Starting with Multi-Engine?

Alani

Alani

Pre-Flight
Joined
Mar 1, 2020
Messages
30
Location
Huntersville, NC
Display Name
Display name:
AlaniPhantom
Hello,
I'm turning 40 this year, and I have decided to pursue my passion for flying that I've put off for so many years.
I'm considering diving straight into multi-engine training. I wanted some input. I would like to fly trans atlantic in 2 - 3 years after completing my training. Any input / guidance welcome.

Thanks
 
Only input I have is that multi-training is not where I would choose to start flying. That's simply because I don't think a multi-engine plane would ever fit in with my budget or missions. I think it's a good question, I'm as curious as you are if others have done it.
 
Alani, without going into great detail, I would recommend following the standard training path which for the vast majority of pilots means starting in a single-engine airplane.
 
Having owned a twin,I would recommend you get your private in a single. Just the expense of the hours you’ll need ,in a twin can be prohibitive.
 
@Alani - please share your general location, available budget and give a specific example of your trans atlantic flight goal.

Your request is not typical and could easily be considered a troll post. If you are serious, sharing answers to questions asked will help ensure you get serious responses.

I'm sure someone out there has done it...but very rare. I have heard a few stories of younger people, usually with very active flying parents, who get their PPL and then on the same day hop in a few different planes...including a twin and getting them all on the same day.
 
The only negative to starting with multi-engine is cost provided you intend on flying multis initially and only will add on a single rating for grins sometime in the future. Many an Air Force pilot never flew a single engine airplane, but then the taxpayer was making the payment for the training cost.
 
Trolly but I’ll play...

I would have to imagine insurance would be a big issue.
 
This is the day for strange first posts. Must be the corona-thingy. :eek:

Why limit your aspiration to a piston multi-engine? Why not just head straight to flying a Boeing? I'm sure there's any number of full motions simulators available to get you started. :rolleyes:

Seriously, if you really want to become a proficient pilot, go find yourself an instructor with an underpowered, high wing, single-engine taildragger. You will look back and be happy you did.
 
This has been done. It's atypical, and the results aren't usually very good. But it's been done. I'm not a fan, obviously.
 
When I was studying for the instructor rating we learned about the "Seven Learning Factors." As an instructor I found these to be true and valuable.

  1. READINESS - Ensure students are mentally, physically and emotionally ready to learn.
  2. PRIMACY - Present new knowledge or skills correctly the first time. (Teach it right the first time.)
  3. RELATIONSHIP - Present lessons in the logical sequence of known to unknown, simple to complex, easy to difficult.
  4. EXERCISE - Ensure students are engaged in meaningful activity.
  5. INTENSITY - Use dramatic, realistic or unexpected things, as they are long remembered.
  6. EFFECT - Ensure students gain a feeling of satisfaction from having taken part in a lesson.
  7. RECENCY - Summarize and practice the important points at the end of each lesson, as last things learned and practiced will be remembered longest.
Look at that #3. Relationship. Simple to complex, easy to difficult. Starting in a multi is a really good way to get behind right off the bat. The multi is far more complex (retracts, constant-speed, more engines to manage), is faster (you get behind the airplane real quick) and stalls/spins are out. It's just a good way to waste money, get discouraged, and quit. #2, Primacy, will be difficult since there's so much coming at you all at once you can't absorb much of it, and the whole initial experience could be quite negative.

People don't take their first driving lessons at 75 MPH on a bumper-to-bumper freeway. Or in an Indy race car.
 
Last edited:
Sinistar said:
@Alani - please share your general location, available budget and give a specific example of your trans atlantic flight goal.

Your request is not typical and could easily be considered a troll post. If you are serious, sharing answers to questions asked will help ensure you get serious responses.

