Question regarding training on modern aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question regarding training on modern aircraft
Hi All
This is my first post and have a couple of questions that I would like some advice on especially from those who have done similar. I have recently finished my ATPLs and I am currently hour building and am considering where to do my CPL/IR.
I am thinking that I would like to do it on Modern Glass Cockpit Aircraft so the Diamond Aircraft comes to mind as it seems to get good reviews. One thing that bothers me is am I right in saying that the DA42 only has two levers that control the power and pitch ie the pitch is all done automatically for you is this a disadvantage when trying to get a job ? Obviously you could do differences training on a conventional Twin.
Also speaking about Diamond Aircraft there is only a few places you can do this in the UK and I also notice on this forum that someone has mentioned Diamond Flight Academy in Kalmar my second question is it a disadvantage to do you training outside of the UK if you are looking for a job with a UK Regional Airline, would you be at a disadvantage when it came to getting a interview assuming you were lucky enough to get one ?
I also had thought about Tayside Aviation as they have a G1000 Tecnam Twin
Many thanks for you thoughts and feedback PM if you like
This is my first post and have a couple of questions that I would like some advice on especially from those who have done similar. I have recently finished my ATPLs and I am currently hour building and am considering where to do my CPL/IR.
I am thinking that I would like to do it on Modern Glass Cockpit Aircraft so the Diamond Aircraft comes to mind as it seems to get good reviews. One thing that bothers me is am I right in saying that the DA42 only has two levers that control the power and pitch ie the pitch is all done automatically for you is this a disadvantage when trying to get a job ? Obviously you could do differences training on a conventional Twin.
Also speaking about Diamond Aircraft there is only a few places you can do this in the UK and I also notice on this forum that someone has mentioned Diamond Flight Academy in Kalmar my second question is it a disadvantage to do you training outside of the UK if you are looking for a job with a UK Regional Airline, would you be at a disadvantage when it came to getting a interview assuming you were lucky enough to get one ?
I also had thought about Tayside Aviation as they have a G1000 Tecnam Twin
Many thanks for you thoughts and feedback PM if you like
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,150
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
One point that spriings to mind is that the glass cockpit in the diamond is not the same as used in larger aircraft. A nice machine, but I wouldn't worry about levers when job hunting. As many cheap hours as possible is a good bet.
de minimus non curat lex
Your light aircraft flying is simply a means to an end ~ the issue of a CPL/IR
The critical phase is the MCC/JOC course. This is where the device you choose can be important; and also how well you do on the course. The demonstration of CRM etc etc
Where in EASA land you train is mainly irrelevant. What is important is the quality and reputation of the ATO.
The critical phase is the MCC/JOC course. This is where the device you choose can be important; and also how well you do on the course. The demonstration of CRM etc etc
Where in EASA land you train is mainly irrelevant. What is important is the quality and reputation of the ATO.
de minimus non curat lex
There is a school of thought that would suggest that the Seneca is a more superior platform for the IR.
There is on doubt that the DA42 is far easier to operate compared to the PA34, and is ideal for weekend flyers with PPL/IRs.
So for those of you who are " an ace of the base " it is irrelevant what type you train on as you will simply sail through the course and test irrespective of type.
But for those very marginal people, you will succeed (just) on the DA42, but probably not on the PA34. It is not just having less levers to push and pull. You are demonstrating basic skills such as TRIMMING, and TRIMMING well. Other aspects are AIRMANSHIP and SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, not to mention CAPACITY.
So you decide to take the path of least resistance, obtain your licence with a MEP(land) endorsement and think YES, I have made it. Phew.
So the very marginal person now undertakes the MCC/JOC. Struggles and might even find it an overwhelming experience depending upon the complexity of the device. Just proving a bit too much? But MCC certificate issued.
Interview followed by a disappointing sim ride................need I say more.
The writing was probably on the wall at an early stage even before the twin engine flying started. You need a honest discussion with the training team before you spend your hard earned money in the first place.
