Is complex time important?

G

GregP

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
29
Display Name
Display name:
GregP
Hello folks,
I recently posted a thread on buying my own plane, whether it be a Maule or Cessna 182 for time building etc and to use for family traveling. I failed to mention that I am trying to aquire the 1.,500 hrs for my ATP so I can hopefully get on with a regional or local company that has some smaller King Air's or event Citations. Anyway, I was talking with a instructor the other day and he said they like lots of complex time. For example, a guy with 1,000 hours in a Mooney or Arrow would be more likely to get the job over someone with 1,000 hours in a Maule or Cessna 172. Any views on this or facts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
 
I seriously doubt they would choose one candidate over another because of complex time. If that was the case, how do so many CFI’s get hired into 121 after the majority of their time is giving dual instruction in basic aircraft (172, Cherokee etc.) ?

It’s a nice endorsement to have for absolute certain, but it’s not going to have any bearing on whether or not you land a job with the airlines. It’s possible that some charter or corporate gigs may like it, but again it’s doubtful. Having the necessary ratings is all that matters to get hired at a regional. Turbine time is second most important, but that’ll come later.
 
Part 121 does not care about complex time. They don't even ask.
 
Ryanb said:
I seriously doubt they would choose one candidate over another because of complex time. If that was the case, how do so many CFI’s get hired into 121 after the majority of their time is giving dual instruction in basic aircraft (172, Cherokee etc.) ?

It’s a nice endorsement to have for absolute certain, but it’s not going to have any bearing on whether or not you land a job with the airlines. It’s possible that some charter or corporate gigs may like it, but again it’s doubtful. Having the necessary ratings is all that matters to get hired at a regional. Turbine time is second most important, but that’ll come later.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I wasn't sure and it certainly sounded like something worth asking about. And what you said about giving dual time in a 172 validates your view of it as well.
 
Just get to ATP mins and be instrument proficient. They don’t care if you have 1000 hours of complex time. In fact, they’ll hire you and the guy that’s been flying jets at a 135 company no problem.
 
jordane93 said:
Just get to ATP mins and be instrument proficient. They don’t care if you have 1000 hours of complex time. In fact, they’ll hire you and the guy that’s been flying jets at a 135 company no problem.
Click to expand...
How about importance of multi time over single only?
 
Flying complex/high performance aircraft might be beneficial in training. People do wash out at Regionals all the time. I'd be curious to see the stats on that.
 
AggieMike88 said:
How about importance of multi time over single only?
Click to expand...
I've talked to numerous recruiters from the regional's and they are hurting for qualified pilots now and will be for the foreseeable future. Just like Jordan said, 1500 or fairly close by time you get to ATP-CTP and a medically qualified heartbeat (i.e. 1st Class Medical in hand). I've seen the numbers for the mandatory retirements coming up at the majors over the next 5 years and it ain't pretty. Good time to get your mins to get hired on. ;):)

Multi engine time will still count more for the corporate/135 guys than it will for the 121 airlines. Different training regime and insurance requirements between the two is why it's more important for the 91/135 operators.

I hope to catch on with one of the regional's once I'm done with my final 3 year requirement with the military (retiring after 28 years....). I'll be just over 1,500 with about 600 ME, so should be able to find something out there. :eek::)

Cheers,
Brian
 
FlyingTiger said:
Flying complex/high performance aircraft might be beneficial in training. People do wash out at Regionals all the time. I'd be curious to see the stats on that.
Click to expand...
That's why the commercial rating requires the complex time for flight training, yet a complex is not required to take the check ride
 
FlyingTiger said:
Flying complex/high performance aircraft might be beneficial in training. People do wash out at Regionals all the time. I'd be curious to see the stats on that.
Click to expand...
I’d say being instrument proficient is more important than complex time. When I got hired, the captain that was on the hiring board said, “we’re not here to show you how to shoot an ILS, we’re here to show you how to shoot an ILS in our jet.” FWIW we had guys that were former airline and 135 wash out of training and we had guys that haven’t flown anything faster than an Arrow pass with flying colors. So prior jet or turbine experience is not an automatic pass.
 
Mooney Fan said:
That's why the commercial rating requires the complex time for flight training, yet a complex is not required to take the check ride
Click to expand...
The commercial rating doesn’t require any complex time anymore.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Sounds like you're saying we need to be rock solid on the fundamentals.
Click to expand...
Yes. If you suck at flying an ILS in a 172, you’re going to really suck flying an ILS in a plane that has a ref speed faster than the redline of a 172
 
Wheels said:
The commercial rating doesn’t require any complex time anymore.
Click to expand...

A TAA is required though, and this would seem to indicate that a panel with Dual G5s, a WAAS GPS (like a GTN750) and an STEC-30 meets that requirement:

https://www.boldmethod.com/blog/art...t-training-requirement-for-commercial-pilots/

The FAA proposed to define "technically advanced airplane" in FAR 61.1 based on the common and essential components of advanced avionics systems equipped in an airplane, including a primary flight display (PFD), a multifunction flight display (MFD) and an integrated two axis autopilot. The FAA proposed that a TAA must include a PFD that is an electronic display integrating all of the following flight instruments together: An airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator, heading indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator. Additionally, the FAA proposed that an independent MFD must be installed that provides a GPS with moving map navigation system and an integrated two axis autopilot. The proposed definition of TAA would have applied to permanently-installed equipment.

 
Professional aviation is a very fickle mistress. There was a time when the only way to get hired at a regional was to have at least 3500 hours total with at least 1500 multi turbine and if you were over the age of 40 when you applied, you'd better know someone high up within the company or it wasn't going to happen for you.

