How common are aircraft partnerships compared to outright ownerships?

However, if you remind me of your flight instruction qualifications and how
many students you have successfully transitioned from a Warrier to a C172SP

I've successfully transitioned students into aircraft ranging from
gliders and old-fashioned ragwings to complex singles like the Mooney
and Bonanza, and even the odd twin. From where I'm sitting, he's right
and you're wrong. An hour is plenty of time to deal with issues like
fuel injection vs carb heat. It's nowhere near enough to get full
utility from a glass panel, but it's more than enough time to get the
same utility a pilot would get from a conventional panel. Someone who
is current and proficient in a Warrior should not need more than an
hour max to transition into a Skyhawk regardless of engine and
avionics.

Also, I think it's ridiculous to require recency of experience in make
and model - recency of experience makes sense for a class of airplane,
and a Warrior and Skyhawk are the same class.

Michael

Michael wrote:

Someone who
is current and proficient in a Warrior should not need more than an
hour max to transition into a Skyhawk regardless of engine and
avionics.

Let me understand you. One hour is all you need to transition a pilot
unfamiliar with an IFR certified GPS and dual-axis autopilot into an
aircraft equipped as such? Really?

If you could, what is your syllabus?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Let me understand you. One hour is all you need to
transition a pilot
unfamiliar with an IFR certified GPS and dual-axis
autopilot into an
aircraft equipped as such? Really?

Really. After all, said pilot has clearly been flying without these
things and doesn't need them. Thus I see no reason to cover the full
functionality of the devices unless he wants me to. He can read the
manual and figure it out himself, we can talk about it on the ground if
he wants to, and if he wants we can work on them - but knowing how to
use them is not a requirement for a checkout.

Would you require a VFR-only pilot to learn how to shoot an ADF
approach just because the plane he is renting is equipped to do so? Or
would showing him how to tune in a station be enough? How is it
different if he's IFR rated? Suppose he's IFR rated but not current?
Suppose he's only out of currency by only 3 months, and could shoot 6
aproaches and a hold with a safety pilot and suddenly he's legal?

Would you require training in LOP operations just because the plane was
equipped with engine analyzer and GAMI's, or would the "Lean to initial
roughness, then enrich to smoothness" be OK with you because it still
works?

Would you require training in aerobatics just because the aircraft was
capable of them? That would make a hell of a transition from a C-150
to a C-150 Aerobat.

There is a huge difference between being able to fly to the capability
of the airplane and being able to fly the plane reasonably safely.
Being able to fly to the capability of the airplane is something we
should all aspire to - but it's not realistic to require that for a
rental or club checkout.

If you could, what is your syllabus?

GPS syllabus - how to put it into direct-to mode and change range on
the map (if there is one). Takes 5 minutes max.

Autopilot syllabus - how to engage heading hold and altitude, how to
disengage, where the circuit breaker is to disable it. Takes 5 minutes
max.

Sure, there's a lot more functionality there - but the pilot doesn't
need it, so no point requiring him to learn it.

Michael

In article .com,
Michael wrote:

Also, I think it's ridiculous to require recency of experience in make
and model - recency of experience makes sense for a class of airplane,
and a Warrior and Skyhawk are the same class.

I think the insurances companies have the rules on recency of
experience set to tightly, but I think there is some merit on having
recency of experience requirements, even in the same class of
aircraft.

I fly out of West Valley Flying Club (http://www.wvfc.org), which
is one of the biggest (the biggest?) flying clubs. The requirement
for recency of experience is 1hr in make/model in the last 90 days
for sub-200hp fixed gear planes. A more powerful plane counts for
a less powerful one, so an Archer counts for a Warrior, and a 172
counts for a 152. Complete matrix available he
http://www.wvfc.org/current.html

I haven't flown a 172 since 1990, so even though the transition
shouldn't take more then an hour or so, I'm by no means familiar
with the specific characteristics of a 172. Could I just hop in
a 172 and fly safely? Probably, but I'd also probably do some
minor things incorrectly based on flying Archers/Warriors for years.

For sub-200hp fixed gear planes, six months or so is probably safe,
but after that, the minor differences can start to bite.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

"John Clear" wrote in message
...

SNIP

I fly out of West Valley Flying Club (http://www.wvfc.org), which
is one of the biggest (the biggest?) flying clubs. The requirement
for recency of experience is 1hr in make/model in the last 90 days
for sub-200hp fixed gear planes. A more powerful plane counts for
a less powerful one, so an Archer counts for a Warrior, and a 172
counts for a 152. Complete matrix available he
http://www.wvfc.org/current.html

SNIP

John,

That's a terriffic website and WVFC looks like a really well-run
organization.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

John Clear wrote:

In article .com,
Michael wrote:

Also, I think it's ridiculous to require recency of experience in make
and model - recency of experience makes sense for a class of airplane,
and a Warrior and Skyhawk are the same class.


I think the insurances companies have the rules on recency of
experience set to tightly, but I think there is some merit on having
recency of experience requirements, even in the same class of
aircraft.

I fly out of West Valley Flying Club (http://www.wvfc.org), which
is one of the biggest (the biggest?) flying clubs. The requirement
for recency of experience is 1hr in make/model in the last 90 days
for sub-200hp fixed gear planes. A more powerful plane counts for
a less powerful one, so an Archer counts for a Warrior, and a 172
counts for a 152. Complete matrix available he
http://www.wvfc.org/current.html

I haven't flown a 172 since 1990, so even though the transition
shouldn't take more then an hour or so, I'm by no means familiar
with the specific characteristics of a 172. Could I just hop in
a 172 and fly safely? Probably, but I'd also probably do some
minor things incorrectly based on flying Archers/Warriors for years.

For sub-200hp fixed gear planes, six months or so is probably safe,
but after that, the minor differences can start to bite.

John

wow, THAT's a fleet! How many members?

On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 22:44:58 +0000 (UTC),
(John Clear) wrote:

I fly out of West Valley Flying Club (http://www.wvfc.org), which
is one of the biggest (the biggest?) flying clubs.

Wow, those are some high rates for 70's-80's 172's.
The club is $600 year, so if you fly 100 hours a year ( a lot for most
pilots who don't own their own) that adds $6/HR to your $90/HR rate.
My clubs 172's of that vintage are $70/HR wet, just raised from $67.
Yes, we have no-sub insurance. At 50 hours per year you're paying
$102/HR for an older 172. Our Piper Dakota 235HP of that era runs
right at $100/hr. We are in North San Diego County. I can rent
1999-2000 172 SP's at the KCRQ FBO for $99/HR, course then you need
your own insurance.

Peter R. wrote:

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.

Pull out the carb heat below the green arc. Push it in aboove the green
arc. There. You're checked out.

Newps wrote:

Peter R. wrote:

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.

Pull out the carb heat below the green arc. Push it in aboove the green
arc. There. You're checked out.

Thanks. If it is really that easy, then why are there so many NTSB
accident reports that list carb icing as a contributory cause?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:

Peter R. wrote:

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage
if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.

Pull out the carb heat below the green arc. Push it in aboove the green
arc. There. You're checked out.

Thanks. If it is really that easy, then why are there so many NTSB
accident reports that list carb icing as a contributory cause?


Because there are a lot of folks out there who forget. Many of these are
those that switch between injected and carbureted engines. No amount of
check ride is going to make you remember. That is why we have checklists and
the checklists are different for each aircraft. It's no different that those
that have non mechanical failure gear up landings.