Certified to fly more than a plane

Neil Gould wrote:


In the US, one is certified to fly planes of a particular type, for
example,

Actually, certificates are for category and class (Airplane Single
Engine Land for example). There are also type ratings but they
only apply to large/jets.

Sylvain wrote:
Mike 'Flyin'8' wrote:
There is not a 'currency' for a particular aircraft. As a pilot with
Single Engine Land rating, I can fly a Skyhawk today, and jump in the
Warrior tomorrow.

that said, with increasingly restrictive insurance requirements, this
might very well become a thing of the past,

Actually, I have seen nothing change on this. My insurance covers me
equally if I am flying my own plane or any other aircraft that I am
legally permitted to fly.

While much of the bogus additional currency rules are blamed on
insurance, most of it is stuff that the flight schools make up for
their own benefit.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
...
Sylvain wrote:
Mike 'Flyin'8' wrote:
There is not a 'currency' for a particular aircraft. As a pilot with
Single Engine Land rating, I can fly a Skyhawk today, and jump in the
Warrior tomorrow.

that said, with increasingly restrictive insurance requirements, this
might very well become a thing of the past,

Actually, I have seen nothing change on this. My insurance covers me
equally if I am flying my own plane or any other aircraft that I am
legally permitted to fly.

While much of the bogus additional currency rules are blamed on
insurance, most of it is stuff that the flight schools make up for
their own benefit.

Just renewed my policy and it went from named pilot to a very liberal open
pilot policy without me asking. Darn liberals are everywhere. :-

Dave Stadt wrote:

that said, with increasingly restrictive insurance requirements, this
might very well become a thing of the past,

While much of the bogus additional currency rules are blamed on
insurance, most of it is stuff that the flight schools make up for
their own benefit.

I have no reason to doubt what you are saying, but I cannot see
the benefit for the flight school of arbitrarily restricting the
number of people who can fly their aircraft; an aircraft that stays
on the ground does not do much good to their bottom line unless I am
missing something.

--Sylvain

"Sylvain" wrote in message
t...
Dave Stadt wrote:

that said, with increasingly restrictive insurance requirements, this
might very well become a thing of the past,

While much of the bogus additional currency rules are blamed on
insurance, most of it is stuff that the flight schools make up for
their own benefit.

I have no reason to doubt what you are saying, but I cannot see
the benefit for the flight school of arbitrarily restricting the
number of people who can fly their aircraft; an aircraft that stays
on the ground does not do much good to their bottom line unless I am
missing something.

--Sylvain

For the record I didn't say any of the above. But while I am here.....FBOs
and flight schools make all kinds of rules that make no sense. Most would
not survive in a real business environment. They seem to think rules solve
problems and from what I can tell, most of the time they have no clue and
could care less what the goofey rules might do to their business.

wrote in message
I'm sure I've come across posts from people here who seem to fly more
than one type of plane at a time,
It's not allowed in my country, and was interested in knowing whether
India alone is archaic or do similar rules exist elsewhere too?

Those rules descended from the United Kingdom. They still have similar
rules. If you are IFRcurrent in a B-737, you still have to take a checkride
to be IFR current in a C-421. Last I heard, the CAA allows only 2
type-ratings at any one time.

D.