Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc.
Reload this Page >

Any Single Pilot Citation Captains out there?

Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

Any Single Pilot Citation Captains out there?

Old 4th Oct 2006, 18:47
  #1 (permalink)  
ssg
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 194
Any Single Pilot Citation Captains out there?

Looking for single pilot captains, Citation Encores, Ultras, Vs, SII, 550s, ect that fly under the single pilot exemption.

As one myself, I am trying to get some ideas on pay scales, flight hours, ect, so we have some info to go to bat with.

Go to my website

www.propilot.us

-SSG
ssg is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2006, 07:04
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Single Pilot Europe

Used to have an exemption, but its just expired and I have not renewed it as I discovered its Illegal to fly Bravo's and Ultra's etc single pilot in European airspace. The exemption is only good in the U.S. A quick phone call to the CAA will confirm this, anyone choosing to ignore this rule is risking their licence.
Freelance_uk is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2006, 20:38
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: herethereverywhere
Posts: 102
Will that apply for the likes of Citations Mustang, CJ1 or CJ2 etc.....
MrMutra is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2006, 06:27
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 27
No this only applies to Citations that are above 12,500ILbs In the case of the Bravo 14,800ILbs
Freelance_uk is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2006, 10:58
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 556
It's not actually the weight that matters, it's the fact that the flight manual says "minimum crew two pilots". The FAA can only give you an exemption from that within their own airspace.
The CJ (525) series and the VLJ's are single pilot aeroplanes so no problem arises for private ops, however JAR-OPS 1 says that all jets have to be two crew for commercial ops. This makes it unlikely that air taxi will be very viable with the VLJ's in Europe.
Also, there were a few SP Citation I's and II's, designated 501 & 551. These had various differences from the standard aircraft; trivial ones for the I but quite major (the MTOW) for the II. If you get hold of one of these they can be quite legally flown SP in Europe.
BizJetJock is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2006, 13:19
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Age: 99
Posts: 1,032
You can fly single pilot only FAR23 aircraft, not FAR 25.

Exemption have been granted for some airplanes like the Falcon 10 in france with some "single pilot" mods, but generally it is not widely spread.

by the way the C501 flight manual stipulate that the aircraft is Far 23 if it has (among other stuff) an operable Autopilot approach coupled, a boom mike, a xponder ident on the yoke, etc.... check MEL. if not it reverts to Far 25 !! simple no ?
CL300 is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2006, 05:08
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: here and there
Posts: 161
No intention of thread-jacking here, but I found this somewhere on the net some time ago and kept it, as I found it quite educational, especially the FAR 23 versus FAR 25 certification. I hope others might appreciate it also.


EDIT:
*I mentioned that I found this on the web some time ago. I wanted to give credit where it is due. The "history" portion of this post is an excerpt of an article written by Fred George of B&CA, whom I had the pleasure to meet at NBAA in 2006. It is from the November, 2002 issue of Business & Commercial Aviation. I highly recommend it if you aren't already a subscriber.

http://tbm700.com/modules.php?name=N...le=print&sid=7


The History of Single-Pilot Citations

Cessna Aircraft earned FAR Part 25 transport category type certification for its Citation 500 fanjet in September 1971 and for its Model 550 Citation II in March 1978. Part 25 aircraft must have at least two crewmembers in the cockpit because of the need to have a back-up in the event of crew incapacitation. The pilot-in-command must have an aircraft type-rating, but the second-in-command need only meet the requirements of Part 61.55.

In 1977, Cessna elected to pursue Part 23 normal category certification for a slightly modified version called the Model 501. Under the requirements of Part 23, aircraft with MTOWs less than 12,500 pounds could be OK’d for single-pilot operations if an FAA evaluation deemed the workload acceptable. The Citation 501, or Citation I/SP, easily passed the FAA’s single-pilot workload test. The pilot-in-command still needed a type rating, but a properly qualified PIC no longer needed an SIC.


For the Citation II, Cessna elected to pursue both Part 25 transport category certification for the basic Model 550, having a 13,300-pound MTOW, and Part 23 normal category certification for the Model 551 Citation II/SP, a 12,500-pound MTOW limited aircraft.


