Cessna Citation I type rating cost

[PropHellen]

Hi,

Does anyone know what the initial typerating Citation I (C500) costs at Simuflite/Dallas with a JAA approved training scheme? Anyone has any experience with them to share?

Thanks

[G-DAVE]

Can only suggest you email or phone them. Very easy to deal with, and the answer will be 100% correct.

[Kilroy Was Here]

Sorry Simuflite training

Tjana PropHellen,

I am currently in class with Simuflite in Dallas (Checkride tomorrow) on the Citation.
This is my first time training with them after several years with Flight Safety in Long Beach and I was looking forward to something different.
My best effort of an unbiased opinion is that Flight Safety in Long Beach is quite a bit better. At Simuflite CAE in Dallas, the ground school slides have a lot of errors, the instructor used a significant amount of non standard terms like "Dogs" for the door bayonet locks, "Pigs" for Thrust reverser levers or "Christmas tree" for the 23 psi bleed-air pressure regulator. There are checklists for items not in the Citation checklist like "red gun failure" and other special Simuflite procedures that were interesting, but completely new to me.
I came without a sim partner and Simuflite provided a instructor to act as co-pilot; he was late and did not participate in any of the briefing; he kept referring to "left" and "right" items as "port" and "starboard" and did in my opinion a poor job of following standard operating procedures most of the time and caused uncertainty and confusion.
The simulator also had a lot of problems; the stick shaker was inoperative, the cockpit was very dark from the failure of several lights, the oxygen mask on the copilot side had to be disconnected because the flow could not be stopped and there was "glitches" like the altimeter would suddenly go to zero and then recover again on it's own.
The performance calculations that they teach are not an accurate representation of what is the rules, and even if it is more conservative and thus not "dangerous", I believe that especially "new" pilots who often fly the Citation for their first Part 25 aircraft need to be given the accurate, true and legal guidance of how to plan a departure so they can fully understand the limitations and options available to them.
I may come across as to hard on Simuflite, but I have a low tolerance for what appears to be a lot of waisting of my time and my employers good money when it could be so much better with just some effort on the corporate culture. I have yet to be asked to comment on the course, and hope I get the chance to tell them about this.
I still enjoyed the training at Simuflite and had a good learning experience and may come again. I just cannot recommend the Citation class for a initial type rating. I would go to Flight Safety in Long Beach

[Flintstone]

Kilroy.

The sim glitches sound typical of an old type. When I used to use the S2 sim at FSI San Antonio the thing was always developing faults. That and many of the other things do sound fairly annoying though.

'Dogs' or dogging down (stop sniggering at the back) are terms I have heard before in connection with doors. It is still used in the navy I believe and refers to a door being made secure or watertight. Port and starboard are perfectly acceptable in my opinion. I've also heard the christmas tree term and if it describes the piece of plumbing accurately I don't see the problem. Not sure where 'pigs' come from though.

[pilotbear]

Sorry Flinty but that is not the way to teach initial type ratings. It is poor, lazy and unprofessional. They cost a lot and it should be done properly in as near possible with manufactures terms and procedures.
A recurrent is a different story, the pilots are experienced and can take on board different stuff.
If the person is unhappy with the training they should take it up with the management of the centre with specifics. I did with FSI and got a very good result. If the instructor co pilot does not do what they are paid to do refuse to get in the sim. I did and they will soon sort it out. YOU are paying for that guy to do his job.
They cannot bill you for something if it is not correct, don't be intimidated. They need the business right now not a poor reputation.

[what next]

Good morning!

... he kept referring to "left" and "right" items as "port" and "starboard"

That would have driven me crazy as well! If I wanted to go starboard and port, I would have joined the navy, not the airforce, so to say... I think this starboard and port stuff is another one of these things that can really only be appreciated by people who were born in the United States of Kingdom. But I would simply have complained the first time the instructor had used these terms and honestly wouldn't have known which direction to turn anyway.

That apart, I had a completely different experience in Dallas last year than Kilroy. But I did a slighty different course then for the C550/560 series (Bravo/Ultra/Encore) following the JAA syllabus which is done on a different (probably more modern) simulator and maybe also with different instructors.

The sim was very reliable, during my stay it had one technical fault that was fixed within hours so that the course schedule needed only slight adjustments. Like Kilroy, I was the only one on my course and needed a second instructor as "right seater" in the simulator. I had a different one on nearly every session, but none of them missed the briefing and they all did a perfect job with textbook-like crew coordination. No starboard and port nonsense ever :-)

From the non-standard terminology criticised by Kilroy, I remember only the "christmas tree". No dogs and pigs and if I'm not all wrong, the "red gun failure" is contained in the original Cessna checklist. But out of curiosity, I will look that up when I'm at the airport later. Have to re-read the manuals anyway, recurrent training is not so far away anymore - I at least wouldn't mind if my employer sends me to Dallas again for that!

