Ameriflight - Page 7

GregCollins2 · January 9th, 2004, 16:07

We've got a couple freight dog's that hang out at our school during their layover. Both of them started flying at the same time I did and both paid to be SIC's with Central Air Southwest to build multi time and both wound up being hired by the company. (Neither was ever a CFI). They both now have several thousand hours of 135 multi time flying Aero Commanders. Is their time worthless because thay paid to get the job? It's hard to believe that how they got flight time during their first 1200 hours will have any bearing on their future opportunities now that they have flown almost 2000 hours single pilot 135 for the company (as paid employees). As far as logging time, I know that they did go through 135 Line training and check flights and that they flew VFR legs. Central has some kind of a training authority from the FAA to allow for the SIC under IFR in an otherwise single pilot operation.
I'm a 39 year old full time CFI/CFII/MEI with over a thousand hours dual given and I have to admit I envy the amount of real world experience these guys have. Kind of makes me wish I'd paid to fly at their company so I could get a job with them!
One other thought while I'm getting myself in trouble. If you are pushing 40 and can afford to pay for hundreds of hours of flight, chances are you have already proven that you can be employed succesfully.
Okay, now let me have it.

Phatty · January 9th, 2004, 16:28

[ QUOTE ]
We've got a couple freight dog's that hang out at our school during their layover. Both of them started flying at the same time I did and both paid to be SIC's with Central Air Southwest to build multi time and both wound up being hired by the company. (Neither was ever a CFI). They both now have several thousand hours of 135 multi time flying Aero Commanders. Is their time worthless because thay paid to get the job? It's hard to believe that how they got flight time during their first 1200 hours will have any bearing on their future opportunities now that they have flown almost 2000 hours single pilot 135 for the company (as paid employees). As far as logging time, I know that they did go through 135 Line training and check flights and that they flew VFR legs. Central has some kind of a training authority from the FAA to allow for the SIC under IFR in an otherwise single pilot operation.
I'm a 39 year old full time CFI/CFII/MEI with over a thousand hours dual given and I have to admit I envy the amount of real world experience these guys have. Kind of makes me wish I'd paid to fly at their company so I could get a job with them!
One other thought while I'm getting myself in trouble. If you are pushing 40 and can afford to pay for hundreds of hours of flight, chances are you have already proven that you can be employed succesfully.
Okay, now let me have it.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I decided to PFT (oops!) it was because of stories like this and similar advice fom CFI's, check airmen, and two 777 captains. There was never any mention of it being a dirty way of gaining experience. I guess different people have had different experiences...

EatSleepFly · January 9th, 2004, 17:34

You know what everyone? We should quit wasting our time. Nothing anyone says, regardless of their experience level, seems to be making them think twice, so screw it. They'll put down their money, they'll pretend their employed pilots, and then they'll get the boot out into the "real" world where their whopping 700 hrs. will get them planted right into the right seat of a 172 somewhere...

...And then we can all say, in unison: "I TOLD YOU SO!"

EatSleepFly · January 9th, 2004, 17:37

[ QUOTE ]
The "not meeting the 135 minimums" is hogwash. the S.I.C. has no minimums.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, its not hogwash. Most of these aircraft are single-pilot aircraft, therefore, no SIC is required, and no SIC time can be logged.

Eagle · January 9th, 2004, 19:43

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The "not meeting the 135 minimums" is hogwash. the S.I.C. has no minimums.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, its not hogwash. Most of these aircraft are single-pilot aircraft, therefore, no SIC is required, and no SIC time can be logged.

[/ QUOTE ]

not all pilot jobs are PIC, some are SIC, which means you do not need to meet the requirements of 135.245.

Unless it is your contention that having the flight time is all it takes. (eg: you have 1200hrs tt therefore you are ready to fly as PIC)

There is no time requirement for SIC slots under part 135.

Phatty or anyone else could get hired with 500hrs tt all in a cessna 140, to fly rt seat in a king-air or lear or even a G-V.

I stand my my previous statment:Hogwash.

EatSleepFly · January 9th, 2004, 19:53

I realize that, Eagle. I think we're misunderstanding each other.