I'm sure someone out there has done it...but very rare. I have heard a few stories of younger people, usually with very active flying parents, who get their PPL and then on the same day hop in a few different planes...including a twin and getting them all on the same day.
Click to expand...
It's definitely not a troll post. I've kept up with this forum for a long time without registering as a member because I wasn't ready to contribute much. However (and candidly speaking) I'm at a phase now where I've done the motorcycle and cars thing (I still do bikes, cars not so much anymore) and ready to enter the next phase.
I know it's a major commitment, but it's been in the works for many many years. Some points;
I'm in the Charlotte NC area (lived in Connecticut, Frankfurt Germany, Amsterdam NL), moved to NC about 6 months ago.
The transatlantic mention refers to longer flights between the US and Europe (most of my family and friends are across the pond, and my partner and I are very adventurous.....we've probably spent so much on airline tickets enough to by a small plane). Typical trip will be CLT to LHR or DUB. Flights within the US will be pretty much all over the US, maybe further south or north.
Budget-wise.....well I definitely cannot afford a Gulfstream.
I tend to intensely focus/commit with undivided attention whenever I'm engaged, which is part of why I'm eliciting input before doing anything.

This is definitely not a troll post. Just someone looking to embark on a new journey in a new phase and looking for input from experienced pilots.
Perhaps moving too fast...but I did learn racing from behind the wheel of a single seat F-1 vehicle. Then again, cars are planes are very different. Not trying to over simplify it.
 
Last edited:
Alani said:
It's definitely not a troll post. I've kept up with this forum for a long time without registering as a member because I wasn't ready to contribute much. However (and candidly speaking) I'm at a phase now where I've done the motorcycle and cars thing (I still do bikes, cars not so much anymore) and ready to enter the next phase.
I know it's a major commitment, but it's been in the works for many many years. Some points;
I'm in the Charlotte NC area (lived in Connecticut, Frankfurt Germany, Amsterdam NL), moved to NC about 6 months ago.
The transatlantic mention refers to longer flights between the US and Europe (most of my family and friends are across the pond, and my partner and I are very adventurous.....we've probably spent so much on airline tickets enough to by a small plane). Typical trip will be CLT to LHR or DUB. Flights within the US will be pretty much all over the US, maybe further south or north.
Budget-wise.....well I definitely cannot afford a Gulfstream.

This is definitely not a troll post. Just someone looking to embark on a new journey in a new phase.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the quick response and clarifying! This is such a non-standard way to start that seemed a bit questionable. Hopefully no hard feelings for the questions.

I am guessing, with enough budget, that you learning to fly from scratch in a twin will be considerably easier than the next step of finding a plane and making those Atlantic crossings. I think even the DA62 (twin) and TBM (single engine turbo prop) crossings have to go way up north over iceland and greenland, etc. Trying a straight shot from Charlotte to England seems like Jet territory only, If not the length of trip in any kind of twin turbo prop would be so long that your passengers might like the commercial flights better. Keep in mind a lot of the twins you see flying like on YouTube (310's, Barrons, etc) don't have the range to cross the atlantic and if a engine fails they often will have to fly lower where the single engine will burn even more fuel.

However, none of this should make you give up wanting to learn to fly. If you can afford to jump right into twin engine training you can easily afford 40hrs of lessons in a single engine first. To give you a better picture of what it might be like.
 
Sinistar said:
Thanks for the quick response and clarifying! This is such a non-standard way to start that seemed a bit questionable. Hopefully no hard feelings for the questions.

I am guessing, with enough budget, that you learning to fly from scratch in a twin will be considerably easier than the next step of finding a plane and making those Atlantic crossings. I think even the DA62 (twin) and TBM (single engine turbo prop) crossings have to go way up north over iceland and greenland, etc. Trying a straight shot from Charlotte to England seems like Jet territory only, If not the length of trip in any kind of twin turbo prop would be so long that your passengers might like the commercial flights better. Keep in mind a lot of the twins you see flying like on YouTube (310's, Barrons, etc) don't have the range to cross the atlantic and if a engine fails they often will have to fly lower where the single engine will burn even more fuel.