Greetings, Max

[Flintstone]

Originally Posted by pilotbear

Sorry Flinty but that is not the way to teach initial type ratings.

I didn't say it was, I said I'd also experienced a knackered sim. Complaining about standard terminology is groundless though.

Port and starboard, it's not that difficult. What about engines? If someone calls them '1&2' and another refers to them as 'left and right' or even 'port and starboard' is it too much to expect of a professional pilot to understand?

Max. Ask any number of professional pilots either side of the Atlantic to define port and starboard and I think you'll find that as someone who doesn't know their meaning you're in the minority. Should we do away with coloured navlights because they have boat origins? Flightdeck? Rudder? Cockpit? Knots? Drift? The list is long, might be time for some background reading

[what next]

Hello!

Max. Ask any number of professional pilots either side of the Atlantic to define port and starboard and I think you'll find that as someone who doesn't know their meaning you're in the minority.

In "my" country, these terms are not used by anybody. If I wouldn't have taken sailing lessons in my youth, I wouldn't know what to make of them. Even so, I must _actively_ think what is meant by these words, whereas the meaning of "left" and "right" comes instinctively.

I have not come across "starboard" and "port" in any ICAO document, it is not used in RT phraseaology, it is not used in any aeroplane manual. Therefore it is non-standard phraseology and therefore misleading and potentially dangerous, if you ask me!

And BTW (for Kilroy): I just came back from flying (a C550 Ultra) and had a look into the original abnormal checklist by Cessna: The call it indeed the red gun themselves - so it is no invention by a SiumuFlite instructor.

Greetings, Max

[The Beer Hunter]

Port and starboard make perfect sense to me and I've never sailed a boat in my life. I think you will also find it in some older aircraft manuals so the 'non-standard' defense fails too.

English. The language of aviation.

[Flintstone]

Originally Posted by what next

I have not come across "starboard" and "port" in any ICAO document, it is not used in RT phraseaology, it is not used in any aeroplane manual.

Never say never


Transport Canada. http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/applica...sup/BH_212.doc

Australian CASA. http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airw.../HS748-032.pdf

Pakistani CAA. caapakistan.com.pk/format1/CAA-058%20(Rev-1).pdf

EASA. http://www.easa.eu.int/ws_prod/c/doc...0Issue%203.pdf - (Page 6, Section 4, Para 1)

FAA. rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/b72df74d3b1847ad852567240060a02d/$FILE/4a28.PDF


ICAO Circular 88-AN/74 (155-160). ..........As the aircraft approached the aerodrome boundary..... the starboard wing was held down slightly to compensate for port drift. ..... as he closed the throttles the starboard wing went down suddenly...... the aircraft struck the ground heavily on its starboard undercarriage. After the impact, the starboard wing, engine nacelle and undercarriage became separated from the main structure, the aircraft rolled over to starboard....

From the JAA ATPL question bank. "Track 348T, drift 17 left (port).....

ATPL Forum where students routinely quote questions using the terms port and starboard Drift (wind, not gyro) - ATP Forum

UK CAA. www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ATS050.PDF


Say 'surrender' or I'll post some more

[what next]

Hi!

English. The language of aviation.

Agreed. But only as far as standardised by ICAO (for us civilian aviators). So please show me one (a very tiny little small one would be enough!) example of the use of starboard and port in any official ICAO document?

Did you ever hear a controller say "Turn starboard by 10 degrees"? I haven't - and I have been flying in native english speaking countries on both sides of the Atlantic.

Greetings, Max

[Flintstone]

Max.

Apart from the one up there^^^^?

Please don't make me Google any more, it's Friday night, I'm on a promise and I don't want to hurt you.

[what next]

Say 'surrender' or I'll post some more

Okay, okay ... you win (your google results were not there when I posted my last answer). Obviously, some individuals who contribute to ICAO-related documentation still use naval terms for aviation matters

However, I stick to my point (and Kilroy's): To ensure unambiguous communication in a multi-crew (and multi-national / multi-native-language as is often the case in Europe) working environment, only such terminolgy shall be used, as is consistent with that used by the aeroplane manufacturer and the operating manuals of the employer. In the Citation that we talk about here, every lever, switch and annunciator is either labelled "L/H" or "R/H", so we must stick to "left" and "right" if we want to avoid dangerous confusion in the stressful event of an emergency. And 80 percent of the time spent on the simulator you have to deal with emergencies...