If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing?

Mr_Creepy · January 9th, 2004, 20:02

Eagle: Like the new avatar. Stay away from my cat

Doug and other "pros": I am with you in complete frustration! Why do people consider throwing money away on worthless programs like Amerijet and Gulfstream (yes I said them in the same breath) but will not spend less money and get a CFI?

Anyone who has CFI'd will tell you it made them a better pilot. Still, there are people who think "I don't need to be a CFI to be a good pilot."

I shudder to think what kind of pilot I would have been without ALL the training I have given in the past 17 years.

But don't worry Doug, some people have a history of ignoring good advice....

FL270 · January 9th, 2004, 20:04

[ QUOTE ]
If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing?

[/ QUOTE ]They don't. At least not legally. End of story.

As to Eagle's statement ... the point is not that a person would be technically unemployable after this program, just that they would be PRACTICALLY unemployable. Sure, a 500-hour pilot (assuming commercial/MEL/inst) could be hired and given appropriate training to be the SIC in a G-V under Part 135 (or Part 91 even more easily). However, that is EXTREMELY unlikely to happen, especially in the current environment where a relatively large number of pilots with greater experience are available and far more palatable to the insurance folks.

FL270

Mr_Creepy · January 9th, 2004, 20:24

Let's talk about this SIC thing. There is a great misunderstanding here. Take for example, the Beech 1900. It is single pilot certified! Yet no one denies the validity of operating it with two pilots.

Believe it or not there is no effect of how an aircraft is certified for SIC operations. By default, ALL 135 operations require two pilots. But almost as a rule, all operators get the single pilot exclusion based on the use of a working autopilot that meets the requirements.

You know what this means? If you put an old C-172 on charter, you HAVE to fly it with two pilots unless you can get a non-autopilot exemption.

So anyone can operate 135 in any aircraft with two pilots, and as long as the right seat pilot took a check ride to the 8410 specifications (and a few other qualifications,) they can log it as SIC. This is irregardless of the presence of the autopilot by the way.

We have a C-182 on our charter certificate here at Air Orlando Charter. It is perfectly legal for us to put two (qualified) pilots in that plane with a passenger in the back, and have them both log it, one as PIC and one as SIC.

jonnyb · January 9th, 2004, 20:42

The horse is dead folks. If they don't listen, who cares. I can't stand it when I give people advice (that they asked for), then I tell them what they don't want to hear and they want a debate! Phatty and Another Wife, posted above is advice from who "you" want to be! Think about that and do what you want. Honestly, no offense, but most of us could care less what you do or how it turns out. We're just trying to help and you obviously don't want to hear it. That's fine, but if that's the case, DONT ASK again cause nobody will have any interest in helping.

RPM · January 9th, 2004, 20:56

Well, we certainly gave them an earful about the company and its procedures (159 posts) , but still nobody has answered the original question of advice for training for 1st 135 op.

sounds like they already had their mind made up anyway before we got a hold of em.

ananoman · January 9th, 2004, 20:59

[ QUOTE ]
Let's talk about this SIC thing. There is a great misunderstanding here. Take for example, the Beech 1900. It is single pilot certified! Yet no one denies the validity of operating it with two pilots. Believe it or not there is no effect of how an aircraft is certified for SIC operations. By default, ALL 135 operations require two pilots. But almost as a rule, all operators get the single pilot exclusion based on the use of a working autopilot that meets the requirements.

You know what this means? If you put an old C-172 on charter, you HAVE to fly it with two pilots unless you can get a non-autopilot exemption.

So anyone can operate 135 in any aircraft with two pilots, and as long as the right seat pilot took a check ride to the 8410 specifications (and a few other qualifications,) they can log it as SIC. This is irregardless of the presence of the autopilot by the way.

We have a C-182 on our charter certificate here at Air Orlando Charter. It is perfectly legal for us to put two (qualified) pilots in that plane with a passenger in the back, and have them both log it, one as PIC and one as SIC.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was always my understanding. You need either one pilot and an autopilot, or two pilots. It is similar to the 'single pilot' light jets out there. Some of the Citations are certified single pilot, and are identical to other models that require two pilots, except they have different 'paperwork' and are certified differently. If the autopilot on one of the single pilot jets quits working then you need 2 pilots to fly the plane. The funny thing is, even if you are 'single pilot certified' you must also have some other kind of training (I think annually) inorder to fly your jet with another crew member.