However, none of this should make you give up wanting to learn to fly. If you can afford to jump right into twin engine training you can easily afford 40hrs of lessons in a single engine first. To give you a better picture of what it might be like.
Click to expand...
No hard feelings at all, the questions are perfectly understandable. I tend to intensely focus on things with undivided attention (drives my partner nuts...she gets a good laugh though)....hence the tendency to go multi/twin first.
Definitely will have to go way up, and back down (couple of refueling stops likely). Getting all the training done in one shot, and then focus on getting hours / experience cross country (rentals etc) could be a good way to gain additional insight + buying enough time to research the right plane to suit our needs.
I can definitely jump right into the training, I've also heard no matter which option, as with anything it depends on the school, instructors etc.
 
I see you tagged Pilatus?

Well if you are comfortable flying from Charlotte way up north, into Canada, Greenland, Iceland and then over to Ireland with about 5 stops and wearing exposure suits your path from zero to a DA62 is not at all far fetched. I just watched a YouTube where they ferried one over. But for that $1M or whatever it will cost you could buy a lot of business class tickets.
 
@Alani ... I see the following challenges to your idea

  1. Finding someone who will agree to teach you primary in a multi engine aircraft. Compared to the quantity of instructors for Single Engine Land, the quantity of multi engine instructors is pretty small. And likely all of them will not agree to take on a zero time pilot because they will perceive the activity of teaching a zero time student to be too risky
  2. Finding a multi engine aircraft to train in. There are lots of good multi engine aircraft to rent at flight schools for multi engine training. But you will likely find none will rent to you for primary training. So pursuing this dream will mean you need to purchase something. Aircraft purchase and ownership provides its own set of difficult challenges that are increased when “you don’t know what you don’t know”
  3. Insurance cost. If you are able to find a broker or underwriter to insure you (liability) and your aircraft (hull damage), it will be extremely expensive and come with a large cargo hold of restrictions. But more likely you will find no one will provide coverage.
On the flip side of your idea, choosing to go down the traditional path of flight training, and a near flight college/academy level of schedule and intensity, it is likely you can be ready for transition into a multi engine aircraft within 9-12 months of starting. And the progress of obtaining and perfecting the skills of multi engine will be much faster and less expensive.

However you choose to proceed, keep us informed.

And welcome to the conversations!
 
Sinistar said:
But for that $1M or whatever it will cost you could buy a lot of business class tickets.
Click to expand...
I agree with this sentiment.

A favorite bit of wisdom I got from @wabower 11 years ago when I got started was the purchase the airplane can afford to own and operate every day (or weekend) and rent something for this one or three times a year flights.

For me, I’d rather have someone else chauffeur me across the pond whilst I relax enjoying an alcoholic beverage, a movie or three, and a nap.

And when home stateside, go exploring in a nicely equipped ASEL.
 
Thanks for the input. The recurring theme seems to be to go the traditional route, and it does sound like that may be the path. Perhaps wise not to approach it with such intensity and haste. I'll be calling around this week to some local flight shops in the area as well.
Very much appreciate the input, and I'll surely have more questions :)
 
@flyingron is in Statesville and might be able to offer suggestions on good schools and instructors
 
Alani said:
Thanks for the input. The recurring theme seems to be to go the traditional route, and it does sound like that may be the path. Perhaps wise not to approach it with such intensity and haste. I'll be calling around this week to some local flight shops in the area as well.
Very much appreciate the input, and I'll surely have more questions :)
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with approaching it with intensity. I got my PPL in less than 3 months during one summer when I was in engineering college.

I gather from one of your posts that you may be the type that enjoys taking on a new challenge/hobby/sport and you work hard to master it. I have a athletically gifted friend like that. But once he masters something he gets bored and moves on to something different and immerses himself in it.

But learning to fly from scratch in a twin would be similar to saying you are going to learn how to play golf doing rounds on the course only, without benefit of any time on the putting green or at the driving range. Certainly can be done, but not likely the best way to learn the building block skills.
 
