Is a 337 a twin?
 

Guys, conflicting reports... 1 guy says a 337 isn't a "twin" as such as it's centreline thrust and can't be logged as a "twin" as such, also because it's not asymetric and the other says that it is a twin because it's multi-engine, therefore it goes in the multi-engine column... If it isn't a twin, then why do you need to be endorsed on it... if that makes sense?

Squarker

It is a multi engine aeroplane.

Reference: CAO 40.1.0

??????????????????

I've never flown one, but my understanding is that it requires an endorsement because it doesn't fall into the "Single Engine < 5700kg" group -regardless of their positioning, there are still two engines.

The centerline thrust thing comes up in regard to the need to have a multi-engine CIR or NVFR rating to fly one under the NVFR or IFR. Given the lack of asymmetric thrust issues, there is no reason you can't operate it under the IFR or NVFR on a single engine instrument rating. You do still need the type endorsement though.

Clear as mud? :cool:

If I can add that someone said that there are log-books out there with a centre-line thrust component specifically for these types... If you can use it on a Single Engine IFR, perhaps it still isn't clearly a "twin" in the true definition. Just wondering as I have many differing opinions.

It has two engines, therefore its a MULTI engined aircraft, and to be logged as such. I have a few hours in em and they are all logged as multi, as required by the CASR's. regardless of where the thrust line is. I have never been asked to disseminate between asymmetric thrust and centerline thrust aircraft when asked for my multi hours either.

it is up until one engine fails!!


heres what logic says:
logbooks have columns for 'multi engine' aircraft, and what is multi?
multi is short for multiple.
multiple means more than one!
336/7 has more than one engine, so time in it is classified multi!

assymetric/centreline consideration for "multi" only comes into it, as mentioned previously, for things like instrument ratings.

if you can only log twin time because the plane has the chance of being assymetric when you lose one, does that then strictly mean you can only log multi time when youve lost an engine and become assymetric? then what happens if your in a twin and your down to one engine, shouldnt it then be logged single? :} ;)

That's really good point there....as long as the a/c got more than 1 engines, im sure it is log as multi hours~

That having been said,
 

...and I'm not proclaiming my subscription to this opinion, but I have heard a lot of people (in particular employers) say to others, something to the effect of this:

Employer: How much twin time have you got?
Applicant: 800hrs. command.
Employer: What's it in?
Applicant: 400hrs in C336/7
Employer: Oh, ok, so you really only have 400hrs multi command then.
Whilst the fact remains that it is indeed a multi engined aircraft, there is a perception out there (as is the whole point of this thread, I suppose) that it isn't really a twin.

It may be necessary to educate people on this one a little, although with prospective employers it may be prudent to choose the words to do so carefully. :hmm:


520.

when asked "on what", I would reply, "on all of the 14 multi's I have listed on my license" and then let them trawl the log book if they want to. :}

Like Wiz: "On what? Pick a common light piston twin, chances are I've flown something in that endorsement group..." :hmm:

if employers wanted to know your experience flying conventional twins in an assymetric condition, there would be some place to log said hours.

theres no difference in flying a conventional twin to a centreline thrust twin until an engine fails.
two engines to manage, two sets of gauges to monitor...


and k3nny, logic is not necessarily the way it actually is!

I remember applying for a job years ago with a company (cant remember who it was) that specifically stated in their minimum requirements that any centreline thrust hours could not be included in the multi engine time.

Havent got it with me to confirm, but Im sure it states in my NZ CAA logbook that centreline thrust hours are not to be logged in the "multi" column. This might not apply in OZ.

I cant find anything in the rules about the logging of flight time itself, but for IFR currency requirements it is made very clear that for currency in "non-centreline thrust" multi IFR, time/approaches in centreline thrust aircraft are not acceptable.

Yeh, I've got a bit of time in the ol' mixmaster, bloody good aeroplane, too.:ok:

Let us list the facts in isolation, maybe we could all see what the deal is then, because it really depends in which context the question is asked.

The mixmaster is a multi-engined aeroplane.

You log such time in the "multi" columns in your logbook, both in Australia and in New Zealand. In this context "multi" refers both to centreline thrust and non-centreline thrust multi-engined aeroplanes.

Now, here is where it gets confusing......

Despite this time being correctly logged in the "multi" column, such time DOES NOT COUNT toward the issue of a higher licence or rating WHERE THAT QUALIFICATION REQUIRES A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF MULTI TIME. In this context "multi" means non-centreline thrust multi-engined aeroplanes only.

Thus, the minimum time required for the next qualification must have been achieved on a non-centreline thrust multi-engined aeroplane. This includes the first multi-engined conversion (in NZ, 5.0 hours in a non-centreline thrust multi-engined aeroplane), multi-engined instrument rating (no minimum hours requirement if you already have a single-engined instrumant rating, but the multi test must be conducted in a non-centreline thrust multi-engined aeroplane), and so on.

Not sure whether it is clearer now, probably not, knowing me, but there you go. Of course if I have got something wrong, I will stand corrected.

Happy flying in the 337, the safest twin I ever flew.
dh

Back to the original question...
Yes, C336/337 is logged as multi, because it has more than one engine!
Yes, some Operators will disregard time on C336/337 toward multi time when applying for a position. But it's still experience!
Yes, I have 337 time, P337H. Nice machine!

Just consider this, which column do helicopter pilots log their multi-engine in? Yes, in the multi column, even though both engines power the one rotor! No assymetric thrust there...:ok:

Start off the new year with a long post...
 

My thoughts on the original questions are:
1) My thoughts would be that you log C337 (or any other "centre line thrust multi engine a/c") time in the multi column of your logbook. Can't speak for NZ rules...
2) You need an endorsement on it because the regulator says so. (You need an endoresement on any type/class you fly. It just so happens that the class endoresement you received with your licence covers most things you fly early on - <5700 kg; piston; single.)
Further, to reiterate previous posts, the privelege of a single engine instrument rating is sufficient to fly this particular beast IFR. Convntional twins are perfectly symmetrical until something goes wrong. It has been said (and I can tend to agree) that engine failure in a C337 can be more dangerous than in a conventional twin. The only real difference I see is in the immediate reaction to the assymetric induced yaw of the a/c - and that should be more or less instinctive (but not rushed). After that its the same replanning etc.
I have heard about guys in C337's attempting takeoff with only one (the front) engine running?
What an employer asks for may seem stupid, but it is their prerogative. If you have C337 time in your multi total don't "hide" this fact. If you have an IFR-CME then you are qualified to fly "conventional" twins IFR. There is then min time on type requirements for commercial ops elsewhere (CAO Sec 82).
Happy New Year
CR.

last time i checked two engines = multi engine!!! :}

My NZCAA logbook says at the bottom of the first page....





Check you local reg's but as far as NZ is concerned it maybe an a/c with more than one engine but cannot me be logged as such :=
Now for the rotor heads..... with the above quote in mind you presumably cannot log multi time in a BK117 but what about the likes of a chinook???

My interpretation of that statement:

Time spent in centre-line thrust aeroplanes shall not count as multi-engined time, but can be logged as multiengine time!

Just a thought.:ok: