there and giving them a living and will probably end up taking care of them later, there is an industrial business I can build upon and grow (and before you speculate its not related to any recent propositions up there). Also, my hobbies are accessible there and it has some water on it, my kid(s) and I can play there every summer. I own my companies, but the majority of my income is from running a software consulting firm I own in the SF bay area so while I intend to spend summers and as I build out the business there as well a chunk of fall and spring. I'll be missing my family when they aren't there, and needing to deal with business in SF all through the summer (couple of times a month).

The nature of the industrial business, at least for the first 5 years will require extensive renovation, on the scale of several years. My daughter and wife will fly commercial for several years as we visit, thats just sensible and they won't be going back and forth that often (all summer, and the a few long weekends a year). I'll be up there more. And door to door however, its about 8 hours each way if I fly direct through Spokane from my house without stopping (9 if I want a meal or need gas etc). and it will be 1500 each way and 3000 roundtrip in later years to bring my family - if that happens 3 or 4 times year its 15,000 just in family tickets. Because I'm running the show in the business side, and building some cabins, and other goodies over the next several years, not to mention do a little fishing here and there, I think I'd make as many as 18-20 flights by myself at an average commercial cost of $20,000 annually. I don't need to get there tomorrow, but there is as much as $35,000 a year in commercial flights.

I also do have time sensitive affairs trying to juggle a couple of businesses.... and a fair amount of income to offset. I won't bore you with my taxes, but it looks like next year I can afford 2-300,000 worth of aircraft, 2-3500 a month worth of fuel, inspections, and insurance - all my other costs on average. If I had a lot of control, I'd be into whatever other cost sharing I can scare up (buy a plane, work with a flight club?). Next year I can probably spare 3-4 weeks of 25ish hours a week of flight school back to back.

Because this particular property is the singular purpose for my training, and I have a multi-decade interest.... and more coin than I thought I might ever.... this is the route. I can't afford a meridian with post 2006 Garmin glass.. but from the calculations online I do think I can afford to borrow or buy enough plane to afford the realms of sr-22's, 337's, and p210's. I do question from what I've read whether I could afford to maintain and fuel an older multi-engine.... also, it seems the few that have upgraded avionics seem to really push the budget. Having never yet learned real instrumentation, the pictures, descriptions, and functions of at least a modern GPS or even modern glass panel seem a lot more familiar to me and somehow safer and easier to learn although I wonder if that's the case. So then I'm trying to find this intersection between a plane I can afford, with avionics I've only read about.

Again, I can't calculate fuel, but given my tentative budget, after probably too much time salivating over stuff I know little about, it seemed like I might find a late model (post 82) P210 if I were lucky.... there happen to be 2 on controller in California in my budget.. but they could be total dogs, rusty, one of them has had a couple bad landings once undoubtedly due to the faulty front wheel rigging. I've read pilot articles on what they are like to fly. Fully laden though, forgoing luggage.... not sure it makes it there.
And then there is the two engine thing, and eventually getting my wife in the plane.... and while it seems statistically the cirrus parachute its a dead ringer to eventually getting her into the aircraft if after several years I know what I am doing.

Long story getting longer.....The neighboring ranch has a 2600 foot airstrip. And I have room for one. There is also an enormous public lake I think I might be able to land in as well but presume the speed and fuel hit for carrying pontoons makes that impractical. I don't know him yet, but I intend to make friends whether this works out or not, and in 45 minutes away. In San Francisco I live 30 minutes from two pretty popular small airfields, one in Marin and the other in Halfmoon Bay - (San Carlos and Palo Alto work for training but not as a home base I think). I think if I can stay an average of above 175 knots, I think I can get there in under 4 hours.... add a 30 minute drive and 30 minute check out, a 4 hour flight to my neighbors or my spot and I'm saving 10 hours roundtrip - up to 20 times a year for several years. That's like 1000 hours of my life even in the next 5 years.

So if there is a sub $300,000 plane that will make the distance with my family which I'm hoping will be 4, but a 6 place plane sounds better.... and do I have any hope of flying such a plane safely. I can afford some training.... and this is where all this plane nonsense comes in.

The local schools all have cirrus and cessnas. No one has a 205, 210, or 337. Plenty of 182's and so on.

From what I have read it seems like I should learn on a 152, graduate up the ranks, and be learning my and taking my first solos in something like a 182 with G-1000 glass.