Greetings, Max

[Flintstone]

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. Nothing more annoying than being introduced to something for the first time, being taught terminology only to find out on joining the line that it's slang. Old-timer, ex-airline skippers who have retired to a training organisation seem to be the worst for this.

To be honest terms like port and starboard are probably dying out. No bad thing, too long winded.

[Paradise Lost]

Summoned to the fray!

Even without a naval background, the terms Port and Starboard are in fairly common usage. I'm pretty sure when I was learning to fly (with Bleriot and the Wright Bros) that I had to check my port and starboard nav. lens' were there, intact and uncracked!
Every manufacturer seems to delight in baffling new pilots to type, by inventing dozens of new acronyms for things we all knew on other aircraft by completely different names....T4, EGT, ITT, JPT etc.etc.
For our continental colleagues (for whom I have the utmost respect since they have to learn all this crap in a second language), the simple way to remember Port/Starboard is that "Port is left is red".

[what next]

For our continental colleagues (for whom I have the utmost respect since they have to learn all this crap in a second language), the simple way to remember Port/Starboard is that "Port is left is red".

No way So when I get told: "Memory Items Engine Fire - Starboard Engine!" I have to do this whole thing backwards in several steps: First translate "Starboard" to german, then remember your aide-memoire, translate it to german also, so I can match the engine shutdown request to the "port-is-left-is-red", determine that there is no match, so it must be the other side, thanslate that to english again and then start looking for the correct button. By the time my finger will reach out towards that button, the check ride will long be over and my job gone for good...

No no, I really like my job and will not endanger it by complicating my life with port and starboard. Maybe one day when I retire from flying and start sailing again

I would estimate my chances of shutting the correct engine down in a simulated emergency using standardised phraseology to be around 95 percent (my students in the procedures trainer, but also in the real aeroplane!, score around 70 percent, but they are excused for being beginners). Ask me to shut down port or starboard and the chance of me getting it right will be exactly 50 percent.

[Nearly There]

Port is Left,both have 4 letters its that simple, Port the drink is red..
No real need for translating, working backwards etc, it should be common knowledge, not something thats left to a 50/50 chance!
Must admit though left and right or No1 No2 is easier and saves a second of thought.
As for the rest cant comment, Im on the outside trying to get in

[FlyTCI]

I just went through the Bravo ground school at CAE in Dallas a couple of weeks ago. I'm in the right seater program and will soon be one of the guys helping clients in the sim. So far I have not come across the terms port or starboard.

Is the place perfect, for sure no, but remember we are in aviation. The last couple of weeks have been quite rough for the instructors. 62 of them were let go in the middle of my ground school about a month ago. Most were taken back a as part timers about a week later. In this way the company could dump the bennies they had as full timers.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience but this turmoil could have been a factor. I know it sucks as a paying customer, but it's rough times in aviation (and every where else) so the guys let go and then came back were not happy. If times were better they might have gone somewhere else, but bills have to be paid.

Overall most of the people I have come across have been very friendly and professional. I say give them one more shot, and if you are still not happy go back to FSI.

[Tugnut]

I think the original post was also asking how much a C500 course would cost! In 17 post We seem to have lost sight of what was being asked. I didn't see anything that related to a port/starboard debate!!

FlyTCI, seeing as you seem to work there maybe you are best placed to answer PropHellen's original post. Alternatively, take G-DAVE's advice.

Tug

[what next]

Hello!

I think the original post was also asking how much a C500 course would cost! In 17 post We seem to have lost sight of what was being asked. I didn't see anything that related to a port/starboard debat!!

There are two questions in the initial post. Someone has answered the second question in the negative, one of his points being this starboard/port issue. I think that it is very legitimate to discuss about it - this is the basic purpose of a discussion forum, isn't it?

Regarding the price: I could tell him, how much _my_ employer had to pay for _my_ course last year. But firsty I can't, because my work contract forbids me to talk about such things in public and second, this price will differ from the quote he will get, because my employer sends more than one pilot there every year. The only way to find out is to call them or send them an email. Both ways would have taken much less time than to write the original post in this forum... and waiting for answers

62 of them were let go...

This is very bad news, as I really have encountered very professional and competent staff there who certainly deserve better than that. I really hope business picks up quickly before these colleagues (if I'm allowed to use this term for fellow pilots and instructors) are forced to leave SimuFlite for good. Thy will be hard to replace.

Greetings, Max