The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Multi first or MECIR?

Old 27th Aug 2014, 14:22
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I believe the part 61 IFR will work like it does in FAA land.

This is what generally happens in the good old USA.

PPL- (this includes NVFR as you cant hold a PPL without night rating in FAA land) It doesn't say NVFR on the licence, its just a given.

Straight after PPL is IR S/E- I think this is a great idea as the hour building phase generally follows. Exposure to weather other than CAVOK when your progressing up to your CPL test is a blessing in disguise.

After CPL check ride many do a M/E rating. During your M/E checkride you have to shoot a couple of instrument approached one of which includes and engine inop approach. Then presto! Multi engine IR done. No need to waste hours of flight time on NDB's in the USA hence the MECIR works out to be about 40% cheaper there.
pilotchute is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2014, 22:22
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In God's Country
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 44 Likes on 5 Posts
G'Day Aussie Bob - my intention was not to disrespect VFR pilots, certainly I have advocated on other forums that VFR done right is no less safe than IFR. I have a good friend (who was a mentor to me in my earlier career) who has never held an IR and he certainly has had a long and successful flying career. My company operates VFR for the majority of its work, however all the M/E pilots are IFR qualified and current - the idea being that the use of that rating is a "tool in the toolbox" for when it is required. The majority of days in the north of this continent do not require an IFR flight plan...

Upon re-read of my post, I can see how it may appear "extreme"... Not my intent, however the other Bear (Square Bear) more accurately sums up my thoughts on the matter - if you can, you should... There is no better insurance than training and "upskilling", especially when one lacks in experience. A hallmark of the commensurately professional VFR pilot is the refined judgement to know what can (and cannot) be worked with. Although the same is true of an IFR pilot (the MECIR does not make one invincible!), the additional skill set offered by dedicated / comprehensive instrument flight training will go some way to mitigating the lack of judgement that is a weakness often found in the low time pilot - which is the context of this thread.
Flying Bear is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2014, 03:27
  #23 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pilotchute
I believe the part 61 IFR will work like it does in FAA land.

This is what generally happens in the good old USA.

PPL- (this includes NVFR as you cant hold a PPL without night rating in FAA land) It doesn't say NVFR on the licence, its just a given.

Straight after PPL is IR S/E- I think this is a great idea as the hour building phase generally follows. Exposure to weather other than CAVOK when your progressing up to your CPL test is a blessing in disguise.

After CPL check ride many do a M/E rating. During your M/E checkride you have to shoot a couple of instrument approached one of which includes and engine inop approach. Then presto! Multi engine IR done. No need to waste hours of flight time on NDB's in the USA hence the MECIR works out to be about 40% cheaper there
Better late than never, I guess, but it does make you wonder why everything is so complicated (bureaucratic) and expensive in Australia. I know there are economies of scale in the US, but the cost of everything - especially any administrative fees associated with CASA - is pretty outrageous here. It's like you get milked every step of the way from student license to CPL and beyond.

I hope that goes some way to explaining why I'm asking all these questions and not blindly rushing to hand over any more money than I need to. Not saying I'm not prepared to do the hard yards, but if I can spread things out over a sensible time frame, it would certainly help. Having said that, it looks like I now need to put some more money aside for an instrument rating. From a flying skills and safety point of view - at the very least - it seems to make sense.

Last edited by Virtually There; 28th Aug 2014 at 04:43.
Virtually There is offline  
Old 30th May 2016, 02:25
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Sydney, AU
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi Virtually There,
I just bumped to this thread - basically I'm in the same shoe as you were two years ago. Do you have any update on the direction you choose?

I'm thinking about getting the IR - just passed the IREX exam, but wondering if I should get the IR rating (IR or MECIR, that's also a question) or I should try to find a VFR charter job first.

So if you could share your experiences, that would be a great help to figure out what my next step should be

Cheers,
Dave
DaVeAU is offline  
Old 30th May 2016, 12:53
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm thinking about getting the IR - just passed the IREX exam, but wondering if I should get the IR rating (IR or MECIR, that's also a question) or I should try to find a VFR charter job first.