The miser and risk taker in me says, take 30 hours of instruction then worry about plane. The over confident possible idiot in me says, pilots think beginner pilots can learn in 80s' era's cessnas. I have only one place I really need to fly.... and I think I know of a certified instructor who likes to fish that I may be able to go with me a half dozen worth of times. If I after 20 hours in a 182 or SR 22 I seemed on track and confident I might fly..... I'd do my solo to that location, I'd get hand holding to that location, and then after a couple years of 160 hours a year ---- maybe, my wife would get on that plane.... or I at least could feel good about flying my kids, or someone elses kids... Maybe that part never happens.... but in the meantime I have a fairly serious business to build.

Many apologies for the long ramble, I probably shouldn't have had a glass before writing. I appreciate the indulgence from an armchair flight gazer... and all the advice.

I guess as I write this it seems sensibly speaking, start out in a modern sr-20, get 20 hours, upgrade to the sr-22.... if the taxes work out, but an sr-22 - fly it for several years then worry about passengers.... Pretty sure with me or me +1 in it, I can get the plane there with calm weather in under 4 hours flight time.

I'm really sorry for how long this became and not sure what tone comes across... guess its anonymous embarrassed now scanning back through and that I spent an hour typing it out - just no one to talk this out with at the moment with any experience... but welcome the advice.

[AdamFrisch]

I've never flown a Cirrus, but from all accounts they're capable and good planes. It does make sense to train in the aircraft you're going to own. However, if you're planning on grass strips etc, then the P210 might be a better choice as the SR22 isn't great on grass. The P210 is a complex aircraft that will need preventive maintenance, but not excessively so. Good aircraft with a big owner base.

If you want to fly 4 people and have any kind of range, you'll need to buy at least a 6-seater. That limits your options. Any kind of night flying over barren terrain - mountain or not - is maniacal in a piston single in my mind. If it quits, you have very little chances of a happy ending.

But if you want it - go for it! Flying and aircraft ownership is magical and highly recommended, albeit not the cheapest of endeavours. But owning a plane is still cheaper than your average coke habit!:ok::}

[syncrofly]

Above all I want to be safe. The whole parachute thing seems handy if I were to have a heart attack or something.... although far from certain safety I suppose.... if the multi-engine is the way to go, that's why I'm asking on these boards.

I've been looking at maintenance costs, airspeeds, and finally got a better nm measurement. My destination is actually closer to 700 NM. I've taken your point on upgrades fuel costs and maintenance in the cost differential. I'm currently trying to put together a spreadsheet that helps figure this all out.

The 337 is a lot more attractive on the upfront cost front. The fuel management with the extended tanks seems to kill a lot of rookies though.

I'm glad it doesn't sounds totally insane to start training in my future aircraft as soon as I can.

The whole pressurization thing? I've seen different pilots with a lot of hours talk about going for the turbo models with a cieling of 29K and the masks, vs the pressurized versions that cap out at 20K. In the short term pressurization seems to quiet the 337 down in the cabin which sounds nice. It seems most experienced pilots like to get above the weather and its overall smoother up there, and with the right aircraft faster. If my end game is passenger comfort pressurization seems preferable but I don't know the real difference between 20 and 26K for example. Any opinion?

If I find an air school I like, and I intend to get Private, IFR, and Multi-Engine you think the training is more efficient? Do some of the hours potentially overlap?

And lastly, and I know this is subjective.... I know there are lots of solos before before I even get my basic license. When do most pilots become more than competent.... ie. tested from a vets perspective... Can I feel good about taking on passengers at 500 hours? I'm guessing everyone's different but a little bit of guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks for reading through all that stuff and helping me with my concerns.

Kind regards

[BackPacker]

Well I have not read the whole story in detail, but from your tone it seems there is an underlying factor. You're not just looking for a convenient and economical way to travel that distance, but you're also looking for the challenge of a new skill and the magic of flying yourself. At least I see a glimmer of something like that shining through.

So why not give it a go? It looks like you're not exactly strapped for cash, so that should not be a problem. Just go to a school, book a few lessons and set your goals on a first solo initially. Get a subscription to some aviation magazines, see if you can hook up with some more experienced pilots to share a beer and/or a flight or two. And then make further decisions from there.

You don't have to decide to go the whole way right now. There are numerous decision points along the way at which, worst case scenario, you can cut your losses.

At some stage you will probably find yourself holding that PPL. Then set aside a long weekend, rent a C172 or other aircraft, and make the trip. Find a weekend with good weather, bring a pilot friend, just to see what it's like. You can then decide further what it's going to be like doing the trip at double the speed (half the time) because of a better aircraft.

[Tinstaafl]

If you want to fly yourself, then do it. A US PPL will cost a minimum of about $5,000. Add another $1000 or two for not doing it in minimum permitted time. An instrument rating will be ~$7,000, plus an couple of thousand for greater than minimum time. There are plenty of instructors to be found who could fly with you post-licence if you're not confident of your skills. It won't take too long before you'll feel comfortable on your own.

