Ratings for Single Engine
 

Any person with a SEP valid can fly any SE airplane?
I mean, if a PPL, or a CPL wants to fly a Cessna Caravan, or a Cessna 182, don´t need any special rating?

Thanks

NO, You can only fly a Single Engine "PISTON" aeroplane which is not type rated. The Caravan is a Turbine Class aeroplane and fits into the Cessna SET Class.

In addition to the SEP/SET difference, there's also the difference between land and water/amphibious. Anything that can float and fly requires an additional rating.

And in the pedantic mode: a PPL(A) with a SEP class rating is only valid on fixed wing aircraft. For rotary (helicopters) you need a PPL(H).

Wouldn't want Whirly or Whirls to feel left out of the discussion...

.....and f:mad: ! :p:p

And as Whopity skirted around - you cannot fly the piston Malibu (PA46?), as it's type rated.

So - nothing that floats (intenetionally), nothing with a turbine engine, nothing with rotating wings and not a Malibu but, otherwise - yeah! - you can fly anything (just about). :ok:

You say "Lisbon" - local regulation *MAY* be different if you have a non-UK CAA issued licence.

Wish they'd do that in NZ. I have to get a type rating on a 152 and a 172 and a 172 with a variable pitch prop conversion, and a 172 with manual flaps as opposed to the first one that had electric flaps ! Crazy.

The retractable / variable pitch microlight that I fly with a 100 HP Rotax is a different type to the one with fixed gear / variable pitch and a 80 HP Rotax.

All makes money for the Conspiracy Against Aviation ! :ok:

You are all making assumptions - an FAA licence and an N number on the side requires no rating. Caravans are "single engine land" in the good ole US of A.

<<edit: Sorry, opened wrong message for editing - I've not touched this one (but "edit" would show).>>

Very true, ff....and probably exactly why the Malibu requires a type rating elsewhere.

Even then, your Caravan would likely require some endorsement in complex aircraft or performance, so the answer to

is still, "No".

Many countries consider the "single engine airplane" rating to be valid on any single engine airplane which weighs less than 5,700 kg (or 12,500 lbs). The only practical variation for these countries, is the "seaplane" rating, with same weight limits.
xxx
Now, in you want to fly a "Warbird" like a P-51D Mustang, you better get a type rating for that racehorse, which is over 5,700 kg. I would not try to risk my life in one, unless properly trained and qualified.
xxx
In some countries, flying a "retractable gear" aircraft, or "constant speed propeller", or even "night" flying is considered as a "rating", as much as flying a "tailwheel" aircraft... some people love to make things difficult. Personally, I have rented airplanes I did not know, so I always asked for a chek-out in the specific aicraft type, at least to learn with a local pilot, about the area in which I was going to fly.
xxx
As far as flying "IFR" - if the aircraft is so equipped, I rather file IFR... much easier to chat with ATC than following railroads, and get lost. A Jeppesen enroute chart is more adequate (and approach chart), easier to read than using a Michelin road map despite their 1:500,000 scale in France.
xxx
And for me, IFR does not mean IMC necessarily. In a C-150, I would feel out of place in heavy rain, clouds and turbulence. I rather fly VMC and enjoy the scenery. I intend not to become a statistic at my old age. My fun flying is for sunny days and blue skies (low level along nude beaches, bikini patrol).
xxx
I own a little Piper L-21B of Korean War vintage, with O-320 motor.
Never flew it IFR, nor is it equipped. Flew it a few times at night, when late to go home. Just has one old 360-channel VHF R/T (720 not needed), a Xponder (to keep ATC happy) to cross a control or terminal area, and a CB radio for R/T in banner operations or glider towing. I do not need a VOR receiver, nor a GPS... what's all that...
And plexiglas window/door open for air conditioning. Windy in the back...?
No mike/earphones in the back, just yell your insults.
xxx
:E
Happy contrails.

In JAA States we do not have a 5700Kg limitation for licencing purposes.
The definition "airplane" does not include helicopters! Aircraft does.

Whoppity, perhaps you can explain why the PA46 requires a type rating under JAA when there are many more equally complex, equally high performance aircraft out there that do not?