You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers
Judd is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 02:21
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Sydney, AU
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Judd
You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers
I totally agree, but at the end it comes down to financials - and that's the hard part. I'd like to get the IR as soon as possible, but the question here is that before/or after getting employed.

If I'd have unlimited funding I'd start the course tomorrow - regardless the employment as I see IR as a very important skill to have.
On the other hand if I'm not flying commercially I can remain a 'nice weather pilot' without the commercial pressures.

So it's really an egg or chicken question for me now
DaVeAU is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 02:43
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,285
Received 203 Likes on 89 Posts
My advice is to wait until you have clocked up about 500-1000 hours and then tackle it. You are very unlikely to get an IFR job in an IFR equipped aircraft straight out of flying school and could just end up with an expensive burden to keep current.

What Judd has said sounds like a sales pitch. Of course flying schools are going to want you to keep forking out your coins on more and more courses. The old "you're not a professional pilot unless..." :rolleyes nonsense is actually rather insulting to the any of us who fly professionally VFR and make good decisions so we don't end up having to "save our skin" because the airline life and all the bling might not appeal to all of us.

As an employer of VFR pilots, having an IR on your resume would make no difference to your application. Giving the impression that you might be the type to make decisions that would necessitate "saving your skin" however, would make a negative impression.
Clare Prop is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 03:06
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mt Druitt
Posts: 173
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MECIR

Get your MECIR ASAP.

You start building renewals and as others have alluded, a good skill set that will come in handy
snoop doggy dog is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 05:54
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What Judd has said sounds like a sales pitch

Sorry to disappoint you but believe me, nothing could be further from the truth. All my own flying training was fortunately in the RAAF where instrument flying started right from ab-initio days until graduation at 210 hours with a full instrument rating. Much of that was on limited panel because of the unreliability of artificial horizons in those days.

No sales pitch there, just a heartfelt thanks to those instructors who, with great patience, taught me to fly on instruments when I was just 19.
Judd is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 06:29
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Redfern
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As usual its a RAAF'ie neglecting to take into consideration commercial realities.
olm8tyrone is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 10:53
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well DaVeAU, I got the multi, and got a job, and haven't needed an instrument rating at all, as we only fly VFR. I fly regular ferry flights at night in remote areas, which is good IF practice, and will be getting my IR at some point (when I have a break from work!).

I didn't plan it that way, but passed my IREX and then got messed around by a flight school when I went to do my MECIR and only had enough time to complete my multi before starting work - so in the end, didn't have a choice.

In my opinion, yes it will make you a more complete pilot, and yes it will be advantageous to have a few renewals when it comes time to move up to RPT. If you can afford to do it, do it.

But it is hard to do renewals remotely, and if you can't afford to do it right now, or - like me - circumstance conspires against you, it's not the end of the world.

I spoke to a CFI of a school that specialises in IR training not long ago and his own opinion was most new CPLs were better off trying to land that first job up north and get a bit of real-world flying under their belts before getting a MECIR. In his words: "No-one's going to give you a job flying twins and most of the flying up north is VFR. You need to go out and scare yourself a couple of times, get some hours under your belt and then come back and see me - then you'll really appreciate what an instrument rating is for!"

Many of his students have 800+ hours before they tackle their MECIR, which is about when they're looking to step up to twins.

I will say I've seen a few pilots up here with IR's who never use them and let them lapse - that's just the reality.
Virtually There is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 10:58
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 58
Posts: 1,096
Received 64 Likes on 33 Posts
No right or wrong answer.

Centaurus, I'm going to disagree with you for the only time in my life. I promise.

I own a Flying School, we do a lot of Instrument Ratings. Firstly I don't believe for one minute that any Flying School would have a policy for pushing Students into a twin for an Instrument Rating for commercial gain. If so, market forces would have driven them out of this tough market. The margins are probably identical to that of a single engine aircraft. There is no Financial gain in doing it. The 50 percent reduction in twin hours for a saving of probably less than $2000, against the additional assymetric exposure, the more confident entrance to the flight test, the probable safety benefit, the cost of retraining and retesting in event of a fail, the fact that you may be thrown into the deep end on your first job and be potentially drawing on every bit of twin exposure you can recall, etc etc etc. Every pilot has to make their own decision. Its probably an additional 2% of the cost of your pilot training. Work an extra 3 weeks. Save. Make it work. Like I say to my kids. "Just because its my opinion, doesn't mean its the correct opinion"