Today if you've got a pulse and can differentiate a picture of an airplane from a picture of a bicycle or a mountain lion successfully 3 out of 5 times, you're in. Ok maybe it's not quite to that point yet, but it's probably closer to that than it's ever been. Which is good news if you're gonna try your hand at it. But remember pro aviation is a fickle mistress and things can turn on a dime. So if you're gonna try your hand at it, pitter patter better get at'r. Wait too long and hiring mins could change.
 
Wheels said:
The commercial rating doesn’t require any complex time anymore.
Click to expand...
You might want to look at FAR 61.129 Aeronautical Experience. You still need the (10) hours of complex flight time. The new rule is the elimination of the complex aircraft for the practical
 
Mooney Fan said:
You might want to look at FAR 61.129 Aeronautical Experience. You still need the (10) hours of complex flight time. The new rule is the elimination of the complex aircraft for the practical
Click to expand...
Maybe you should read the reg again.

61.129(a)(3)(ii) 10 hours of training in a complex airplane, a turbine-powered airplane, or a technically advanced airplane (TAA) that meets the requirements of paragraph (j) of this section, or any combination thereof. The airplane must be appropriate to land or sea for the rating sought;

There are many schools that are using a technically advanced airplane and the students are getting their commercial without ever touching a complex plane.
 
Wheels said:
Maybe you should read the reg again.

61.129(a)(3)(ii) 10 hours of training in a complex airplane, a turbine-powered airplane, or a technically advanced airplane (TAA) that meets the requirements of paragraph (j) of this section, or any combination thereof. The airplane must be appropriate to land or sea for the rating sought;
Click to expand...

My 2019 FAR 61.129 (a)(3)(ii) must have an amendment. :(
 
You should cease using whatever publisher put out a 2019 FAR with the old version of the regulation. It changed in mid-2018.
 
"Earning" a Commercial Pilot Certificate without ever touching a gear switch is a travesty and an embarrassment. Not even requiring a complex airplane for the Flight test is bizarre.

Who allows this kind of thinking within the FAA? Nevermind, that can't be answered in polite conversation.

Are we accommodating an industry that can't produce an affordable retractable airplane that lasts more than 20 years?

The trend toward $300,000+ Skyhawks with $100,000 instrument panels needs to be reversed with bare bones airplanes with low-buck panels. I'm not a Piper fanboy, but the PA-28 trainer seems like a step in the right direction...

EDIT: Get off my lawn!
 
IK04 said:
"Earning" a Commercial Pilot Certificate without ever touching a gear switch is a travesty and an embarrassment. Not even requiring a complex airplane for the Flight test is bizarre.

Who allows this kind of thinking within the FAA? Nevermind, that can't be answered in polite conversation.

Are we accommodating an industry that can't produce an affordable retractable airplane that lasts more than 20 years?

The trend toward $300,000+ Skyhawks with $100,000 instrument panels needs to be reversed with bare bones airplanes with low-buck panels. I'm not a Piper fanboy, but the PA-28 trainer seems like a step in the right direction...

EDIT: Get off my lawn!
Click to expand...
I’ve known a lot of people over the years with long and successful flying careers who have never touched a gear switch.
 
I would still consider that a switch, just with a funny shape to it.
 
I think I've touched a gear switch once, maybe twice. Most of my complex time (including all my commercial training and checkride) is in a manual gear Mooney. You gotta love a plane where the fix for a gear failure involves a doctor that specializes in shoulder injuries. ;)
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I think I've touched a gear switch once, maybe twice. Most of my complex time (including all my commercial training and checkride) is in a manual gear Mooney. You gotta love a plane where the fix for a gear failure involves a doctor that specializes in shoulder injuries. ;)
Click to expand...

Oh, man... You are right about that! I forgot my first experience with retractable gear was in a 1966 Mooney with the Johnson Bar and the pump handle flaps!
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Instrument proficiency is paramount. Regardless of what you’re flying it will not make much difference... other than its very important to have a very solid foundation of instrument skills.
Click to expand...
This is true. But I would clarify it even a bit further to say its very important to have a solid foundation in flying IFR in the system. Just saying you need good instrument skills could lead one to think they need to get all the hood time they can. But you can do hood time without talking to anyone. Filing IFR and flying in the system are just as important if not more so.
 
IK04 said:
Oh, man... You are right about that! I forgot my first experience with retractable gear was in a 1966 Mooney with the Johnson Bar and the pump handle flaps!
Click to expand...
The Navion is more akin to learning a large airplane. The gear and flaps are hydraulic and you need to turn that on (well, technically take it out of bypass) before you try the others. Much akin to the DC-9. Unlike the DC-9, you usually can't move the gear handle if you don't turn the hydraulics on. And if you do move the handle, chances are the gear is coming down anyhow. There was a DC-9 crash where they got interrupted in the approach checklist and didn't get the hydraulics turned up. They put the handle down but the gear didn't come out The FO who was flying noted that something was wrong as the plane wasn't slowing like it should. Captain essentially says "I got it" and proceeds to land gear up.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
This is true. But I would clarify it even a bit further to say its very important to have a solid foundation in flying IFR in the system. Just saying you need good instrument skills could lead one to think they need to get all the hood time they can. But you can do hood time without talking to anyone. Filing IFR and flying in the system are just as important if not more so.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the comments. That’s exactly what I was trying to say.
 
Thanks everyone, for all of these comments in regards to my question. I do believe it will be the Maule I will be getting.
 
BigBadLou said:
I've heard that they care more about retract time than complex. Or is that a myth? (genuinely asking) (NOT for a friend :D )
Click to expand...

Can't think of too many retract but not complex time building planes out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top