PPL training is one thing.......proceeding to professional training is clearly a different matter.
There is on doubt that the DA42 is far easier to operate compared to the PA34, and is ideal for weekend flyers with PPL/IRs.
So for those of you who are " an ace of the base " it is irrelevant what type you train on as you will simply sail through the course and test irrespective of type.
But for those very marginal people, you will succeed (just) on the DA42, but probably not on the PA34. It is not just having less levers to push and pull. You are demonstrating basic skills such as TRIMMING, and TRIMMING well. Other aspects are AIRMANSHIP and SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, not to mention CAPACITY.
So you decide to take the path of least resistance, obtain your licence with a MEP(land) endorsement and think YES, I have made it. Phew.
So the very marginal person now undertakes the MCC/JOC. Struggles and might even find it an overwhelming experience depending upon the complexity of the device. Just proving a bit too much? But MCC certificate issued.
Interview followed by a disappointing sim ride................need I say more.
The writing was probably on the wall at an early stage even before the twin engine flying started. You need a honest discussion with the training team before you spend your hard earned money in the first place.
PPL training is one thing.......proceeding to professional training is clearly a different matter.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: England
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a long winded and unpleasant post. Why such negativity?
OP, do whatever you are most comfortable with. If you pass PPL no problem, ATPL exams no problem, why would you struggle with any other part of the ratings? Fly the most convenient aircraft which gives you the best grounding in your chosen path. Only listen to peoples OPINIONS that seem to be based on a little fact and not just pure speculation.
OP, do whatever you are most comfortable with. If you pass PPL no problem, ATPL exams no problem, why would you struggle with any other part of the ratings? Fly the most convenient aircraft which gives you the best grounding in your chosen path. Only listen to peoples OPINIONS that seem to be based on a little fact and not just pure speculation.
de minimus non curat lex
I taught on the Seneca for 8 years when British Aerospace were at Prestwick.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.
"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.
If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.
"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.
If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown both the Thielert and L360 DA42's as well as the PA34 (II, III, IV and V). The PA34 is, in my opinion, a stable instrument flying platform that prepares a student reasonably well from a handling and capacity perspective compared to hand flying a B737 or A320 type during MCC/JOC. The DA42 is light by comparison and the high aspect-ratio wing gives it fairly forgiving but 'floaty' handling characteristics in the flare that are not typical of transport type aircraft. Another point to note with the DA42 is that it is not equipped with a conventional T/C and therefore it's not possible to practice unusual attitude recoveries in the traditional sense; with greater emphasis on recognition, prevention and/or recovery from upset conditions now being mandated by the regulators, I find the absence of this basic instrument surprising in an aircraft used for initial instrument rating training. As said, the G1000 is a nice piece of kit but quite unlike the EFIS you will find in a transport type - it's as much to do with the architecture and philosophy of the system as the presentation, in my opinion.
I don't think the lack of pitch levers on the Thielert engined -42 is of any concern unless you plan to fly other piston twins with prop/mixture controls. In that sense, the power levers are more akin to the thrust levers (or throttles in old money) on the types typically used for MCC but without the spool-up and larger pitching moment.
jamesgrainge
In fact many do, as although a PPL is a great foundation if the training is good, the CPL and multi-engine IR require a different skill set, greater capacity and application. Bear in mind as well that the ability to pass theoretical knowledge exams is no indicator of practical potential and some high achieving graduates do drop out of the practical phase. I would agree with parkfell's opinion in this regard.
I don't think the lack of pitch levers on the Thielert engined -42 is of any concern unless you plan to fly other piston twins with prop/mixture controls. In that sense, the power levers are more akin to the thrust levers (or throttles in old money) on the types typically used for MCC but without the spool-up and larger pitching moment.
jamesgrainge
If you pass PPL no problem, ATPL exams no problem, why would you struggle with any other part of the ratings?
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: go west
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I taught on the Seneca for 8 years when British Aerospace were at Prestwick.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.
"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.
If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.
"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.
