A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why didn't the Cessna 337 make it?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 1st 06, 07:00 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why didn't the Cessna 337 make it?

Speculation: The training market is the 800lb gorilla in GA. Almost
every certified design is going to get a lot of business from schools
and whatnot. This includes twins too, where people are always trying
to get the coveted multi-engine ratings.

Enter the Skymaster: It's a twin, which means it has the cost of a
twin (in fuel and overhaul costs and insurance, etc). Unlike most
other twins, though, when you do your multi training and checkride in
it, you have a limitation in your logbook to inline multis, right? Eg,
you can't go and fly a 310 without another checkride.

With this in mind, I would guess that most schools, upon learning about
the restrictions, passed on them because all those aspiring airline
pilots wouldn't be interested in wasting time with inline multis.

Basically, I'm guessing that safety benefits of an inline are
overshadowed by the practical usefulness of the logged time towards an
ATP (in the eyes of the schools and students, a significant market).

/conjecture

Thoughts?

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

  #2  
Old June 1st 06, 01:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why didn't the Cessna 337 make it?

Ben Hallert wrote

With this in mind, I would guess that most schools, upon learning about
the restrictions, passed on them because all those aspiring airline
pilots wouldn't be interested in wasting time with inline multis.

Basically, I'm guessing that safety benefits of an inline are
overshadowed by the practical usefulness of the logged time towards an
ATP (in the eyes of the schools and students, a significant market).


The F-4 Phantom II pilots returning from Vietnam with a centerline thrust
rating didn't seem to have a problem finding airline jobs. :-)

Bob Moore
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FORSALE: HARD TO FIND CESSNA PARTS! Enea Grande Aviation Marketplace 1 November 4th 03 12:57 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.