Different Twins For Ir
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different Twins For Ir
HI all
midway through my last module for the ATPL subjects and been looking at various FTO's for the IR. i understand there's pretty long waiting lists at some places so i wanted to get a head start with regards choosing a school.
is there any advantage/disadvantage in doing the IR in a Twinstar(glass) as opposed to a Seneca(dials)?
also are there any differences in doing it in a Duchess as opposed to a Seneca or are the two a/c similar in handling?(bearing in mind i've never flown a twin).
i am over cautious regarding these aspects as i expect the jump from Warrior to twins+IR is going to be huge to say the least.
any advise from anyone whos had the opportunity to fly any or all of these a/c would be helpful.
thanx
gb
midway through my last module for the ATPL subjects and been looking at various FTO's for the IR. i understand there's pretty long waiting lists at some places so i wanted to get a head start with regards choosing a school.
is there any advantage/disadvantage in doing the IR in a Twinstar(glass) as opposed to a Seneca(dials)?
also are there any differences in doing it in a Duchess as opposed to a Seneca or are the two a/c similar in handling?(bearing in mind i've never flown a twin).
i am over cautious regarding these aspects as i expect the jump from Warrior to twins+IR is going to be huge to say the least.
any advise from anyone whos had the opportunity to fly any or all of these a/c would be helpful.
thanx
gb
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 38
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You won't develope a scan in a DA42. You wont develope situational awareness in a DA42. You will be more geared towards a glass cockpit enviornment in the DA42.
IMO The DA42 makes life alot easier, 1 lever, big map, use of autopilot etc etc..you could teach monkeys to fly it. No doubt people will disagree with me but thats their opinion. I feel safer training on conventional tools and have the opinion its easier to convert from clock n dials to glass than it is going from glass to clock n dial.
Its a tick in the box while laying the foundation for your future flying career. It depends what your aspirations are after training completion.
I'm just a skeptic!
IMO The DA42 makes life alot easier, 1 lever, big map, use of autopilot etc etc..you could teach monkeys to fly it. No doubt people will disagree with me but thats their opinion. I feel safer training on conventional tools and have the opinion its easier to convert from clock n dials to glass than it is going from glass to clock n dial.
Its a tick in the box while laying the foundation for your future flying career. It depends what your aspirations are after training completion.
I'm just a skeptic!
Educated Hillbilly
The dutchess is alot easier to fly than a seneca, it will make your initial course easier; but in the long run a seneca will be better for developing your twin engine handling skills.
Supercharged PPRuNer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Doon the watter, a million miles from the sandpit.
Posts: 1,183
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditto to that. I've only flown the Duchess, but made my decision based on advice from people who have instructed on both.
Everyone's different, but I found the Duchess a fairly easy transition from a complex single (Sierra). It's very very easy to land, and stalling is a non-event.
I'm sure the DA42 would make life much easier for the IR, what with a single lever, glass cockpit, a/p etc, but as has already been said, you'll be laying the foundations for your future career. If your first airline assessment is in a clockwork-dial sim, I suspect you'd find it harder coming from a DA42 than a Duchess or Seneca.
Everyone's different, but I found the Duchess a fairly easy transition from a complex single (Sierra). It's very very easy to land, and stalling is a non-event.
I'm sure the DA42 would make life much easier for the IR, what with a single lever, glass cockpit, a/p etc, but as has already been said, you'll be laying the foundations for your future career. If your first airline assessment is in a clockwork-dial sim, I suspect you'd find it harder coming from a DA42 than a Duchess or Seneca.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: the priory
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"You wont develope situational awareness in a DA42"
the IR test in the DA 42 is done using raw data, just like in a spam can. no difference whatsoever. the auto-pilot is demonstrated on the test for a short period of time during the cruise, to make sure you can actually use one! but thats all. he wont let you fly the ILS with it!
The scan is different on the Garmin 1000. At first i actually found it harder to maintain altitude accurately than i did on the steam gauges i'd used before. (A needle on a big round gauge needs less interpretation than a moving tape on a screen - even when theres an altitude bug) That said, once you get the feel of it, its nice...