The development of the 14,700-pound MTOW Citation S/II in the early 1980s, though, made it impractical to spin off a 12,500-pound Part 23 version without incurring severe operational limitations. So, Cessna petitioned FAA Flight Standards in Washington, D.C., for an operational exemption to Part 25’s requirement to have two crewmembers, arguing that the excellent safety records of the Citation I/SP and II/SP enabled the S/II to be flown safely by a single pilot with a CE500 common type-rating. The FAA agreed, at the time, and granted what has become known colloquially as the Cessna Exemption. Cessna subsequently applied for extensions of the single-pilot operation exemption for the Citation 500, 550 and 560 models for pilots with the CE500 common type-rating, thus eliminating the need for separate single-pilot, Part 23 versions of 500-series aircraft. Uvalde, Texas-based Sierra Industries and Seattle-based Shannon Engineering also earned single-pilot operational exemptions for Part 25 500-series Citations.


When Cessna initiated development of the Model 525 CitationJet in the late 1980s, though, the FAA determined that it was sufficiently different from other Citation 500 models to warrant a separate type-rating. The CJ would be certified as a Part 23 aircraft, making it eligible for single-pilot operations. Cessna, though, pursued both CE-525 two-pilot and CE-525S single-pilot type-rating approvals, thereby giving operators a choice of flying alone or with an SIC. The CJ3 also will be certified as a Part 23 aircraft, but in the higher-weight commuter category. Want to fly with an SIC if you have a CE-525S type-rating? Just take a Part 61.58 checkride with an SIC and you’re qualified!


Citation Development History

*Fanjet 500, later Citation 500: original production version first flown September 1969. Production version entered service 1971.

*Citation I: enhanced performance version of the Citation 500, introduced 1976. Compared to the Citation 500, the wingspan was longer, higher gross operating weight, and more powerful JT15D-1A engines.

*Citation I/SP: Special performance version of the Citation I (previously dubbed the Citation 501), introduced in 1977. Last production version of the orignal Citation, last one delivered in 1985. Replaced by the CitationJet. The I/SP is certified for single-pilot operation, but the I and 500 are not.

*Citation II: development of the Citation I originally designated the Citation 550, featuring a fuselage stretch (max seating of 10), longer span wings, more powerful JT15D-4 engines, and increase baggage storage capacity. Certified in 1978.

*Citation II/SP: single-pilot version of the Citation II.

*Citation S/II: based on the Citation II but certified for single-pilot operation, The S/II featured aerodynamic improvements with a new supercritical wing based on what had been developed for the Citation III, and newer JT15D-4B engines. Certified in 1984 and temporarily replaced the Citation II in production until 1985 when the Citation II was reintroduced.

*Citation Bravo: based on the Citation S/II, but with newer PW530A engines, modern cockpit avionics (the Honeywell Primus suite), redesigned interior based on the Citation Ultra, and trailing link main landing gear legs. Certified in 1996, replaced both the Citation II and S/II in production. Current production standard that replaces the I/II series.

*Citation V: development of the Citation I, previously designated Citation 560. The Citation V series is a development of the Citation II/SP. Compared to the Citation II and II/SP, the V series have a slight fuselage stretch and more powerful JT15 engines. The Citation V was certified in 1988.

*Citation Ultra: based on the Citation V with more advanced avionics featuring the Honeywell Primus suite. The Ultra was certified in 1994. Also features an advanced supercritical wing based on the design work for the S/II and Bravo series.

*Citation Ultra Encore: an Ultra with new trailing link main landing gear legs, new fuel efficient PW535 engines, increased fuel payload, redesigned interior and improved systems. Current production standard of the V series.

*Citation III: Originally the Citation 650, the III is larger all-new design to supplement the smaller Citation I/II/V series. Features a swept supercritical wing, T-tail, new fuselage, and Garrett TFE731 turbofans. Certified in 1982.

*Citation VI: low-cost derivative of the Citation III with a standard interior (no customization options) and simpler cockpit avionics. Only 39 were built 1991-1995.

*Citation VII: certified in 1992, the Citation VII is a Citation III with systems improvements and more powerful Garrett engines for better hot/high performance. The VII is still in production, replacing the III/VI series.

*Citation X: Cessna's flagship business jet (designated the 750) first certified in 1996. All new fuselage, sharply swept supercritical wings, FADEC-equipped Allison AE3007 engines, and whole host aerodynamic features to facilitate its high cruise speed. The achievements of the Citation X were so significant, the engineering and test team was awarded the Collier Trophy in 1997.