Alani said:
..
I tend to intensely focus/commit with undivided attention whenever I'm engaged, which is part of why I'm eliciting input before doing anything...
Click to expand...

As mentioned, bring several fat wallets and, to be successful, I would recommend you approach this as a full-time endeavor; for the flights you want to do, you’ll need an instrument rating, so knock that out as well.

It’ll be more cost- and time- effective and efficient to go to a pilot mill and be done through commercial MEL with IRA in six months though, then buy a capable twin to do the mission you want.

Or not. It’s your family you’ll be hauling around, not mine.
 
I can see the novelty of flying a light twin over the pond, but after a couple of crossings....
No thanks.
 
AggieMike88 said:
@Alani ... I see the following challenges to your idea

  1. Finding someone who will agree to teach you primary in a multi engine aircraft. Compared to the quantity of instructors for Single Engine Land, the quantity of multi engine instructors is pretty small. And likely all of them will not agree to take on a zero time pilot because they will perceive the activity of teaching a zero time student to be too risky
  2. Finding a multi engine aircraft to train in. There are lots of good multi engine aircraft to rent at flight schools for multi engine training. But you will likely find none will rent to you for primary training. So pursuing this dream will mean you need to purchase something. Aircraft purchase and ownership provides its own set of difficult challenges that are increased when “you don’t know what you don’t know”
  3. Insurance cost. If you are able to find a broker or underwriter to insure you (liability) and your aircraft (hull damage), it will be extremely expensive and come with a large cargo hold of restrictions. But more likely you will find no one will provide coverage.
On the flip side of your idea, choosing to go down the traditional path of flight training, and a near flight college/academy level of schedule and intensity, it is likely you can be ready for transition into a multi engine aircraft within 9-12 months of starting. And the progress of obtaining and perfecting the skills of multi engine will be much faster and less expensive.

However you choose to proceed, keep us informed.

And welcome to the conversations!
Click to expand...

My knowledge of multi engine flying is miniscule. But I have come to realize just reading here and there that it is a good deal more complex than single engine, and that the principles of single engine lay the groundwork for learning ME then. It would be interesting if someone experienced in ME also pointed out how it isn’t just a SEP with twice the motors.
I was surprised (from a quiz at boldmethod) to hear that there is (or can be?) one engine that is more critical than the other. Not sure why that was, I don’t remember now. Again, I don’t know, but also there is synchronizing the props, and probably much more that is a good deal more to think about and handle.

I think it is enough with one set of engine controls, throttle/mixture, and in certain planes the control of the propeller (constant speed props). So when practicing stalls, steep turns, etc, it is challenging enough with one throttle.

I know for myself that it is more than enough to get used to, and control one engine while learning.

Maybe someone could list the extra complexity, the extra considerations?
 
Adding an additional throttle/prop lever doesn't make things harder. In normal operations they are moved together the same way you'd move the single one in a complex single. The extra work in a twin comes with preparing for and dealing with the loss of one engine. Getting rid of one, doesn't make it easier :)
 
1024px-ChampionLancer402N9924Y.jpg
 
AggieMike88 said:
@Alani ... I see the following challenges to your idea

  1. Finding someone who will agree to teach you primary in a multi engine aircraft. Compared to the quantity of instructors for Single Engine Land, the quantity of multi engine instructors is pretty small. And likely all of them will not agree to take on a zero time pilot because they will perceive the activity of teaching a zero time student to be too risky
  2. Finding a multi engine aircraft to train in. There are lots of good multi engine aircraft to rent at flight schools for multi engine training. But you will likely find none will rent to you for primary training. So pursuing this dream will mean you need to purchase something. Aircraft purchase and ownership provides its own set of difficult challenges that are increased when “you don’t know what you don’t know”
  3. Insurance cost. If you are able to find a broker or underwriter to insure you (liability) and your aircraft (hull damage), it will be extremely expensive and come with a large cargo hold of restrictions. But more likely you will find no one will provide coverage.
On the flip side of your idea, choosing to go down the traditional path of flight training, and a near flight college/academy level of schedule and intensity, it is likely you can be ready for transition into a multi engine aircraft within 9-12 months of starting. And the progress of obtaining and perfecting the skills of multi engine will be much faster and less expensive.