Other differences -
DA42 is less stable directionally and in pitch than a senaca or duchess and needs lots of attention on the rudder in turns. But, you have a nice big attitude indicator, so you'll be fine..
but, the main thing with the plane is that it has proper engines (ie not lycomings or similar!!) you wouldn’t expect have to think about over boosting in your turbo diesel car - so why on earth would you want to do it when flying a go around in bad weather??) No nasty fixed waste-gate turbo on the twinstar. When you drive your car, you dont worry about the cylinder temperature too much, because its water cooled and thats the way it should be! so, no cowl flaps to fiddle with - because you'd rather be flying the plane. what i'm getting at is that the the main advantage of the plane over the older twins is the engine management (or lack of). the actual 'pilot ****' is no different to any other little plane...
the ADF in the DA 42 is a becker one and is not one of the machines strong points at all. The king ones typically found on conventional instrument panels are more accurate and much nicer to use in my experience..
Change is coming - there'll be no choice soon. the fleet of senacas used for ir training in the uk is actually not that large and FTOs still using them will have no choice but to replace them within the next two or three years because pprune wannabes wont want to fly them...
enjoy your training and good luck
the IR test in the DA 42 is done using raw data, just like in a spam can. no difference whatsoever. the auto-pilot is demonstrated on the test for a short period of time during the cruise, to make sure you can actually use one! but thats all. he wont let you fly the ILS with it!
The scan is different on the Garmin 1000. At first i actually found it harder to maintain altitude accurately than i did on the steam gauges i'd used before. (A needle on a big round gauge needs less interpretation than a moving tape on a screen - even when theres an altitude bug) That said, once you get the feel of it, its nice...
Other differences -
DA42 is less stable directionally and in pitch than a senaca or duchess and needs lots of attention on the rudder in turns. But, you have a nice big attitude indicator, so you'll be fine..
but, the main thing with the plane is that it has proper engines (ie not lycomings or similar!!) you wouldn’t expect have to think about over boosting in your turbo diesel car - so why on earth would you want to do it when flying a go around in bad weather??) No nasty fixed waste-gate turbo on the twinstar. When you drive your car, you dont worry about the cylinder temperature too much, because its water cooled and thats the way it should be! so, no cowl flaps to fiddle with - because you'd rather be flying the plane. what i'm getting at is that the the main advantage of the plane over the older twins is the engine management (or lack of). the actual 'pilot ****' is no different to any other little plane...
the ADF in the DA 42 is a becker one and is not one of the machines strong points at all. The king ones typically found on conventional instrument panels are more accurate and much nicer to use in my experience..
Change is coming - there'll be no choice soon. the fleet of senacas used for ir training in the uk is actually not that large and FTOs still using them will have no choice but to replace them within the next two or three years because pprune wannabes wont want to fly them...
enjoy your training and good luck
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CAA examiners report a significantly higher first time and first series pass rate on the DA42 compared to the Seneca.
Surely that's a matter for the MEP rating, not the IR which is meant to be about your instrument flying and IF procedures etc.
Surely that's a matter for the MEP rating, not the IR which is meant to be about your instrument flying and IF procedures etc.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi again
wow what a rapid response. thanks to all who posted. loads of interesting points to consider.
i suppose that once qualified cp/ir/mcc,the prospective employer wont frown on me having done the IR in an "easier a/c" then; seeing as the DA 42 is an approved a/c and all?
gb
wow what a rapid response. thanks to all who posted. loads of interesting points to consider.
i suppose that once qualified cp/ir/mcc,the prospective employer wont frown on me having done the IR in an "easier a/c" then; seeing as the DA 42 is an approved a/c and all?
gb
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2007
Location: the priory
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i bloody hope not!!!!!!!!!!!!
no, seriously, its not a problem. there are already quite a few of them at several different schools and as i said before, the total size of the UK IR training fleet isnt that large really....
also, the licence and ratings within it are no different to what you get from training on any other aircraft (depite what you may hear from some people) you just need to do a couple of hours of differences training if you want to fly an older twin..
no, seriously, its not a problem. there are already quite a few of them at several different schools and as i said before, the total size of the UK IR training fleet isnt that large really....
also, the licence and ratings within it are no different to what you get from training on any other aircraft (depite what you may hear from some people) you just need to do a couple of hours of differences training if you want to fly an older twin..