*Citation X/SP: increased performance version of the Citation X upcoming that will enhance primarily its range/fuel burn.

*Citation Excel: the Model 560 combines a shortened version of the Citation X's fuselage with the advanced supercritical straight wings of the Citation Ultra and new PW545 engines. Certified in 1998.

*Citation Sovereign: the Model 680 features a stretched Excel fuselage combined with all-new supercritical wing with, along with the horizontal tailplane, features a new planform. Uses the PW306 (same engines as on the 329JET).

*CitationJet: The Model 525 replaces the orignal I/II series with the same forward fuselage with an all new wing, new Williams FJ44 engines, and a T-tail. EFIS avionics are standard, as is single-pilot operation. Certified in 1993.

*CitationJet CJ1: A CitationJet 525 with Collins Pro Line 21 cockpit avionics suite and an increased operational gross weight (primarily fuel/payload).

*CitationJet CJ2: stretched CJ1 with more powerful FJ44-2C engines, longer span wings, increased area tail.

*CitationJet CJ3: further stretch of the CJ2 with even longer wings, larger tail, and FADEC controls on more powerful FJ44 engines.

*Citation Mustang: all new light jet aircraft to compete with the likes of the Eclipse 500, smallest of the Citation family past or present. High aspect ratio supercritical wings, T-tail, and sleek contours and oval windows compared the rest of the Citation family.

*CitationJet CJ4: the Citation CJ4 isn’t just another derivative of the CitationJet line, but rather is a clean-sheet design that incorporates some of the best features found in other Citations. It has the Encore-plus’s cockpit and cabin, the Mustang’s wide cabin door, Sovereign-style wing performance and the CJ3’s external baggage capacity. The CJ3 will probably replace the Encore/Encore+ (CE-560) series around 2010, thus ending the Part 25 Cessna Citation 500 series aircraft production run after nearly 40 years.

Last edited by formulaben; 17th Jan 2007 at 02:35.
formulaben is online now  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 02:44
  #8 (permalink)  
ssg
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 194
Thanks

Excellent previous post on the development and history of the single pilot exemption...Thanks.

Some other thoughts:

Only around 500 pilots have ever had the exemption, and about 200,000 flight hours were logged.

Exemption expires every year and requires and intial checkride in actual aircraft, subsequent can be accomplished in sim.

Flight hours are sent to Cessna for forwarding to FAA.

Insurance rates vary for single pilot ops, with most being less not more then two pilot crews, due not to single vs two pilot, but rather one guy good enough to take the ride every year, tends to be a known quantity with the insurance companies. Very few pilots have the single pilot twin and turbine hard IFR experience to step up to single pilot jet ops, fewer still actualy use it. My informal study of the 100 or so pilots that hold it per year generaly keep the exemption, easier then a new ride in aircraft, but use it to move the plane to maintanance, ect and most fly with an SIC anyway.

As stated previous, Part 23 aircraft don't require a waiver, and besides being under 12500 lbs, all are generaly slower then the Part 25 aircraft. Part 25 aircraft are generaly heavier and faster, carry more people.

As far as crew incapacitation, or work load issues. Very few pilots crap out during a flight, crew or otherwise. Statistics being so rare and hard to come by it's tough to even calculate. As far as workload issues, single pilot capts have to pass a very stringent ride every year. Colleagues Citation reccurent is typicaly 2-3 days, mine is 5, with a real ride, two actualy, proficiency, then a single pilot ride.

Accident statistics for exemption holders don't exist except for the latest accident in Ca(Cable Airport) Fresh exemption holder decided to fly his Encore into a short field, landed long, with a tailwind, tried to make it. Killed his wife, burned him and his daughter. I flew that aircraft and trained with him, he went to Simuflite twice that year prepping for his ride.

Since he is the only exemption holder ever to kill someone, much less have an accident as a single pilot captain, and I know the guy, and the plane, I can say from experience that he could fly a plane in a training environment, and he was a business owner not a professional pilot, which fortunately puts him into THAT category of pilots who will soon be flying the Eclipses, Mustangs, ect.

Accident data is pretty sparse on Citations, but the consensus is pilots like to crack them up on approach or final, and the latest is no exception.

I never met the guys wife, but I heard she was nice, the plane was beutifull and now it's destroyed along with a perfect accident record for the single pilot exemption.