It is a loop hole, but really no different than logging time as a safety pilot. And as others have said, Ameriflight really is not PFT. They don't need you there. Most of you guys would not bitch about someone going to ATP or Ari-Ben Aviator to log multi-time. All they do is put 2 pilots in a Seminole or a Dutchess and have one person under the hood, and the other log safety pilot time. For about the same money, you could go to Ameriflight and log turbine time.

That being said, I do not think this should be the sole basis of someone building time. You do learn alot about being a pilot as a CFI. I really believe that it will help you later in your career. For many this is the first time that they are really the PIC. If you just get your ratings then go to Ameriflight, you will be upgraded to Captain someday. You will be put in a position where you are responsible for all aspects of the flight. You will be responsible for teaching your less experienced FO how things are done. You will be in this positon, and will have very little actual PIC time besides the 100 or so hours you flew solo when getting your ratings. I do not think this is a good idea.

MikeD · January 9th, 2004, 21:10

[ QUOTE ]
[That was always my understanding. You need either one pilot and an autopilot, or two pilots. It is similar to the 'single pilot' light jets out there. Some of the Citations are certified single pilot, and are identical to other models that require two pilots, except they have different 'paperwork' and are certified differently. If the autopilot on one of the single pilot jets quits working then you need 2 pilots to fly the plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

No autopilot=second human pilot? For what possible reason?

That's one of the dumber rules I've seen out there......

Doug Taylor · January 9th, 2004, 21:15

We didn't have an autopilot in the beech 1900, and half of the time, the guy not flying was dozing off.

The 1900 is a single-pilot aircraft if you take the single-pilot checkride which my company did not allow so my type says "BE 1900 - Second In Command Required".

I_Money · January 9th, 2004, 22:40

[b]I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP

It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path!

Hmmmm - I am confused!!!

Doug Taylor · January 9th, 2004, 22:43

Iain Holmes, come on down! You're the next contestant on the "Statement is Right"!

Vyse · January 10th, 2004, 03:29

For some people,

You can tell them it's fire.
You can show them that it's hot.
You can show them somthing burning in the fire.
You can tell them about the people who have burned themselves.

But inevitably, some people will still have to stick their hands into the flame before they believe you.

just my $0.02.

Eagle · January 10th, 2004, 05:09

[ QUOTE ]
If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know nor really care. but in a Merlin (metroliner whatever) if it is Single Pilot it may fall under 135.105

[ QUOTE ]
135.105 Exception to Second in Command Requirement: Approval for Use of Autopilot System

A commuter air carrier certificate holder may have an aircraft approved with an autopilot system and no second in command if the autopilot system is capable of operating the controls to maintain flight and to maneuver the aircraft about three axes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Auto pilot on, No SIC autopilot off Need SIC.

TheWife · January 10th, 2004, 08:15

[ QUOTE ]
I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP

It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path!

Hmmmm - I am confused!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, let's see, "who's in Sanford" example one, my question was regarding Sanford and the area. The thread turned into people treating me like the world's biggest idiot for being interested in DCA when we politely stated repeatedly that we already had plane tickets and we were going to check it and FSI out. Then we were attacked for not wanting to share all of our financial information with you and told we shouldn't have come here asking questions if we didn't want the answers. And yet, our finances and opinions of DCA had not a thing to do with the living environment in Sanford. Same thing happened here. I am confused as to why you guys won't either answer the question that was asked or else stay off the topic because every chance you get you jump in with the anti-pft thing. You have to understand that some times, certain decisions have already been made but some one is seeking greater knowledge, or insight, into PART of the situation, not the situation itself. So when you come jumping in with guns blazing to unknowing people who aren't familiar with the anger this topic stirs, you must not be surprised when the naive information seeker gets defensive. You guys get defensive when some one speaks up pro-pft so why isn't it fair for someone to get defensive when some one speaks up anti-pft? And don't tell me it's becuase you are right and they are wrong. Opinions can't be wrong. So instead of getting so frustrated and worked up over it, why don't you just laugh to yourself and say "there goes another sucker that will never get hired, less competition for me, good ridence" ???