I fly a Malibu myself and would not consider it to be any more difficult than any other high performance aircraft and in fact I consider the SM92 I fly to be more difficult in operation.

No, the question was about ratings. Wobbly prop and high performance are instructor endorsements.

Can I fly the wobbly prop and high perf on the basic temporary certificate or blue plastic card as issued to me when I pass an FAA Private check ride on an SEP?

Can I just walk up to one and fly it?

Nope. You require a 'turbine endorsement'. You most certainly cannot use your plain vanilla PPL to fly a Caravan.

The temporary licence which the FAA examiner issues, is exactly that. It is your licence until the permanent one arrives in the post a few weeks later and you can exercise the privileges of it straight away (if only it worked like that here!!)

The FAA requires an instructor endorsement for constant speed prop and also for high performance aircraft. Once you have those endorsements, you can jump in an aircraft with those features and fly it - if the owner and his insurance company will let you :)

For anything rotary (other than washing lines of course) you need a type rating for each type; we don't have these class rating things :( In JAA land obviously.

Cheers

Whirls

This is true in JAA land. You need a Cessna SET Class Rating as Whopity mentioned earlier.

In FAA land though you CAN (in theory) fly a Caravan on a plain vanilla PPL. Being less than 12,500 lbs it is covered by the ASEL (Airplane Single Engine Land) Class Rating. You would require a high performance endorsement which you can get from an instructor after training in any aircraft with more than 200 horse power.

The reality of course is that most insurance companies wouldn't let a PPL with no turbine time anywhere near a Caravan unless they had completed an approved course on the type.

Julian you are correct it is often the insurance companies who dictate what they want to insure you.


Pace

Draws black cross on wall - to mark where to bang head.

If the vanilla PPL has extra endorsements it's not vanilla anymore. It's now a swirl.

If you buy yourself a sodding Cessna Caravan from the profits of owning your own aviation insurance company (that naturally covers your own aircraft) you still cannot fly the bloody thing on a VANILLA flavoured SEP PPL.

It has to have endorsements, nuts, swirl, ratings - whatever you want to add - but it has to have add ons....so it's not vanilla!!

What is so difficult about the original question...

Can *ANY* person with an SEP fly *ANY* SEP aircraft.

No!!

Hola Keygrip -
xxx
I think you speak CAA or JAR regulations for your statements.
And the other guys mention FAA regulations.
So comparing oranges and apples.
xxx
I do not see a C-208 as requiring a type rating under FAA rules.
It is a "complex" airplane over 200 hp... just a proper check-out required.
Just "ASEL" as they call it - Airplane Single Engine Land... (or "Sea" if applicable).
xxx
I do not know anyone who flies a C-208.
But I have an acquaintance flying a Pilatus PC-6 Turbo Porter in Alaska.
Powered by Garrett TPE 331 "turbine" engine.
Never told me he required a type rating.
Falls under FAR 61.31 - same class as a C-208.
xxx
Could you clarify if you speak JARgon... or FAA...?
:8
Happy contrails

It's been a while since I woke up to this many kisses...:ok:

SoCal

You are correct. I was also referring to FAR 61.31, but obviously confused 'turbine' with 'turbojet'.

Well, I do understand the confusion by many...
That word "turbine" is a very bad name for explanations.
xxx
Jet engines have a turbine as powerplant... and so do turboprops.
FAA requires a type rating for flying any jet airplane.
But a turboprop is... a propeller engine (powered by a turbine, yes).
But only require a check-out as they are over 200 hp.
FAA does not say anything about type ratings for "turbine engines".
xxx
A propeller airplane (reciprocating engine or turboprop) fly about the same.
Plenty of power with a turboprop, is the only difference.
But such airplanes behave about the same.
xxx
Jets (turbojet or turbofan airplanes) behave differently from propeller planes.
Therefore, FAA considered it should be requiring a type rating.
xxx
Example of handling differences -
On a jet, reducing power does not reduce the "drag" much.
On a "turboprop", reducing power immediately brings propeller drag.
Compare also stall speeds power ON and power OFF.
Basically NO difference for jet airplanes.
Not so for propeller or turboprop airplanes.
xxx
Hope you guys all are happy now.
Happy contrails.

Sorry to backtrack a bit, but does any know if the weight limit of 12,500lbs (5700kg) is max takeoff weight or empty weight?

It's always based upon gross takeoff weight. The wrinkle comes when a PPL multi license holder, who, in Canada, can fly a Twin Otter, which is a 12,500 aircraft, flies it at it's permitted 14,500 for ferrying. Is he still legal? Oh, the complexities!

Canadian regulation:

401.26 The holder of a private pilot licence - aeroplane may act as
(a) pilot-in-command or co-pilot of an aeroplane of a class and type in respect of which the licence is endorsed with ratings;

So, if you have the rating, go fly whatever you are rated for.

With a higher performance, complex endorsement and high altitude performance endorsement (all instructor sign offs)....then yes you can.

Without, then you are limited to non complex, non high performance and non high altitude. Easy...

(under the FARs)....

And even if they were _allowed to_, I strongly doubt that they actually _can_ ;)

Surely the answer is YES! the Caravan referred to is SET not SEP! The original question said SE

Another little known fact is that although a STANDALONE FAA licence entitles you to fly 'N' reg things which if they were on the 'G' reg would require a type rating (ie. FAA ASEL Class Rating covers you you fly a Caravan etc) this is NOT so with the 61.75 'foreign based' or piggyback licences.

A foreign based FAA PPL will appear to include ASEL and AMEL class ratings, but in fact it DOESN'T! It is simply giving you entitlement to your foreign licence privileges in an 'N' reg aircraft - it's NOT giving you new privileges that you don't already have.

So anyone one burning around in an 'N' reg Caravan, Malibu or King Air on a 'piggyback' FAA licence who doesn't have a type rating for that aircraft on their foreign licence, is doing so illegally.

See below . . .

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...2W%2008-08.pdf

I'm intrigued by the 200hp "high performance" defiition.Does this go on rated power or actual?
(i.e. a Lycoming 0-360 is rated at 200hp,but will only develop about 170[for example] if fitted with a course fixed pitch prop.however the same engine in an experimental,slightly breathed on {ported and balanced with high comp pistons,electronic ignition and a good exhaust system } with a constant speed prop can produce 220-230 h.p.).

The FAA define a 'high performance airplane' as being in one "an airplane with an engine of MORE than 200 horsepower".

Worth noting the 'MORE' because a 200bhp Piper Arrow is not a high performance aircraft because it does not have MORE than 200 hp.

So far as I am aware, I don't think the FAA defines how that 200 hp is to be measured.

Makes for an interesting question as well. If someone is flying a high performance aircraft on a 61.75 certificate do they need an FAA HP endorsement?

It is a VERY interesting question, and one which I sought to answer a few years ago before I had a standalone FAA licence.

Here's the scenario - I had a 61.75 'foreign based' licence and wanted to fly an 'N' reg 300hp Cessna 206 whilst on holiday out in the States.

The SEP (land) Class Rating on my UK licence covered this (and I had hundreds of hours in a Cessna 206 anyway), but did the ASEL on my 'piggyback' FAA licence?

I could find nothing in the FAR / AIM which clarified this, so I went to the local FSDO and asked them. They said that the 61.75 licence gave me exactly the privileges of my UK licence - so I should be ok.

The flight school who hired me the aircraft though, thought that to be on the safe side, they would give me a high performance endorsement as part of my pre rental check flight.

These days I have a stand alone FAA licence so things are now much clearer.

That was my understanding as well. What made me think though was when I converted to a full FAA certificate the DPE I talked to originally said that I would need HP for my own aircraft despite being a JAA Instructor as well as differences training etc which I can already give. It all seemed a bit odd.

That's because when you fly an 'N' reg aircraft on your 61.75 foreign based certificate, you are effectively exercising the privileges of your foreign licence, albeit that the 61.75 certificate enables you to do so on an 'N' registered aeroplane.

Once you have a stand alone FAA licence, you will then be exercising the privileges of THAT licence, so whatever JAA qualifications you may have, become irrelevant.