C337 twin or single?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: somewhere on the great australian coast
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C337 twin or single?
Hi guys and gals
This may be a real obvious question... Do you require a multi endoresment to fly a C337, and being centreline thrust is it actually single or multi time?
This may be a real obvious question... Do you require a multi endoresment to fly a C337, and being centreline thrust is it actually single or multi time?
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
You do require an endorsement to fly it and it is a multiengine aircraft.
Cheers, HH.
Cheers, HH.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A multi is a multi is a multi; yes it is a multi engine aeroplane, yeah you do need an endo, no a 337 endo wont let you fly other 300-series Cessnas, and the front of most log books states that flight time in centreline thrust aircraft is to be logged as SE....... 
Jamair, I have checked the ATC logbook and the CASA log book and could find no reference to logging time in a multi engine aircraft in the single engine column.
What would multi engine helicopter pilots do in such a case?
What would multi engine helicopter pilots do in such a case?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bullship
thats so stupid how often do drivers fly them planes round with one engine i thought when looking at multi time would be more about the managment of two engines and the whole work load and not the asymetric flying
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: somewhere hot and sticky
Age: 44
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my NZ logbook (front page)
"Centre-line Thrust Aeroplanes: Time spent in centre-line thrust aeroplanes shall not count as multi-engined time."
I totally agree this is stupid - maybe it shouldn't count as multi-time towards a multi-rating (as you do need to be proficient in asymmetric operations) but in normal operations, the C337 has all the performance and complexity of other light twins.
Dupre.
"Centre-line Thrust Aeroplanes: Time spent in centre-line thrust aeroplanes shall not count as multi-engined time."
I totally agree this is stupid - maybe it shouldn't count as multi-time towards a multi-rating (as you do need to be proficient in asymmetric operations) but in normal operations, the C337 has all the performance and complexity of other light twins.
Dupre.
Yes, but if you think about it, while both engines are operating on a twin, it's really no different from a similarly complex single. What's the difference between an Islander and a C182? The BN2 is slower and has two of everything, it doesn't require any extra skill to move two sets of levers and look at two sets of engine instruments. So going by your logic, all twin time should be logged as SE time unless you're actually assymetric.
Logging it as a single might apply in NZ but that's not the case elsewhere.
In Oz an endorsement on the a/c is required regardless, however for the purposes of Night & Instrument ratings it's considered a 'single' and may be flown at night or IFR using a rating limited to single engine a/c. The reason is that it doesn't display the adverse & severely degraded asymmetric handling qualities of conventional twins.
In Oz an endorsement on the a/c is required regardless, however for the purposes of Night & Instrument ratings it's considered a 'single' and may be flown at night or IFR using a rating limited to single engine a/c. The reason is that it doesn't display the adverse & severely degraded asymmetric handling qualities of conventional twins.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gday
For my two bobs worth, when an engine in a conventional twin isn’t delivering the required power at least your feet are telling you something is amiss and which one, centreline unless the front one seizes your first indication is a drop in performance so early time the only indication is EGT so I know which I would rather have a failure in. I would have to agree with Aerocat, when it’s all ok it’s just another aeroplane.
Cheers Q
For my two bobs worth, when an engine in a conventional twin isn’t delivering the required power at least your feet are telling you something is amiss and which one, centreline unless the front one seizes your first indication is a drop in performance so early time the only indication is EGT so I know which I would rather have a failure in. I would have to agree with Aerocat, when it’s all ok it’s just another aeroplane.
Cheers Q
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add to another NZ uniqueness,
A full 5hr initial multi engine rating is required for a type rating on centreline thrust multi engine aircraft if you are not already the holder of a multi engine rating.
S2K
A full 5hr initial multi engine rating is required for a type rating on centreline thrust multi engine aircraft if you are not already the holder of a multi engine rating.
S2K
Seasonally Adjusted
They (NZ), shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If you can't log 337 time as multi then you shouldn't be subject to the 5 hour initial multi rating.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did mine in an hour.
nothing hard about em. just remember to leave the gear alone when going through your engine out drill. them big doors will cost ya 10knts.
nothing hard about em. just remember to leave the gear alone when going through your engine out drill. them big doors will cost ya 10knts.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C337 requires a multi engine endorsement in Australia as well.
So if you don't have a multi endorsement already you have to do the full endorsement time.
If you then want to fly other multi engine then you have to do the full multi engine asymetric endorsement. So you are better of having a multi engine endorsement on something else first (eg PA30 or BE76) then doing a C337 endorsement which should be no more than an hour or as the flying training organisation you use requires.
As stated just don't try pulling the wheels up during an engine failure as it costs at least 10kts and upto 300ft especially with a rear engine failure. See Bundaberg accident about 2 years ago.
So if you don't have a multi endorsement already you have to do the full endorsement time.
If you then want to fly other multi engine then you have to do the full multi engine asymetric endorsement. So you are better of having a multi engine endorsement on something else first (eg PA30 or BE76) then doing a C337 endorsement which should be no more than an hour or as the flying training organisation you use requires.
As stated just don't try pulling the wheels up during an engine failure as it costs at least 10kts and upto 300ft especially with a rear engine failure. See Bundaberg accident about 2 years ago.
Pullim I come pussim I go?
Tin, having never flown one meself, someone I spoke to/with at one stage mentioned they had the same profile wing (laminar) as a 210, but with struts. That sound right?
Geeze they'd wanna be good to outlift the 185, but then again with two airfloggen fans they'd have a better bite on the rare air in the highlands.
Tin, having never flown one meself, someone I spoke to/with at one stage mentioned they had the same profile wing (laminar) as a 210, but with struts. That sound right?
Geeze they'd wanna be good to outlift the 185, but then again with two airfloggen fans they'd have a better bite on the rare air in the highlands.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Wanna Be Up There...
Age: 53
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ok so what would the endorsements be for this particular one.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...dg=&static=yes
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...dg=&static=yes
Advice from God in Australia indicates:
To all intents and purposes (inline engine aircraft) are currently regarded as a single except that there is an endorsement requirement before one can fly the aeroplane. Under (the new) Part 61 the requirement for endorsement may be dropped. In both cases the aeroplane will be logged as a single in relation to flight time.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torres
What document did this come from as I can find no mention of this in:
http://rrp.casa.gov.au/drafts/draftmos061_v3.pdf
Which is the draft of the new MOS Part 61.
I'd be loath to allow anyone to fly my C337 without being endorsed on type. Witness what happens when the endorsement is not done correctly (Bundaberg accident).
What document did this come from as I can find no mention of this in:
http://rrp.casa.gov.au/drafts/draftmos061_v3.pdf
Which is the draft of the new MOS Part 61.
I'd be loath to allow anyone to fly my C337 without being endorsed on type. Witness what happens when the endorsement is not done correctly (Bundaberg accident).