CPL Multi- or Single?

[packo1848]

Hi all,

I was recently advised that it might be beneficial (although more expensive) to complete my CPL skills test on a multi-engine aircraft instead of the usual complex single. I wondered if anyone had any advice as to the pros/cons of doing it this way?

[taxistaxing]

Out of interest what was the reason given for it being beneficial? I gather there are differences to the syllabus such as not having to do PFLs, but the additional expense involved has put me off that route a bit.

[packo1848]

Several reasons, first off and most important as far as I'm concerned was that being more familiar with the twin would make the IR a simpler task. Second, not needing to spend time on a twin rating would save time between CPL and IR, which for me would balance out the costs slightly as I'm planning on doing it all in one go, a fair distance from home, so accommodation/food expenses etc. would be cut at least a little.

Its just an idea at the moment, just wanted opinions about what problems/benefits might arise doing it this way.

[horsebox]

You win if you pass the cpl multi test, first time in minimum hours.

If you get a partial or a fail, or need a couple of extra hours then it starts costing alot of money.

The multi test on its own is basically a handling test. The CPL skills test is a handling, nav and all the other stuff test.

[michaeljpotter]

I did all my hours building in a single up to about 235 hours ish and then met the multi requirements and took my ride in a multi. Passed. I don't intend to flight instruct so I went straight for a multi. If I really had to I could do the SE as an add-on

[BillieBob]

If I really had to I could do the SE as an add-onWhat do you mean by that? You already have a CPL and an SEP class rating, what sort of 'add-on' do you think is necessary?

[119.35]

I considered doing my cpl in a twin, but decided against it. A couple of people at my school did it in a twin (one did ok and one struggled) but I am pleased I did the cpl in a single.

Don't under-estimate the step up to a twin from a single. It's not massive but it is significant and don't under estimate the cpl skills test, it's not a stroll in the park. So why make if more difficult for yourself?

You have plenty of time to get familiar with the twin during the ME and IR and all the IR sim time you will have.

[PPRuNeUser0173]

You could also do the MEP class rating first then the IR before the CPL -that may be worth considering. 6 hours on the aircraft followed by 35 hours in the Sim before another 15 on the aircraft then MEP skills test followed by IR skills test.

[packo1848]

Cheers for the replies everyone.

Golfdriver, would this method still produce an 'fATPL' at the end? or would the IR simply be applicable to my PPL? What would be the advantages of doing it that way?

[RTN11]

You can do the IR with only 70 hours PIC, so don't have to hour build so aggressively, you would then do your CPL, and build any remaining hours to make 200 hours total time to get the CPL issued.

I would say it makes sense to go SE-CPL then ME then MEIR. To me the ME-CPL before the IR doesn't actually save any money, it just creates hassle, the school loves it since you will end up paying them more money overall and their instructors get extra ME time so they're happier.

Doing IR or CPL first doesn't make any difference, you will end with the same number of hours, same overall cost and what is generally called an fATPL (arguably with an MCC too).

[michaeljpotter]

@BillieBob

There is no further rating than the ATP. I did my IR in a single but met the extra req's for a twin so it ends up being a CPL ME/IR.
Say for example I wanted to fly a Pilatus commercially from my understanding you need a CPL SE.

As RTN said I would advise getting pretty proficient in a single first before going into a twin.

[MartinCh]

Typical, when 'FAA pilots' discuss CPL requirements/checkrides/LST with Euro/UK based pilots who may not be aware of the differences mutually. Also in Europe, the IR is more often part of CPL module 'period' since people need more solo time after PPL and all the nuances and not to overspend. Again, different to FAA system where people have more options to use the flight time efficiently with training working on the 61.129 requirements.

For FAA land, just do the stuff in twin. Saves you doing the 10hr min on complex SE and since you probably have done the IR checkride, all you do is asym ILS approach, I believe. Haven't done twin flying yet, but that's what I sussed out so far.
Aiming for airlines, the ASEL CPL, including complex ASEL time isn't of much use unless for other (GA flying) use.

As for UK, the multi flying is DAMN EXPENSIVE and the checkride fees for retest and the rental again, cost a lot, so there goes the argument against, as given by UK pilots. Just FYI, it doens't relate to original query.

[BillieBob]

Say for example I wanted to fly a Pilatus commercially from my understanding you need a CPL SE.No, you would need a CPL, a rating on the relevant type and to be any use, a valid IR. There is no such thing as a 'SE CPL' or a 'ME CPL'

[oldspool]

I did my CPL and ME together. For me the course I wanted to do (close to my home) was only offered on a twin and turned out to be cheaper than if I had done the course away from home on a single (though probably would not have worked out that way if I had needed a re-test/remedial traning etc...).

I guess the only noticeable differences being:

1) you're [typically] going 20kts faster; don't know whether this makes the nav easier or harder? Depends if you get lost I suppose (you're going to become more lost, quicker :)). Personally, I find nav a bit easier the faster you're going (up to a point).

2) the emergencies section is focused on assymetric flight rather than PFLs. Again, horses for courses.

The only other thing to say is that you are (understandably) expected to know how to operate everything in the aeroplane that is presented for test (even if they aren't specific test items), so if you have a twin with a load of bells and whistles then it may add to the workload. My examiner went to town on the autopilot and icing protection systems (both of which were only loosely covered during the course).

I would guess that it's six and two threes though the SE course should typically be cheaper (even more so if you need a couple of stabs at the skills test).

Good luck.

[BigGrecian]

I'm extremely suprised no one has mentioned that you are actually required to complete 6 hours of multi engine training now to even take the CPL skills test under EASA.

Even if your training is at a grandfathered ATO - the examiners are not allowed to test applicants (FCL 1030 applies) if they don't meet the requirments of part FCL which means you must have the 6 hours training in a multi engine as well as the 200 hours and 100 PIC.

So you will have to fly the multi either way before your test.