However you choose to proceed, keep us informed.

And welcome to the conversations!
Click to expand...

My knowledge of multi engine flying is miniscule. But I have come to realize just reading here and there that it is a good deal more complex than single engine, and that the principles of single engine lay the groundwork for learning ME then. It would be interesting if someone experienced in ME also pointed out how it isn’t just a SEP with twice the motors.
I was surprised (from a quiz at boldmethod) to hear that there is (or can be?) one engine that is more critical than the other. Not sure why that was, I don’t remember now. Again, I don’t know, but also there is synchronizing the props, and probably much more that is a good deal more to think about and handle.

I think it is enough with one set of engine controls, throttle/mixture, and in certain planes the control of the propeller (constant speed props). So when practicing stalls, steep turns, etc, it is challenging enough with one throttle.

Maybe someone could list the extra
flyingron said:
Adding an additional throttle/prop lever doesn't make things harder. In normal operations they are moved together the same way you'd move the single one in a complex single. The extra work in a twin comes with preparing for and dealing with the loss of one engine. Getting rid of one, doesn't make it easier :)
Click to expand...

Ok, so it’s not really additional complexity? So if that’s so, that argument falls away. But AggieMike88’s big three good reasons for rethinking still apply.


OFF TOPIC: I left this as is because it has been a recurring problem lately. I posted the original s answer, got a reply from flyingron, and when I hit reply to HIM ALONE, expecting the normal inclusion If his post, actually my original post was still in the edit box.

Anyone else experience this? I notice that at times it take a LOOONG time for the inclusion of the post you are replying to, and after posting, it hangs around still in the edit box. Something glitchy in the last few weeks or so.
 
Very aspiring goal.

But the great equalizer might be insurance as you need solo time to earn the rating. I don’t envision you will get get multi student pilot insurance, with no other ratings, with the market the way it is. Besides, you can quickly earn a single ratting, then add the multi as an add on, then fly with an instructor for whatever requirement the insurance company gives you.
 
Just looking at the goal. CLT to LON via Greenland. This is a 20-25h flight time trip in a typical light twin(175ish cruise) with probably 5-6 stops. And probably around $7-8,000 or so in operational costs. More coming back. So that's a 3 day +(weather depending) each way. Business class non-stop tickets are around $6,000(8 hours flight time). Operating a twin in Europe is,well , not cheap :eek:
 
Last edited:
Alani said:
Hello,
I'm turning 40 this year, and I have decided to pursue my passion for flying that I've put off for so many years.
I'm considering diving straight into multi-engine training. I wanted some input. I would like to fly trans atlantic in 2 - 3 years after completing my training. Any input / guidance welcome.

Thanks
Click to expand...


About this goal, is it to fly transatlantic once, as kind of a bucket list item, or is it to do so on a regular basis? I can't comment on whether or not it would be prudent to do this on two or three years experience, but I can say this isn't a trip you'd want to make often. What a typical light twin is good for is flights in the 200 - 700 nm range, less than 200 it's faster to drive, more than 700 and it's (usually) faster and more comfortable on an airliner. If you have the need or desire to travel somewhere in that range, GA is something you should look into, if not, there are better ways to fly for fun than in an GA airplane. I'd suggest hang gliding, glider flying, or a light sport trike.
 
If you:
- know which plane you will own
- have the funds
- can be insured
- can find a CFI
I would say go for it. The day you finish your PPL you will feel super comfy and competent with your twin, and you can start taking big trips in it.
 
I actually think getting the PPL in a multi-engine plane is the easy part of this mission.

Last I looked into it, flying an N-reg plane into Europe had some very stiff insurance requirements that were difficult to attain even for experienced pilots. A newbie pilot almost certainly would be uninsurable for the transatlantic mission.