If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.
de minimus non curat lex
You should be developing the "skills" during the single engine flying.
Threat&Error management is also a feature of the learning process.
The process is similar to osmosis. It takes time. It cannot be rushed.
Threat&Error management is also a feature of the learning process.
The process is similar to osmosis. It takes time. It cannot be rushed.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,150
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
It's a bit like driving an old Bentley instead of a new car. You have to give some of yourself into the process. Much more satisfying.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: go west
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't get me wrong lads, but are we being sentimental here?
PPRuNe Secret Agent!
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Experience' is what's been said here Martin! - having flown with Parkfell, both him and Paco are experienced instructors/examiners, I've been out of the training system a long time but totally understand the point been made...
I'm a B757 Captain and my FO's with high skill levels have a background of 'tradition' and then there are those focused on automation...
I'm a B757 Captain and my FO's with high skill levels have a background of 'tradition' and then there are those focused on automation...
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,150
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
I would say that the Bentley (or Thorneycroft!) experience would be great for a Routemaster, but with those you operate the clutch after you change gear....
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The easiest thing I ever did was to transition to glass. It is a non event. Unfortunately, some recruiters believe only God's chosen few can make this "difficult" transition. So it all depends on who you apply to. What I will say, is it is a damn site more difficult going back to steam.
de minimus non curat lex
Jamesgrainge
You might think that my glass is 'half empty' rather than 'half full'
What I am trying to convey to junior birdmen is the reality of what it takes to succeed in the profession.
There are certain key stages which to go through, and it is important that a HOWGOESIT takes place with the training team to give you a honest assessment as to your progress, and whether you have developed a suitable learning curve to succeed within normal acceptable time scales.
First time passes might well be one indication of potential.
Completing the flying within the prescribed course minimums might be another. There are others.......
The standard 5 'O/GCSE' (including Maths,Physics,English) & 2 'A' {English system} or equivalent, as the minimum educational standard to attempt the 14 EASA exams. A high mark in Gen NAV is always a good indication that your brain is hard wired correctly.
Significant retakes/overruns might suggest that all is not well.
Far better that on completion of the PPL a sensible decision is made if appropriate. I see little point in someone struggling on, not enjoying it, and just making it by the skin of their teeth after a number of attempts of the "hoops".
The MCC/JOC phase would be a nightmare for all concerned.
You might think that my glass is 'half empty' rather than 'half full'
What I am trying to convey to junior birdmen is the reality of what it takes to succeed in the profession.
There are certain key stages which to go through, and it is important that a HOWGOESIT takes place with the training team to give you a honest assessment as to your progress, and whether you have developed a suitable learning curve to succeed within normal acceptable time scales.
First time passes might well be one indication of potential.
Completing the flying within the prescribed course minimums might be another. There are others.......
The standard 5 'O/GCSE' (including Maths,Physics,English) & 2 'A' {English system} or equivalent, as the minimum educational standard to attempt the 14 EASA exams. A high mark in Gen NAV is always a good indication that your brain is hard wired correctly.
Significant retakes/overruns might suggest that all is not well.
Far better that on completion of the PPL a sensible decision is made if appropriate. I see little point in someone struggling on, not enjoying it, and just making it by the skin of their teeth after a number of attempts of the "hoops".
The MCC/JOC phase would be a nightmare for all concerned.
Last edited by parkfell; 17th May 2016 at 09:47.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: England
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone who sets off down this path looks at it and thinks "this is an easy ride to a big salary"?
The costs alone put off the average individual, not to mention the intense study. Do you really think someone who didn't really enjoy it would even attempt a CPL/IR.
Often people struggle with examinations, the basic skills are developed in PPL stage very early. Anything that makes the art of flight easier allowing the candidate to concentrate on procedural flying surely is a good thing?
Personally it took me 4 attempts to pass my Driving test. Yet 5 years later I was achieving success driving race cars.
Forever fight for your dream, ignore the naysayers and the jaded old pilots, if you have the capacity to achieve, and the determination, you will.