Mr_Creepy · January 10th, 2004, 08:16

Eagle, good post. Our FSDO has told us, however, that even with the autopilot on that two qualified pilots will be able to log PIC and SIC. I'm not sure you were disagreeing with that or not.

Agreed that if no autopilot is installed, then SIC is normally required (without a special FAA exemption.)

AnotherWife · January 10th, 2004, 09:39

[ QUOTE ]
Well, we certainly gave them an earful about the company and its procedures (159 posts) , but still nobody has answered the original question of advice for training for 1st 135 op.

sounds like they already had their mind made up anyway before we got a hold of em.

[/ QUOTE ] You're right on both accounts. Phatty already had his mind made up about flying with Ameriflight, and almost no one seems to understand this thread began with an actual NON-PFT question being asked. And you accuse us of not listening. Geez.

Why do you guys get your panties all in a wad when someone doesn't fall lockstep behind your unsolicited advice? I really view it as your problem.

We promised to update everyone with Phatty's Ameriflight experience, and we will. He's scheduled to begin training at the FlightSafety facility in Burbank, CA on February 2nd. (Yes, they do actual training and have to pass actual checkrides -- imagine that.)

Now I'd better go get some coffee because I know I'm being a bit cranky with you all. . . .

Sprint100 · January 10th, 2004, 09:47

[ QUOTE ]
I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP

It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path!

Hmmmm - I am confused!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

If anyone comes asking for advice, that is not a free pass for you or anyone else to become their "life guidance leader" all of a sudden. The advice you or anyone else gives is just that....ADVICE.
I understand the majority of the boards take on PFT or PFE or whatever. If someone wants to try it and you say not to, does that have any bearing on what you're doing? I can't stand how people get so aggravated on a message board just because someone doesn't agree with you.
If they want to justify their position and that position is different than yours, do as I say. I just politely reply back....like I said before, "blah-blah-blah".

AnotherWife · January 10th, 2004, 09:48

[ QUOTE ]
It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path!

Hmmmm - I am confused!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
Ian, go look at the original question:
[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to be flying with this company (PFT) in a Metroliner III. I'm a low hour pilot trying to build time and would appreciate comments/suggestions concerning this company or training for your first part 135.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see where in here he asked a question and ignored the answer (no one answered it) or where he was asking for justification or reassurance that this was a good path. In fact, the question began " I'm going to be flying with this company. . . "

jonnyb · January 10th, 2004, 09:50

Unsolicited? What? I'm sorry but I think you're an idiot.

Please don't share his experience because I'm pretty sure most (not all) of us don't care. I know reading this seems like I'm "all worked up", but I'm not. I just can't stand to read this crap anymore, so I'll move on to another topic.

stuckingfk · January 10th, 2004, 09:56

[ QUOTE ]
Unsolicited? What? I'm sorry but I think you're an idiot. Please don't share his experience because I'm pretty sure most (not all) of us don't care. I know reading this seems like I'm "all worked up", but I'm not. I just can't stand to read this crap anymore, so I'll move on to another topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what you mean jonnyb. If someone came on here and on their very first post said they were going to Gulfstream, they would get more than an earful. And that definitely woulnd't be unsolicitied.

January 9th, 2004, 16:07	#151
GregCollins2 Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Hendersonville, NC Posts: 284	Re: Ameriflight We've got a couple freight dog's that hang out at our school during their layover. Both of them started flying at the same time I did and both paid to be SIC's with Central Air Southwest to build multi time and both wound up being hired by the company. (Neither was ever a CFI). They both now have several thousand hours of 135 multi time flying Aero Commanders. Is their time worthless because thay paid to get the job? It's hard to believe that how they got flight time during their first 1200 hours will have any bearing on their future opportunities now that they have flown almost 2000 hours single pilot 135 for the company (as paid employees). As far as logging time, I know that they did go through 135 Line training and check flights and that they flew VFR legs. Central has some kind of a training authority from the FAA to allow for the SIC under IFR in an otherwise single pilot operation. I'm a 39 year old full time CFI/CFII/MEI with over a thousand hours dual given and I have to admit I envy the amount of real world experience these guys have. Kind of makes me wish I'd paid to fly at their company so I could get a job with them! One other thought while I'm getting myself in trouble. If you are pushing 40 and can afford to pay for hundreds of hours of flight, chances are you have already proven that you can be employed succesfully. Okay, now let me have it.