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wbryce says: "You won't develope a scan in a DA42. You wont develope situational awareness in a DA42" Complete Tosh! I repeat, complete tosh!
Dont listen to him, the DA42 is a fine bird to fly and I thoroughly enjoyed flying it. If I hadn't developed a scan and situational awareness how would I now be flying turboprops for a reputable airline?
Dont listen to him, the DA42 is a fine bird to fly and I thoroughly enjoyed flying it. If I hadn't developed a scan and situational awareness how would I now be flying turboprops for a reputable airline?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless you're going straight onto an airbus or a boeing, I am not sure how advantageous glass cockpit will be to you....anything smaller or less modern you will have a tough time on.
Duchess is a very easy aircraft to fly - less heavy than a Seneca and trailing link gear makes it land nicely even if you cant! Seneca is heavier - especially the underpowered Seneca 1 and a more of a pig single engine.
I can see the sense of a "less painful" ride in the DA42, and if it means that you're more likely to pass first time than thats a ££ saving. However, I also find it hard to believe that you will not be rigorously worked out (if not more so) in a modern a/c with all the hi tech avionics than you would in an old steamer.
Duchess is a very easy aircraft to fly - less heavy than a Seneca and trailing link gear makes it land nicely even if you cant! Seneca is heavier - especially the underpowered Seneca 1 and a more of a pig single engine.
I can see the sense of a "less painful" ride in the DA42, and if it means that you're more likely to pass first time than thats a ££ saving. However, I also find it hard to believe that you will not be rigorously worked out (if not more so) in a modern a/c with all the hi tech avionics than you would in an old steamer.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Bryce, I'm sorry....but
'You won't develop a scan in the DA42'
Well if you don't you will never pass your IR, actually you will never make it to test day! Fair enough a lot more information is 'centrally' available; but you must develop a scan to interpret it quickly. The DA42 is no different than any aircraft in any IF environment. If you scan breaks down, then what your trying to achieve will inevitably fall apart until you fix it.
'You won't develop situational awareness is a DA42'
Complete and utter twaddle. Do you understand what situational awareness is? It doesn't matter what you fly, situational awareness can be lost. It relates to the pilot, the machine and the environmet which they are flying. If anything the DA42 should AID you situational awareness (And that is even with the Garmin 1000 moving map switched off!)
'You will be more geared towards a glass cockpit environment with the DA42'
Correct me if I am wrong, however the majority of people training towards the IR test are hoping that their next jump is onto a commercial aircraft. EFIS, or glass cockpits, have been around since the early to mid eighties! I can hardly think of many commercial turboprops or jets that have steam driven gauges these days? There are a few, but you are unlikely to be flying them. But then again, as you say, it depends what you want to do with your flying career.
The DA42 makes life easier...
Yeah it probably does, but that's called progress. The 737NG makes life easier compared to the 737-300. The 737-300 was easier to operate than the -200. Its about time the GA world followed the same pattern.
As for your...'you can teach monkeys to fly it' comment. Well, I resent that. You could teach monkeys to fly anything matie, whether they fly it 'well' or not is a different matter all together!
I've met too many folk that sneer at the DA42 and believe that they are better pilots because they did their IR on some 25 year old clapped out twin with analogue diles. Many aren't! Do you think your future employers give a monkeys uncle what you did your IR in? Its your flying ability that counts, amongst other things!
Well if you don't you will never pass your IR, actually you will never make it to test day! Fair enough a lot more information is 'centrally' available; but you must develop a scan to interpret it quickly. The DA42 is no different than any aircraft in any IF environment. If you scan breaks down, then what your trying to achieve will inevitably fall apart until you fix it.
'You won't develop situational awareness is a DA42'
Complete and utter twaddle. Do you understand what situational awareness is? It doesn't matter what you fly, situational awareness can be lost. It relates to the pilot, the machine and the environmet which they are flying. If anything the DA42 should AID you situational awareness (And that is even with the Garmin 1000 moving map switched off!)