My thinking (which may not match yours OP) is that if you'll need, say, 1000 hours to even be insurable for the trans-atlantic flight, then you gained nothing by starting in the multi-engine and racing your way there.

If you want to train in the ME because you just prefer it, well, party on. It only takes cash, as some said.

If you want to train in the ME to do the trans-atlantic route (and by the way, singles fly across the atlantic too), then you should start with a call to a good insurance broker to ask what would be a minimum qualification to even get that insurance.
 
Alani said:
Thanks for the input. The recurring theme seems to be to go the traditional route, and it does sound like that may be the path. Perhaps wise not to approach it with such intensity and haste. I'll be calling around this week to some local flight shops in the area as well.
Very much appreciate the input, and I'll surely have more questions :)
Click to expand...

I will offer a modification of the traditional approach. First, lets start with the final goal. Assuming your budget is not up in the turbo-prop range, one of the best long range multiengine traveling machines is a Piper Twin Comanche. With tip tanks, there standard fuel allows a range of over 1,000 nm. My record with mine is 1275 nm, and that was without significant tailwinds. There is an STC that adds another 40 gallons into the nacelles, which would give you the range to go Goose Bay to Greenland, find the weather socked in unexpectedly and continue to Reykjavik and still have reserves.

So how do you get there? Don't learn in a twin, but do learn in a retractable gear aircraft. Getting used to the complex aircraft from the beginning will better teach the habits needed to safely fly a twin. Depending on one's goal for the multiengine aircraft, there are numerous options. If the Twin Comanche was the right fit, then a single engine Comanche 180 is a very economical aircraft and the systems being very similar, will have part way to transitioning into the twin. An Arrow is also an excellent choice as a trainer.

I know that a few folks will be somewhat skeptical of this advice. Fair enough. But after spending 5 1/2 years teaching primary students in an A36 Bonanza, I see the up side of learning to put the gear up and down from the beginning. It does typically take longer to solo, but over all, it doesn't lengthen out the training and it gets you used to having to think further ahead because the plane goes quicker. I most training airplanes, you don't have to worry too much about planning for descent or entry into the traffic pattern as you just aren't going that fast. A higher performance trainer teaches some key skills from the beginning.
 
schmookeeg said:
I actually think getting the PPL in a multi-engine plane is the easy part of this mission.

Last I looked into it, flying an N-reg plane into Europe had some very stiff insurance requirements that were difficult to attain even for experienced pilots. A newbie pilot almost certainly would be uninsurable for the transatlantic mission.

My thinking (which may not match yours OP) is that if you'll need, say, 1000 hours to even be insurable for the trans-atlantic flight, then you gained nothing by starting in the multi-engine and racing your way there.

If you want to train in the ME because you just prefer it, well, party on. It only takes cash, as some said.

If you want to train in the ME to do the trans-atlantic route (and by the way, singles fly across the atlantic too), then you should start with a call to a good insurance broker to ask what would be a minimum qualification to even get that insurance.
Click to expand...

Insurance is a good consideration. Getting insurance to learn in a twin might also be a non-starter.
 
Kristin said:
Insurance is a good consideration. Getting insurance to learn in a twin might also be a non-starter.
Click to expand...
This. You may be a natural Skygod, but underwriters don't care, especially these days when the insurance rates are skyrocketing due to all the GA crashes. Before you embark on this twin adventure, talk to an insurance broker about coverage.
 
One last thought about training in a twin: First solo is probably the most exciting milestone a pilot has. In order for you to do your first solo in a twin, you not only have to learn the basics that those who are flying singles, you have to learn and become proficient at engine out procedures. I never got past Private Pilot Single Engine Land, but what I've read on engine out procedures would make me think that would be quite a few hours before you'd be ready to solo.

I really like what @Kristin suggested, learning in a Cherokee Arrow, I think that would get you along the path you want to travel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top