January 9th, 2004, 16:28	#152
Phatty Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Evergreen, CO Posts: 37	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] We've got a couple freight dog's that hang out at our school during their layover. Both of them started flying at the same time I did and both paid to be SIC's with Central Air Southwest to build multi time and both wound up being hired by the company. (Neither was ever a CFI). They both now have several thousand hours of 135 multi time flying Aero Commanders. Is their time worthless because thay paid to get the job? It's hard to believe that how they got flight time during their first 1200 hours will have any bearing on their future opportunities now that they have flown almost 2000 hours single pilot 135 for the company (as paid employees). As far as logging time, I know that they did go through 135 Line training and check flights and that they flew VFR legs. Central has some kind of a training authority from the FAA to allow for the SIC under IFR in an otherwise single pilot operation. I'm a 39 year old full time CFI/CFII/MEI with over a thousand hours dual given and I have to admit I envy the amount of real world experience these guys have. Kind of makes me wish I'd paid to fly at their company so I could get a job with them! One other thought while I'm getting myself in trouble. If you are pushing 40 and can afford to pay for hundreds of hours of flight, chances are you have already proven that you can be employed succesfully. Okay, now let me have it. [/ QUOTE ] When I decided to PFT (oops!) it was because of stories like this and similar advice fom CFI's, check airmen, and two 777 captains. There was never any mention of it being a dirty way of gaining experience. I guess different people have had different experiences...

January 9th, 2004, 17:34	#153
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: Ameriflight You know what everyone? We should quit wasting our time. Nothing anyone says, regardless of their experience level, seems to be making them think twice, so screw it. They'll put down their money, they'll pretend their employed pilots, and then they'll get the boot out into the "real" world where their whopping 700 hrs. will get them planted right into the right seat of a 172 somewhere... ...And then we can all say, in unison: "I TOLD YOU SO!"

January 9th, 2004, 17:37	#154
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] The "not meeting the 135 minimums" is hogwash. the S.I.C. has no minimums. [/ QUOTE ] No, its not hogwash. Most of these aircraft are single-pilot aircraft, therefore, no SIC is required, and no SIC time can be logged.

January 9th, 2004, 19:43	#155
Eagle Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Posts: 1,272	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The "not meeting the 135 minimums" is hogwash. the S.I.C. has no minimums. [/ QUOTE ] No, its not hogwash. Most of these aircraft are single-pilot aircraft, therefore, no SIC is required, and no SIC time can be logged. [/ QUOTE ] not all pilot jobs are PIC, some are SIC, which means you do not need to meet the requirements of 135.245. Unless it is your contention that having the flight time is all it takes. (eg: you have 1200hrs tt therefore you are ready to fly as PIC) There is no time requirement for SIC slots under part 135. Phatty or anyone else could get hired with 500hrs tt all in a cessna 140, to fly rt seat in a king-air or lear or even a G-V. I stand my my previous statment:Hogwash.

January 9th, 2004, 19:53	#156
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: Ameriflight I realize that, Eagle. I think we're misunderstanding each other. If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing?

January 9th, 2004, 20:02	#157
Mr_Creepy Old Skool Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the O-zone Posts: 5,807	Re: Ameriflight Eagle: Like the new avatar. Stay away from my cat Doug and other "pros": I am with you in complete frustration! Why do people consider throwing money away on worthless programs like Amerijet and Gulfstream (yes I said them in the same breath) but will not spend less money and get a CFI? Anyone who has CFI'd will tell you it made them a better pilot. Still, there are people who think "I don't need to be a CFI to be a good pilot." I shudder to think what kind of pilot I would have been without ALL the training I have given in the past 17 years. But don't worry Doug, some people have a history of ignoring good advice....