Centaurus, I sincerely promise I will never have a differing view to you again.
glenb is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 11:04
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 58
Posts: 1,096
Received 64 Likes on 33 Posts
and

I hear the argument "the instructor is just trying to get his twin hours up", for doing it all in a twin. Well if my Instructor steps up and gets a good rep as a twin ifr instructor and gets lots of requests and more requests lead to more twin hours, and he throws himself into his well motivated students, well that's even more value for my $2000, in my opinion.
glenb is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 12:06
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The flying school that I wanted to do my CIR at, doesn't have any IFR rated singles - and I think that occasionally flying twins (and not doing asymmetrics all the time etc) is a good way to get yourself killed.
outlandishoutlanding is offline  
Old 31st May 2016, 23:09
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Sydney, AU
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you all the advice! Looks like it's not a black-and-white decision - I think the best for me now to shop around the schools and potential employers to see what can I achieve (as a reality check), and that would make easier to decide. (VFR job first or MECIR).
DaVeAU is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2016, 10:07
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: @5' all day
Age: 55
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Judd
You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers
I think making a blanket statement that your not a professional pilot unless you have an instrument rating is having a narrow view of commercial operations.
I and many of my colleagues are either not current or don't have Instrument Ratings but all have been forging successful careers in our chosen fields of Aerial Agriculture and Aerial Firefighting. We all consider ourselves professional pilots.
An instrument rating, white shirt and some gold bars doesn't automatically make you a professional.
OZ-G10 is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2016, 12:25
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,186
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
"No-one's going to give you a job flying twins and most of the flying up north is VFR. You need to go out and scare yourself a couple of times, get some hours under your belt and then come back and see me - then you'll really appreciate what an instrument rating is for!"
"You need to go out and scare yourself a few times" If you are talking about running short of fuel or getting lost (temporarily uncertain of your position in the never-never), then that is bound to happen sooner or later to most VFR only CPL's as they gain experience.

But if you are alluding to a VFR CPL inadvertently penetrating IMC whether low cloud and/or blinding rain necessitating going on to instruments, then it's a bit late to be thinking about getting an instrument rating.
Centaurus is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2016, 00:38
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,186
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Centaurus, I'm going to disagree with you for the only time in my life. I promise.
Glenb. I fully agree with all the points made in your 31 May post. I must say I have been out of the general aviation instructing game for many years and that inevitably leads to failure to keep up with current thinking when it comes to offering "advice" in response to some Pprune readers queries. We are all the product of our original training and things were different in my days. Please feel free to disagree with my comments as much as you like. Nothing as refreshing as diversity of professional opinion.
Centaurus is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2016, 07:23
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They weren't my words, of course, but I believe he was alluding to those times you may encounter poor visibility or inclement weather that starts to close in on you, or blocks/diverts you for many miles. As a low-hour VFR pilot, it can be testing and unnerving. But I'd posit most such pilots who get themselves in trouble do so through sheer inexperience, as opposed to being cavalier.
Virtually There is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2016, 13:06
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,186
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
But I'd posit most such pilots who get themselves in trouble do so through sheer inexperience, as opposed to being cavalier.
There is no doubt about it. You are right. During my own flying training on Wirraways at Uranquinty NSW I got lost on my first solo cross-country flight of two hours. Heavy rain storms en route and the more I flew around them the worse was my map reading. Saw a railway line and followed it at 200 feet hoping it would lead me to a railway station with a name on its platform.

It did and the name was Harden and it wasn't on my map. Sod's Law said the name on my map was wrong. Turned out the name had been changed but not on the map we had been given. I don't know how but I finally got back to base just as a flare path was being laid out for my late arrival.

Reported to the CFI straight away and told him about flying down the railway line at 200 feet to get a pin-point. All was forgiven (we should not have been sent out in view of poor weather). However the CFI told me I would have been scrubbed if I had not admitted to low flying as he already had a report from some character on the ground who reported my low flying.
Centaurus is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.