Learn in whatever is simplest & cheapest. You don't need all the bells & whistles while learning the fundamentals of how to fly, nor do you need a 6 cylinder high horsepower engine or extra seats. The money saved can then go towards training onto more advance equipment. It's easier to step 'up' to the whiz-bang avionics having learnt on the basics, than it is to have to step 'down' the other way. A glass panel is not necessary for safe instrument flight, although I would recommend a modern moving map GPS like a Garmin 530 GPS/NAV/COM unit with an XM weather datalink (with the right datalink unit you can even have XM entertainment as well)

Cost of maintaining a US licence is cheap. It never expires, unlike UK/JAR/EASA licences. You will have to do a Class 3 medical which lasts from 2 or 3 years depending on your age, and a flight review every two years. Your instrument rating can be kept current just with frequent flying, sufficient to meet the currency requirements *however* at the early stages of your IFR flying, flights with an instructor at least once a year is a good thing. Even more often if you can. You may find that your aeroplane insurance requires recurrency training, which can also be used to meet the IFR recurrency stuff. In some singles & many twins the recurrency training can be done at dedicated simulator schools. Worth the money, IMO, especially if you're inexperienced. I've done it for PA31 Navajos, and Kingair 90s & 200s to either qualify for insurance, or reduce the premium for the owner.

If you really want to fly high with pax then pressurisation is the way to go. Pax generally don't want to sit with masks on. You also have to make sure the O2 bottle has enough for the flight, whereas pressurised aircraft only require enough O2 in case of pressurisation failure to fly to somewhere where flight at non-O2 altitudes is possible.

There are a few piston pressurised singles around but over those mountains & weather? I think you'd be safer in a twin eg C340, C414, Pressurised Baron- but only with regular refresher training in twin flying. Otherwise perhaps a turboprop pressurised single (or even a TP conversion of a piston single. I'm pretty sure I've seen one for P210.) Make sure whatever you get has an approved de/anti icing system.

Of course, the above is to improve your flight schedule reliability. You can equally do that sort of flight in something non-pressurised and even remaining under visual flight rules. Max altitude will be limited to 17,500' due US airspace rules. You'll just have to be prepared to cancel more often.

20,000' or 26,000' isn't really going to make much difference. I fly a C414 in the high teens/low 20s, and a Kingair 200 in the low to mid 20s. Not much difference except for an occasional severe squall line or front with high thunderstorm tops. Either way I'm still going to have to fly around the tops. I just have to do it more frequently if a fair bit lower.

What ever aircraft you get, training & supervision from someone familiar with the type will soon have you able to manage any peculiarities eg extra fuel tanks or whatever. It doesn't take long for things to become routine. Good training, habits & an appropriate checklist tend to look after those sorts of things.

[Hodja]

Sure, there are more capable aircraft, such as the Piper Malibu Meridian or the JetProp conversion but these cannot be flown on a SEP class rating.Sure you can. (on a US license) Over there you could even fly a PC-12 on a PPL...

[Tinstaafl]

In the US, licences at each level (private, commercial & airline transport) are segregated by category (fixed wing, rotary wing, balloon etc) & class. In the fixed wing category the classes are Single Engine Land, Single Engine Sea, Multi Engine Land & Multi Engine Sea (SEL, SES, MEL & MES, respectively).

Having gained a licence at any particular level, on a category/class eg a Private licence on a MEL, then you're licenced to fly *any* MEL that doesn't specifically require training or a type rating. An MU2 is a type that requires training. All jets require type ratings but not generally turboprops or piston aircraft <12,500lb take off weight). So, do your Private in a BE76 Duchess, and you're legal to go fly a Kingair 200 - as long as you're familiar with its handling & the normal & emergency procedures.

[syncrofly]

Hello all,

Thank you for the help. I'm meeting with an instructor and flight school to map our training and costs. After calling around several airfields (its nice to have options) I think I have the right spot (up in Marin County).

I have a few emails out to insurance companies, a few people I have chatted up seemed skeptical whether I could even get insurance as a student or low time PPL for the p337, so I am checking on that as well.

The school I'm checking out first has some real veterans, who teach cause they love to fly, in a couple of old instrument rated 172's without the fancy glass. I figure I can learn the basics and then if I'm raring to go I can sort out a plane along the way, possibly in training.

Overwhelmingly people encouraged me to start before sweating it too much. So that's where I am taking it.

I really appreciate the thoughtful replies and general encouragement. I'm sure I'll be posting more questions, and hope to contribute similarly in the future.