Multiengine Rating

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
...
FAR 135 requires that gross weight be adjusted so the SE SC
is at or higher than the MEA or the aircraft must be flown
under the single-engine IFR rules with VFR descent always
possible.

So adjusting gross weight when and engine fails means throwing the least
liked passenger out the nearest exit and so-on untill gross weight for
single engine operation is reached!!

"GDBholdings" wrote:

So adjusting gross weight when and engine fails means throwing the least
liked passenger out the nearest exit and so-on untill gross weight for
single engine operation is reached!!

Well, thank goodness that being the pilot I am a required crew member. :-)

--
Mike Flyin'8
PP-ASEL
Temecula, CA
http://flying.4alexanders.com

So adjusting gross weight when and engine fails means throwing the least
liked passenger out the nearest exit and so-on untill gross weight for
single engine operation is reached!!

So now watching "Survivor" on TV counts as pilot training?

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

It means pre-flight planning for the route and adjusting
payload or fuel so that the MEA can be maintained on one
engine.




"GDBholdings" wrote in message
news:4U9rh.677783$R63.473026@pd7urf1no...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| ...
| FAR 135 requires that gross weight be adjusted so the SE
SC
| is at or higher than the MEA or the aircraft must be
flown
| under the single-engine IFR rules with VFR descent
always
| possible.
|
| So adjusting gross weight when and engine fails means
throwing the least
| liked passenger out the nearest exit and so-on untill
gross weight for
| single engine operation is reached!!
|
|

"Jim" wrote in message
...
That's the correct phraseology. Loose an engine and you'll descend to the
single engine service ceiling (density altitude). The Aztec is 6000 ft.
Plenty of MEA's out west that are higher than that.

I seem to remember that when the prototype twin Diamond came out, the SESC
was something ridiculously low, like 1800 feet. You couldn't make it over a
tree at that altitude, even in the East!

They improved that, a great bit, for the current model! g
--
Jim in NC

Long time ago, the Champion Lancer had a single-engine best
rate of climb of 100 feet per minute down. Fixed gear,
fixed pitch props, a Citabria with a nose-wheel. But it did
have a Vmc and you could get a multiengine rating cheap.


"Morgans" wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim" wrote in message
| ...
| That's the correct phraseology. Loose an engine and
you'll descend to the
| single engine service ceiling (density altitude). The
Aztec is 6000 ft.
| Plenty of MEA's out west that are higher than that.
|
| I seem to remember that when the prototype twin Diamond
came out, the SESC
| was something ridiculously low, like 1800 feet. You
couldn't make it over a
| tree at that altitude, even in the East!
|
| They improved that, a great bit, for the current model!
g
| --
| Jim in NC
|
|

Jim Macklin wrote
Long time ago, the Champion Lancer had a single-engine best
rate of climb of 100 feet per minute down. Fixed gear,
fixed pitch props, a Citabria with a nose-wheel. But it did
have a Vmc and you could get a multiengine rating cheap.

Not quite, the Lancer was produced between '61-'63, the Citabria
did not appear until 1964. More like a Tri-Champ with two engines.

Bob Moore

Well yes, but I thought more people would know what a
Citabria was than a Tri-Champ.


"Bob Moore" wrote in message
46.128...
| Jim Macklin wrote
| Long time ago, the Champion Lancer had a single-engine
best
| rate of climb of 100 feet per minute down. Fixed gear,
| fixed pitch props, a Citabria with a nose-wheel. But it
did
| have a Vmc and you could get a multiengine rating cheap.
|
| Not quite, the Lancer was produced between '61-'63, the
Citabria
| did not appear until 1964. More like a Tri-Champ with two
engines.
|
| Bob Moore