There is a lesson here somewhere, and I keep asking what it is, but I am left with the same conclusion, that single or two pilot ops have the same human factors issues, many times being egos, bad communication, laziness at looking up numbers, or just plain complacency and lack of discipline to go around, whatever. So before everyone beats up on single pilot ops keep looking at why two pilot planes keep cracking up, and the same stupid reasons keep coming up all over again.

Our latest Citation crash in Carlsbad was just plain silly with an approach speed of 160+ kts, or the Circut City Citation getting too low, way to low on a simple vor/dme approach.

Anyway, back to the point, any single pilot capts out there got an idea on money, pay, flight hours ect?

SSG
ssg is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2007, 20:17
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by ssg View Post
Accident statistics for exemption holders don't exist except for the latest accident in Ca(Cable Airport) Fresh exemption holder decided to fly his Encore into a short field, landed long, with a tailwind, tried to make it. Killed his wife, burned him and his daughter. I flew that aircraft and trained with him, he went to Simuflite twice that year prepping for his ride.
Since he is the only exemption holder ever to kill someone, much less have an accident as a single pilot captain, and I know the guy, and the plane, SSG
Wow what a claim. I did a quick google search and found this.

On November 5, 2005, at 0958 central standard time (CST), a twin-engine Cessna 500 airplane, N505K, was destroyed upon impact with terrain following a loss of control during takeoff from the William P. Hobby Airport (HOU), near Houston, Texas. The instrument rated commercial pilot and one passenger were fatally injured. The airplane was owned and operated by the pilot. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight plan was filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The local maintenance test flight was originating at the time of the accident, with Corpus Christi, Texas, as the intended destination.
Airport personnel reported that the owner of the airplane rented an office and hangar from a fixed base operator (FBO) on the east side of runway (RW) 22. Records indicate that 377 gallons of jet fuel was purchased on November 5, 2005, from the FBO's fueling vehicle about 0800; the fueling technician stated that the airplane was "topped off." Witnesses reported that the airplane had not been flown in over nine months, and was on its first flight since heavy maintenance was accomplished. Maintenance records confirmed that the airplane had not flown since January 31, 2006.
Several eyewitnesses observed the mishap. The three statements below recount their observations:
"A Citation C-500 was taking off on runway 22. The aircraft lifted off and climbed to approximately 200 to 300 feet. The aircraft appeared to have stalled during the ascent, banked to the right, crashing onto runway 12L/30R. It then tumbled for approximately 500 feet, coming to rest on taxiway Hotel and Mike."
"As the aircraft came more into my field of vision, it was 100 to 150 feet off the runway. I observed it roll hard to the right, become inverted, and crash into the ground. A large fireball followed the impact."
"I remember seeing the belly of the airplane, it was lime green color, then it winged-over to its right and went down."
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
The 55-year old pilot held a commercial pilot certificate with a rating for multiengine land and instrument airplane. In addition, he was also typed-rated in the Cessna 500 and 650 models. On February 20, 2005, the pilot satisfactorily completed the annual single-pilot training program and the single-pilot proficiency check in the CE-S550 airplane, as required by FAA exemption 405 and amended on June 27, 1984. The training included authorization for circling approaches.
slowtion is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2007, 20:35
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4
Here is another one. I know it is a 501, but the pilot also owned a 550 and a S/2 and had the single pilot waiver.