January 9th, 2004, 20:04	#158
FL270 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 1,101	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing? [/ QUOTE ]They don't. At least not legally. End of story. As to Eagle's statement ... the point is not that a person would be technically unemployable after this program, just that they would be PRACTICALLY unemployable. Sure, a 500-hour pilot (assuming commercial/MEL/inst) could be hired and given appropriate training to be the SIC in a G-V under Part 135 (or Part 91 even more easily). However, that is EXTREMELY unlikely to happen, especially in the current environment where a relatively large number of pilots with greater experience are available and far more palatable to the insurance folks. FL270

January 9th, 2004, 20:24	#159
Mr_Creepy Old Skool Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the O-zone Posts: 5,807	Re: Ameriflight Let's talk about this SIC thing. There is a great misunderstanding here. Take for example, the Beech 1900. It is single pilot certified! Yet no one denies the validity of operating it with two pilots. Believe it or not there is no effect of how an aircraft is certified for SIC operations. By default, ALL 135 operations require two pilots. But almost as a rule, all operators get the single pilot exclusion based on the use of a working autopilot that meets the requirements. You know what this means? If you put an old C-172 on charter, you HAVE to fly it with two pilots unless you can get a non-autopilot exemption. So anyone can operate 135 in any aircraft with two pilots, and as long as the right seat pilot took a check ride to the 8410 specifications (and a few other qualifications,) they can log it as SIC. This is irregardless of the presence of the autopilot by the way. We have a C-182 on our charter certificate here at Air Orlando Charter. It is perfectly legal for us to put two (qualified) pilots in that plane with a passenger in the back, and have them both log it, one as PIC and one as SIC.

January 9th, 2004, 20:42	#160
jonnyb Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: So. California Posts: 1,304	Re: Ameriflight The horse is dead folks. If they don't listen, who cares. I can't stand it when I give people advice (that they asked for), then I tell them what they don't want to hear and they want a debate! Phatty and Another Wife, posted above is advice from who "you" want to be! Think about that and do what you want. Honestly, no offense, but most of us could care less what you do or how it turns out. We're just trying to help and you obviously don't want to hear it. That's fine, but if that's the case, DONT ASK again cause nobody will have any interest in helping.

January 9th, 2004, 20:56	#161
RPM Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: LAX Posts: 658	Re: Ameriflight Well, we certainly gave them an earful about the company and its procedures (159 posts) , but still nobody has answered the original question of advice for training for 1st 135 op. sounds like they already had their mind made up anyway before we got a hold of em.

January 9th, 2004, 20:59	#162
ananoman Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 916	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] Let's talk about this SIC thing. There is a great misunderstanding here. Take for example, the Beech 1900. It is single pilot certified! Yet no one denies the validity of operating it with two pilots. Believe it or not there is no effect of how an aircraft is certified for SIC operations. By default, ALL 135 operations require two pilots. But almost as a rule, all operators get the single pilot exclusion based on the use of a working autopilot that meets the requirements. You know what this means? If you put an old C-172 on charter, you HAVE to fly it with two pilots unless you can get a non-autopilot exemption. So anyone can operate 135 in any aircraft with two pilots, and as long as the right seat pilot took a check ride to the 8410 specifications (and a few other qualifications,) they can log it as SIC. This is irregardless of the presence of the autopilot by the way. We have a C-182 on our charter certificate here at Air Orlando Charter. It is perfectly legal for us to put two (qualified) pilots in that plane with a passenger in the back, and have them both log it, one as PIC and one as SIC. [/ QUOTE ] That was always my understanding. You need either one pilot and an autopilot, or two pilots. It is similar to the 'single pilot' light jets out there. Some of the Citations are certified single pilot, and are identical to other models that require two pilots, except they have different 'paperwork' and are certified differently. If the autopilot on one of the single pilot jets quits working then you need 2 pilots to fly the plane. The funny thing is, even if you are 'single pilot certified' you must also have some other kind of training (I think annually) inorder to fly your jet with another crew member. It is a loop hole, but really no different than logging time as a safety pilot. And as others have said, Ameriflight really is not PFT. They don't need you there. Most of you guys would not bitch about someone going to ATP or Ari-Ben Aviator to log multi-time. All they do is put 2 pilots in a Seminole or a Dutchess and have one person under the hood, and the other log safety pilot time. For about the same money, you could go to Ameriflight and log turbine time. That being said, I do not think this should be the sole basis of someone building time. You do learn alot about being a pilot as a CFI. I really believe that it will help you later in your career. For many this is the first time that they are really the PIC. If you just get your ratings then go to Ameriflight, you will be upgraded to Captain someday. You will be put in a position where you are responsible for all aspects of the flight. You will be responsible for teaching your less experienced FO how things are done. You will be in this positon, and will have very little actual PIC time besides the 100 or so hours you flew solo when getting your ratings. I do not think this is a good idea.

