Bombardier Cl-604 endorsement

[azax]

G'day everybody.

I have heard of a few people that went to Bombardier (Dallas & Montreal) for their type rating but could not reach the standard; These pilots were then sent back without their endorsements.
1. Is this true?
2. How many hours of training is alloted?

I also spoke to a company that leases out Challengers about the incident - they said that Bombardier has stopped training pilots without previous jet experience.
3. Is this true?
4. What is the requirement to be eligible for CL-604 endorsement?

All this because I want to get an endorsement. If anyone also knows of any other places where I can get myself type rated - please mention. I currently have 1000 hours as an instructor on a C152. I hold an Aus CPL/ME and an Indian CPL/ME.

Thank you for your inputs. :ok:

[thepotato232]

Well, any training entity will refuse to issue an endorsement if the candidate cannot meet the practical test standards. That said, some examiners are more given to spuriously busting candidates than others. I can't speak to the specific incident in question at Bombardier, but it's possible. The good news is that there are a wide selection of training companies through which you can obtain a CRJ type rating at your experience level. I've dealt with quite a few low-to-moderate time pilots from India as well as Oz in my travels as an instructor and would-be expat.

Personally, I've got nothing but good things to say about Pan Am International Flight Academy. (http://www.panamacademy.com/) I know quite a few guys who showed up on property there with less experience than you have, and the instructors busted their butts to get them up to speed for their checkrides. A CPL/ME is enough for most of their programs, I think. I believe they do most of their CRJ training out of their sims in Minneapolis. I did a 737 type rating with those guys some years back (with less experience than you have now), and found them to be great folks, and they were running a really cheap price, to boot.

[MarkerInbound]

The FAA revised Part 61 on the 20th of Oct. They say it was a typo but the reg now says you need to have 500 hours turbojet time to complete your checkride in a sim. Might be the reason Bombardier stopped doing training for non-jet pilots. The FAA is working on a re-rewrite but who knows how long it'll take.

[thepotato232]

Yeah, I'm familiar with that typo. People freaked the Hell out when the first draft of that change was released, but someone explained pretty quickly that the reg wasn't supposed to do that. Nobody I know of has stopped doing sim checkrides, for what that's worth.

Would it matter in the Bombardier case? Doesn't that company do most of their training up in Canadia Land?

[FlyTCI]

This is an excerpt from the FARs current as of October 21st which addresses this issue people, including me, were concerned about. I was one who would have been affected by the initial proposal and I managed to get typed before the deadline. Now it turns out, after the revision, there was no need for me to rush it. As I see it the part in red is that was revised, among other things.

(2) If the type rating is for a turbojet airplane, the applicant must—

(i) Hold a type rating in a turbojet airplane of the same class of airplane, and that type rating may not contain a supervised operating experience limitation;

(ii) Have 1,000 hours of flight time in two different turbojet airplanes of the same class of airplane;

(iii) Have been appointed by the U.S. Armed Forces as pilot in command in a turbojet airplane of the same class of airplane;

(iv) Have 500 hours of flight time in the same type of airplane; or

(v) Have logged at least 2,000 hours of flight time, of which 500 hours were in turbine-powered airplanes of the same class of airplane for which the type rating is sought.

(3) If the type rating is for a turbo propeller airplane, the applicant must—

(i) Hold a type rating in a turbo-propeller airplane of the same class of airplane, and that type rating may not contain a supervised operating experience limitation;

(ii) Have 1,000 hours of flight time in two different turbo-propeller airplanes of the same class of airplane;

(iii) Have been appointed by the U.S. Armed Forces as pilot in command in a turbo-propeller airplane of the same class of airplane;

(iv) Have 500 hours of flight time in the same type of airplane; or

(v) Have logged at least 2,000 hours of flight time, of which 500 hours were in turbine-powered airplanes of the same class of airplane for which the type rating is sought.

(4) If the applicant does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section as appropriate, then—

(i) The applicant must complete the following tasks on the practical test in the airplane of the category, class, and type of airplane rating (if a type rating is applicable) for which the airplane rating applies: preflight inspection, normal takeoff, normal instrument landing system approach, missed approach, and normal landing; or

All of it can be read here, just click on the FAR 61.64 link:

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: (http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=43464fac97c71272211db4464854f7c3&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.1.2&idno=14)

potato, even if you are doing the training in Canada the FARs apply if you are putting the type on your FAA license. Just like EASA (JAR) still applies to Europeans coming over to the US getting a type on their JAA license. Where the training is done has nothing to do with it.

[thepotato232]

Well yes, but it doesn't sound like this particular applicant (the OP) has an FAA license - just the Indian and Australian ones. Anyway, on to the FAR:

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the language in that part of the FARs then goes on to state that, without those listed requirements, the applicant will receive a type rating with the note that "THIS CERTIFICATE IS SUBJECT TO PILOT-IN-COMMAND LIMITATION FOR _________". The person with the type rating then needs to perform 20 hours of "Supervised PIC" (as in IOE) before the limitation is lifted.

This is not a change - people who have picked up type ratings in the US with less than those same stated experience levels have been getting the same restriction on their licenses for as far back as I can remember. I've got one on the back of my 737 type. Since employers are going to run you through their own IOE anyway before putting you in the left seat of their aircraft to run wild, I've never heard of anybody getting turned down for a job because they had that listed on the back of their license.

[azax]

This ammendment is ridiculous. How can they decide if a pilot is eligible to get type ratings. Thanks for your posts guys. I will contact Pan Am and post the developments or I'll have to look for an alternate training facility in Europe.

Australia guys? Does anybody know any place down under where I could get the rating though?

[MarkerInbound]

Yeah, the typo got fixed in a day - after the NPRM was out for 18 months and there were 1400 comments, a bunch of which said sim training would be affected. There has always been the limitation if you did not have the experience but the NPRM didn't have the "or" and was read that you had to meet all 4 (they also left off "v") criteria to complete the check in a sim.

[thepotato232]

Thanks for the clarification, MarkerInbound. Our tax dollars at work...

I don't think you'll have any problem, azax. Plenty of foreign students are still getting all the training they need in the States, FAA retardation notwithstanding. Good luck!