Aircraft: Cessna 501, registration: N70FJ
Injuries: 3 Fatal.
At 1407:11 the flight was cleared from Flight Level (FL) 240 to descend and maintain FL 190. At 1409:08 the controller cleared the flight to descend and maintain 15,000 feet, and at 1409:17 the pilot read back the clearance in its entirety. At 1410:20 the controller instructed the pilot to expedite his descent through 16,000 feet for traffic; however, there was no response. From 1410:33 to 1417:21 the controller made ten attempts to contact the pilot; again, there was no response. At 1417:26 the controller requested the pilot to ident if he could still hear him. At 1417:38 the controller received an ident from the aircraft and instructed the pilot to descend and maintain 15,000 feet. At 1418:36 the controller cleared the aircraft for the GPS approach and to acknowledge with an ident. There was no response. The aircraft had impacted a rocky drainage trench near the base of rock outcropping on a magnetic heading of 200 degrees in a wings level, approximately 40-degree nose down attitude, 15 nautical miles east-southeast of the destination airport at an elevation of 5,630 feet mean sea level. An examination of the aircraft's flight control, pressurization, and electrical systems revealed no anomalies with these systems which would have precluded normal operations. A further examination of the thermal damage to the aircraft, determined that there was no evidence of an inflight fire. Both engines underwent a complete teardown examination revealing no evidence of catastrophic or preaccident failure, and that both engines were functioning at the time of impact. Radar data revealed the aircraft was in level flight at FL 190 for more than 4 minutes, when it had previously been cleared to 15,000 feet. It subsequently began a climb reaching an altitude of 20,300 feet before beginning a right descending turn followed by a left descending turn. The last radar return before radar contact was lost indicated the aircraft was at 15,900 feet and descending. No evidence was available that suggests icing greater than light rime icing was present in the area and that weather was unlikely to have been a factor in the accident. The pilot was on two medications for high blood pressure and one for high cholesterol. The pilot had recently been found to have an elevated blood sugar, suggesting early diabetes or some other systemic disease or injury. The pilot had a family history of heart disease and high blood pressure, and had at least one episode of chest tightness in the past. It is possible that he had some unrecognized heart disease. The circumstances of the accident suggest substantial impairment or incapacitation of the pilot. It is possible that the pilot experienced an event such as a stroke or heart attack related to his previous medical conditions or as a new occurrence. It is also possible that he became hypoxic as a result of a decompression event without using supplemental oxygen. There is insufficient information to conclude any specific cause for the pilot's impairment or incapacitation.
To sum it up single pilot ops: Citations systems are all redundent, except the most important part (and the least expensive), THE PILOT.
slowtion is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2007, 20:29
  #11 (permalink)  
ssg
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 194
Hmmmm

Well then I stand corrected that a pilot with a single pilot waiver(4050)has actualy augered one in and died on the scene. Incapacitation I gather rather then incompetence.

I gather this is another one of those owner pilot episodes or was this a paid pilot hired by the company to fly the plane?

The distinction might be small, but I think relevent given that the Mustangs and VLjs are being marketed to the owner pilots.
ssg is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2007, 20:45
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: here and there
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by ssg View Post
Well then I stand corrected that a pilot with a single pilot waiver(4050)has actualy augered one in and died on the scene. Incapacitation I gather rather then incompetence.

I gather this is another one of those owner pilot episodes or was this a paid pilot hired by the company to fly the plane?

The distinction might be small, but I think relevent given that the Mustangs and VLjs are being marketed to the owner pilots.
I may have heard it before this accident, but I've always heard it spoken as such: "no professional (full-time pilot) pilot with an ATP and 4050 exemption has ever caused a fatality" or something to that effect. Whether it is still true or not, the safety record is STILL very good. Yes, I do think there is a distinction...and at times it's no small one for sure.
formulaben is online now  
Old 16th Jan 2007, 18:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: here and there
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by slowtion View Post
Wow what a claim. I did a quick google search and found this.

On November 5, 2005, at 0958 central standard time (CST), a twin-engine Cessna 500 airplane, N505K, was destroyed upon impact with terrain following a loss of control during takeoff from the William P. Hobby Airport (HOU), near Houston, Texas. The instrument rated commercial pilot and one passenger were fatally injured. The airplane was owned and operated by the pilot. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight plan was filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The local maintenance test flight was originating at the time of the accident, with Corpus Christi, Texas, as the intended destination.
Airport personnel reported that the owner of the airplane rented an office and hangar from a fixed base operator (FBO) on the east side of runway (RW) 22. Records indicate that 377 gallons of jet fuel was purchased on November 5, 2005, from the FBO's fueling vehicle about 0800; the fueling technician stated that the airplane was "topped off." Witnesses reported that the airplane had not been flown in over nine months, and was on its first flight since heavy maintenance was accomplished. Maintenance records confirmed that the airplane had not flown since January 31, 2006.
Several eyewitnesses observed the mishap. The three statements below recount their observations:
"A Citation C-500 was taking off on runway 22. The aircraft lifted off and climbed to approximately 200 to 300 feet. The aircraft appeared to have stalled during the ascent, banked to the right, crashing onto runway 12L/30R. It then tumbled for approximately 500 feet, coming to rest on taxiway Hotel and Mike."
"As the aircraft came more into my field of vision, it was 100 to 150 feet off the runway. I observed it roll hard to the right, become inverted, and crash into the ground. A large fireball followed the impact."
"I remember seeing the belly of the airplane, it was lime green color, then it winged-over to its right and went down."
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
The 55-year old pilot held a commercial pilot certificate with a rating for multiengine land and instrument airplane. In addition, he was also typed-rated in the Cessna 500 and 650 models. On February 20, 2005, the pilot satisfactorily completed the annual single-pilot training program and the single-pilot proficiency check in the CE-S550 airplane, as required by FAA exemption 405 and amended on June 27, 1984. The training included authorization for circling approaches.
The 500 does not apply to the 4050 exemption, IIRC.
formulaben is online now  
Old 16th Jan 2007, 19:08
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: here and there
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by ssg View Post
Accident statistics for exemption holders don't exist except for the latest accident in Ca(Cable Airport) Fresh exemption holder decided to fly his Encore into a short field, landed long, with a tailwind, tried to make it. Killed his wife, burned him and his daughter.
.
.
.
Since he is the only exemption holder ever to kill someone...
Is this the accident in question?