January 9th, 2004, 21:10	#163
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] [That was always my understanding. You need either one pilot and an autopilot, or two pilots. It is similar to the 'single pilot' light jets out there. Some of the Citations are certified single pilot, and are identical to other models that require two pilots, except they have different 'paperwork' and are certified differently. If the autopilot on one of the single pilot jets quits working then you need 2 pilots to fly the plane. [/ QUOTE ] No autopilot=second human pilot? For what possible reason? That's one of the dumber rules I've seen out there......

January 9th, 2004, 21:15	#164
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,240 Blog Entries: 1	Re: Ameriflight We didn't have an autopilot in the beech 1900, and half of the time, the guy not flying was dozing off. The 1900 is a single-pilot aircraft if you take the single-pilot checkride which my company did not allow so my type says "BE 1900 - Second In Command Required".

January 9th, 2004, 22:40	#165
I_Money Moderator Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Socal Posts: 5,650	Re: Ameriflight [b]I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path! Hmmmm - I am confused!!!

January 9th, 2004, 22:43	#166
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,240 Blog Entries: 1	Re: Ameriflight Iain Holmes, come on down! You're the next contestant on the "Statement is Right"!

January 10th, 2004, 03:29	#167
Vyse Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Northern California Posts: 238	Re: Ameriflight For some people, You can tell them it's fire. You can show them that it's hot. You can show them somthing burning in the fire. You can tell them about the people who have burned themselves. But inevitably, some people will still have to stick their hands into the flame before they believe you. just my $0.02.

January 10th, 2004, 05:09	#168
Eagle Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Posts: 1,272	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] If an aircraft is single-pilot certified, then there IS no SIC. If there is no SIC, then how do they log this PFE thing? [/ QUOTE ] I don't know nor really care. but in a Merlin (metroliner whatever) if it is Single Pilot it may fall under 135.105 [ QUOTE ] 135.105 Exception to Second in Command Requirement: Approval for Use of Autopilot System A commuter air carrier certificate holder may have an aircraft approved with an autopilot system and no second in command if the autopilot system is capable of operating the controls to maintain flight and to maneuver the aircraft about three axes. [/ QUOTE ] Auto pilot on, No SIC autopilot off Need SIC.

January 10th, 2004, 08:15	#169
TheWife Old Skool Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Utah Posts: 4,180	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path! Hmmmm - I am confused!!! [/ QUOTE ] Well, let's see, "who's in Sanford" example one, my question was regarding Sanford and the area. The thread turned into people treating me like the world's biggest idiot for being interested in DCA when we politely stated repeatedly that we already had plane tickets and we were going to check it and FSI out. Then we were attacked for not wanting to share all of our financial information with you and told we shouldn't have come here asking questions if we didn't want the answers. And yet, our finances and opinions of DCA had not a thing to do with the living environment in Sanford. Same thing happened here. I am confused as to why you guys won't either answer the question that was asked or else stay off the topic because every chance you get you jump in with the anti-pft thing. You have to understand that some times, certain decisions have already been made but some one is seeking greater knowledge, or insight, into PART of the situation, not the situation itself. So when you come jumping in with guns blazing to unknowing people who aren't familiar with the anger this topic stirs, you must not be surprised when the naive information seeker gets defensive. You guys get defensive when some one speaks up pro-pft so why isn't it fair for someone to get defensive when some one speaks up anti-pft? And don't tell me it's becuase you are right and they are wrong. Opinions can't be wrong. So instead of getting so frustrated and worked up over it, why don't you just laugh to yourself and say "there goes another sucker that will never get hired, less competition for me, good ridence" ???