'You will be more geared towards a glass cockpit environment with the DA42'
Correct me if I am wrong, however the majority of people training towards the IR test are hoping that their next jump is onto a commercial aircraft. EFIS, or glass cockpits, have been around since the early to mid eighties! I can hardly think of many commercial turboprops or jets that have steam driven gauges these days? There are a few, but you are unlikely to be flying them. But then again, as you say, it depends what you want to do with your flying career.
The DA42 makes life easier...
Yeah it probably does, but that's called progress. The 737NG makes life easier compared to the 737-300. The 737-300 was easier to operate than the -200. Its about time the GA world followed the same pattern.
As for your...'you can teach monkeys to fly it' comment. Well, I resent that. You could teach monkeys to fly anything matie, whether they fly it 'well' or not is a different matter all together!
I've met too many folk that sneer at the DA42 and believe that they are better pilots because they did their IR on some 25 year old clapped out twin with analogue diles. Many aren't! Do you think your future employers give a monkeys uncle what you did your IR in? Its your flying ability that counts, amongst other things!
Supercharged PPRuNer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Doon the watter, a million miles from the sandpit.
Posts: 1,183
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think there's any argument that a Twinstar is more technologically advanced than a Duchess or Seneca. Or that most people taking an IR aspire to flying glass cockpit jets. And I'm sure you're right, most airlines couldn't care less what aircraft you used for the IR.
I don't need convincing that my own IRT would have been easier in a DA42 than a Duchess (and not going to Cardiff would have been nice as well).
The point remains however, that if you get invited to an airline sim assessment, there's a good chance it will be a sim with clockwork dials. I still suspect that someone with a DA42 background would find the experience tougher than someone who trained in a classic type. It's horses for courses.
I was going to mention Twinstar reliability as well, then I remembered how much of the newness has worn off the Duchess fleet . . .
I don't need convincing that my own IRT would have been easier in a DA42 than a Duchess (and not going to Cardiff would have been nice as well).
The point remains however, that if you get invited to an airline sim assessment, there's a good chance it will be a sim with clockwork dials. I still suspect that someone with a DA42 background would find the experience tougher than someone who trained in a classic type. It's horses for courses.
I was going to mention Twinstar reliability as well, then I remembered how much of the newness has worn off the Duchess fleet . . .
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 38
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CK, We're both on opposite sides of the fence for once!
People who generally disagree with this opinion is present and past students on the DA42, its no big deal, Its the same arguement modular vs integrated, you will not get a definite answer other than opinions from people using either system. My decisions alleviates my concerns which will be different from yours, so my choices and opinions are best suited to me. My post history will show at one point I was strongly considering the DA42 for my training, my past discussions with highly experienced individuals from proon as well from FTOs, instructors and club room chat, thats what I base my decision on (I was nearly booked with Egnatia (thank god) then took a strong interest with Stapleford, I don't want easy for the IR. Train hard, fight easy as a wise instructor used to say alot.
I fully understand what situational awareness is, my point being that someone training in a clock n dial system developes this skill in their head more while on the '42 the SA is given to you on a map, i'm not saying you wont develope SA, what im saying is you wont develope it as much as you would in a steam driven MEP, hence why its easier and why more people are passing on the 42, its that simple, less stressful, less work, less things to go wrong.
Dont' get me wrong, DA42, fantastic aircraft with attractive operating costs to FTOs but not the best tool for me or for IR training. IMO, P.S. people that disagree with me, speak complete tosh or twaddle too!
People who generally disagree with this opinion is present and past students on the DA42, its no big deal, Its the same arguement modular vs integrated, you will not get a definite answer other than opinions from people using either system. My decisions alleviates my concerns which will be different from yours, so my choices and opinions are best suited to me. My post history will show at one point I was strongly considering the DA42 for my training, my past discussions with highly experienced individuals from proon as well from FTOs, instructors and club room chat, thats what I base my decision on (I was nearly booked with Egnatia (thank god) then took a strong interest with Stapleford, I don't want easy for the IR. Train hard, fight easy as a wise instructor used to say alot.
I fully understand what situational awareness is, my point being that someone training in a clock n dial system developes this skill in their head more while on the '42 the SA is given to you on a map, i'm not saying you wont develope SA, what im saying is you wont develope it as much as you would in a steam driven MEP, hence why its easier and why more people are passing on the 42, its that simple, less stressful, less work, less things to go wrong.
Dont' get me wrong, DA42, fantastic aircraft with attractive operating costs to FTOs but not the best tool for me or for IR training. IMO, P.S. people that disagree with me, speak complete tosh or twaddle too!
Last edited by wbryce; 21st Nov 2007 at 12:12.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: springfield
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W Bryce. The simple fact is both have pros and cons. Also, as has already been said, very few people will have trained on both so no one can say which is "best". However I find it quite ironic that someone with such a public profile would be offering advice before they had undertaken any training or skills test on either type...
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 38
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hoody, yes i agree, I aint stipulating which way is best, my arguement can go down as a con.
I start my CPL/IR in a few weeks, my choice of provider, type of ac and location has been thoroughly researched which is constructive to this arguement, ironic or not.
I was in 2 minds at one point on whether to train on a DA42, I choose not too and I'm posting my reasons why. Its upto the users reading to decide which best suits them.
I start my CPL/IR in a few weeks, my choice of provider, type of ac and location has been thoroughly researched which is constructive to this arguement, ironic or not.
I was in 2 minds at one point on whether to train on a DA42, I choose not too and I'm posting my reasons why. Its upto the users reading to decide which best suits them.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did my IR on a seneca, found it very unstable in pitch and pretty gastly when asymetric. My examiner even commented that he hated seneca's, much preferred the duchess which he said was a great little machine. However, if you can fly a seneca well then you should find any other twin a dream to fly.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the senecas are much easier to fly. eavier, more force required on the column, more stable plane.
I flew the duchess too, the seneca is more comfortable to fly.
Seminole sucks! but some people like it.
I flew the duchess too, the seneca is more comfortable to fly.
Seminole sucks! but some people like it.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hampshire
Age: 53
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
a few years ago I did my twin rating on a PA24 Twin Comanche. I did my IR in Bournemouth in a Dutchess. Out of the two I agree with Finals19 much prefer the Dutchess, It's a nice a/c, easy to handle. As far as training for the IR, it depends highly on the school and the instructor. My advice would be look at the school closer than looking at the a/c, it will be easy enough to develop the skills to pass the IR - what ever the aircraft - as long as you go to a school and have an instructor that suits you, and that's the best way to save £££
Good luck
a few years ago I did my twin rating on a PA24 Twin Comanche. I did my IR in Bournemouth in a Dutchess. Out of the two I agree with Finals19 much prefer the Dutchess, It's a nice a/c, easy to handle. As far as training for the IR, it depends highly on the school and the instructor. My advice would be look at the school closer than looking at the a/c, it will be easy enough to develop the skills to pass the IR - what ever the aircraft - as long as you go to a school and have an instructor that suits you, and that's the best way to save £££
Good luck
I'm doing my ME on a Seneca and IR on a Twinstar. Best of both worlds. I learn to fly twins in the heavier, more dated Seneca, and then choose the easier route through the IR with the Twinstar. It's simple economics: FTOs want to compete on pass rate league tables to get more students, so more and more are choosing the Twinstar for IR training because it gets better results.
Moreover, from a personal point of view, in common with most wannabes, my aim is to get my fATPL as soon as possible so I can get a job flying for a living. I'll probably end up flying modern EFIS/FADEC equipped turboprops or jets and I can't really see how doing an IR in a Twinstar can be bad preparation for that?
But let's face it, the actual amount of twin flying you'll do before getting that first job is going to be so minimal that the choice of which aircraft you use for the IR is going to be less important than your basic flying skills and you can hone those better on a taildragger. IR in a Tiger Moth anyone?
Moreover, from a personal point of view, in common with most wannabes, my aim is to get my fATPL as soon as possible so I can get a job flying for a living. I'll probably end up flying modern EFIS/FADEC equipped turboprops or jets and I can't really see how doing an IR in a Twinstar can be bad preparation for that?
But let's face it, the actual amount of twin flying you'll do before getting that first job is going to be so minimal that the choice of which aircraft you use for the IR is going to be less important than your basic flying skills and you can hone those better on a taildragger. IR in a Tiger Moth anyone?