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...29X00851&key=1

It doesn't show a fatality, but the NTSB defines a fatality as happening within 30 days off the accident. A burn victim could die weeks later I suppose.
formulaben is online now  
Old 17th Jan 2007, 21:38
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 637
US Flying Magazine

There is a very good article on SP small jet operations in the December 2005 issue of the US Flying magazine, particularly with respect to insurance, training and safety issues.
QSK? is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2007, 16:25
  #16 (permalink)  
ssg
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 194
Single Pilot Exemption Holder

I am actualy letting the cat out of the bag here..

The Cable airport crash was such that all occupents got out of the aircraft(3)
Hence technicaly, no fatalities.

One died about 2 months later of complications due to burns, both others were burned and required lots of hospital stays...long talks with the pilot, elicited some interesting lessons, and keep in mind I flew this plane....

The point....I understand the NTSB will count the bodies at the scene not follow up to see who died weeks or months later....interesting distinction with regard to statistics...

As I understand, to this date not one current, ATP rated, single pilot exemption holder(4050), who is paid to fly, not a biz owner, has cracked up a plane he was exempted to fly in. And keep in mind the exemption is for the heavier faster Part 25 aircraft, no Cjs, and 550SP, or 501s, ect. Much more stringent requirement, recurrent training, ect.

So yeah, I am sure some guy with an exemption hopped into a Bonanza and bought it at some time, or a some biz owner flying 50 hours a year, has a heart attack, ect, ect. I am just curious if one doing his job, flying the plane he had an exemption in, screwed up. Sooner or later it might happen, but Cessna told me about a year ago, it never has in 20 years.

Personaly at this stage I wouldn't mind flying crew, just to have someone to talk to, clean the plane, be my hanger biotch, warm up my car, do the charts......ect......
ssg is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2007, 06:22
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: here and there
Posts: 161
Originally Posted by ssg View Post
..long talks with the pilot, elicited some interesting lessons, and keep in mind I flew this plane....
Any lessons (flying or otherwise) that you can share? I'm always willing to learn from others mistakes.
formulaben is online now  
Old 29th Jan 2007, 06:06
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 2
Single Pilot Encore in Canada?

Does anyone know if it's possible to Legally fly an Encore in Canada single pilot? If so, what is the process?

thanks
501Driver is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2007, 06:20
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 2
Single Pilot Citation Authorizations

Is is possible to get authorized to operate a Citation Encore single pilot in Canada? How about the Carribean or Mexico?
501Driver is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2007, 09:51
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 49
Posts: 1,110
But why would you really want to

The guy can afford the a/c but cant/wont pay for crew or some SIC training for one of the instructors in the school who can land the aircraft in an emergency.

Lets be honest something like an encore should be 2 crew, ok nobody has died yet but the figures dont show how many level busts (difficult with Primus but dead easy in a II), or other infringements there have been.

A relatively light II can still make 3000fpm even with 20 seconds lack of concentration you're going to make a big hole in the other guys level never mind the 5-6000fpm you can squeeze out of an encore (AI off of course!)

Flying something with that performance in the USA is very much different than flying it in European airspace. Which is why it is probably to be banned in the very near future.

And yes I've got 550/560 time
G-SPOTs Lost is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.