January 10th, 2004, 08:16	#170
Mr_Creepy Old Skool Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the O-zone Posts: 5,807	Re: Ameriflight Eagle, good post. Our FSDO has told us, however, that even with the autopilot on that two qualified pilots will be able to log PIC and SIC. I'm not sure you were disagreeing with that or not. Agreed that if no autopilot is installed, then SIC is normally required (without a special FAA exemption.)

January 10th, 2004, 09:39	#171
AnotherWife Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Evergreen, Colorado Posts: 121	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] Well, we certainly gave them an earful about the company and its procedures (159 posts) , but still nobody has answered the original question of advice for training for 1st 135 op. sounds like they already had their mind made up anyway before we got a hold of em. [/ QUOTE ] You're right on both accounts. Phatty already had his mind made up about flying with Ameriflight, and almost no one seems to understand this thread began with an actual NON-PFT question being asked. And you accuse us of not listening. Geez. Why do you guys get your panties all in a wad when someone doesn't fall lockstep behind your unsolicited advice? I really view it as your problem. We promised to update everyone with Phatty's Ameriflight experience, and we will. He's scheduled to begin training at the FlightSafety facility in Burbank, CA on February 2nd. (Yes, they do actual training and have to pass actual checkrides -- imagine that.) Now I'd better go get some coffee because I know I'm being a bit cranky with you all. . . .

January 10th, 2004, 09:47	#172
Sprint100 Old Skool Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, CA Posts: 5,939	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] I am chiming in for my 0.02USD or 0.03AUD or 0.01GBP It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path! Hmmmm - I am confused!!! [/ QUOTE ] If anyone comes asking for advice, that is not a free pass for you or anyone else to become their "life guidance leader" all of a sudden. The advice you or anyone else gives is just that....ADVICE. I understand the majority of the boards take on PFT or PFE or whatever. If someone wants to try it and you say not to, does that have any bearing on what you're doing? I can't stand how people get so aggravated on a message board just because someone doesn't agree with you. If they want to justify their position and that position is different than yours, do as I say. I just politely reply back....like I said before, "blah-blah-blah".

January 10th, 2004, 09:48	#173
AnotherWife Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Evergreen, Colorado Posts: 121	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] It seems that many people come to an information based website, ask a question ignore the answer, justify what they are doing, and want reassurance that it is a good path! Hmmmm - I am confused!!! [/ QUOTE ] Ian, go look at the original question: [ QUOTE ] I'm going to be flying with this company (PFT) in a Metroliner III. I'm a low hour pilot trying to build time and would appreciate comments/suggestions concerning this company or training for your first part 135. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see where in here he asked a question and ignored the answer (no one answered it) or where he was asking for justification or reassurance that this was a good path. In fact, the question began " I'm going to be flying with this company. . . "

January 10th, 2004, 09:50	#174
jonnyb Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: So. California Posts: 1,304	Re: Ameriflight Unsolicited? What? I'm sorry but I think you're an idiot. Please don't share his experience because I'm pretty sure most (not all) of us don't care. I know reading this seems like I'm "all worked up", but I'm not. I just can't stand to read this crap anymore, so I'll move on to another topic.

January 10th, 2004, 09:56	#175
stuckingfk Old Skool Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: El Forko Grande Posts: 2,575	Re: Ameriflight [ QUOTE ] Unsolicited? What? I'm sorry but I think you're an idiot. Please don't share his experience because I'm pretty sure most (not all) of us don't care. I know reading this seems like I'm "all worked up", but I'm not. I just can't stand to read this crap anymore, so I'll move on to another topic. [/ QUOTE ] I know what you mean jonnyb. If someone came on here and on their very first post said they were going to Gulfstream, they would get more than an earful. And that definitely woulnd't be unsolicitied.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode