CPL multi engine fleet
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Korea
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CPL multi engine fleet
My flight school is planning to buy few twin otter.
My question is after I get my private pilot licenses and to have multi engine
50 hours to get CPL, is it possible to go directly to twin otter after flying
cessna 172 ?
My question is after I get my private pilot licenses and to have multi engine
50 hours to get CPL, is it possible to go directly to twin otter after flying
cessna 172 ?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose you would need a type rating for the twotter, wouldn't you? Considering it's turbine...
edit: ... unless I understand that you wish to first do a PPL SEP on a 172, and then train in the twotter for the CPL? I suppose it could be done, but why? Seems like most students have enough with getting to grips with a Seminole or the likes of it.
edit: ... unless I understand that you wish to first do a PPL SEP on a 172, and then train in the twotter for the CPL? I suppose it could be done, but why? Seems like most students have enough with getting to grips with a Seminole or the likes of it.
Type ratings for turbine aircraft depends on the rules of the country. In the US, for instance, no type rating is required unless it's a jet or over 12,500lb MTOW. As long as the US licence authorises multi engine flight then away you go. Insurance is a different matter though.
For training there's no great reason why a student couldn't go from a C172 to a Twin Otter. In many respects it would be easier than say, a Baron or a Seneca 3. The Twin Otter has fixed gear and is relatively slow. Generally turbines are easier to operate than many piston engines. No cowl flaps, no mixture to lean & no CHTs to baby. Most critical things are torque & ITT limits but that's no worse than monitoring MaP to avoid overboosting a fixed wastegate turbocharger or managing CHT & EGT. The big catch is that it's easy to screw a turbine very expensively during starts if you're not watching things.
Although quite do-able it seems an expensive way to learn fundamental multi engine skills that can be learnt on a much cheaper piston twin.
For training there's no great reason why a student couldn't go from a C172 to a Twin Otter. In many respects it would be easier than say, a Baron or a Seneca 3. The Twin Otter has fixed gear and is relatively slow. Generally turbines are easier to operate than many piston engines. No cowl flaps, no mixture to lean & no CHTs to baby. Most critical things are torque & ITT limits but that's no worse than monitoring MaP to avoid overboosting a fixed wastegate turbocharger or managing CHT & EGT. The big catch is that it's easy to screw a turbine very expensively during starts if you're not watching things.
Although quite do-able it seems an expensive way to learn fundamental multi engine skills that can be learnt on a much cheaper piston twin.
