Stepping stones to a turboprop

[TangoWhiskey]

Just curious to hear from those of you that have done it, or are about to:

What is the typical path for a private pilot to go from flying 172's to eventually being insurable to fly his or her own privately-owned and operated turboprop, say something like a Pilatus, TBM, or King Air C90-series?

What do insurance companies want to see in the way of hours and prior experience?

 

[LearDriver]

What is your total time and M/E time?

 

[TangoWhiskey]

What is your total time and M/E time?

Oh, this would be a LONG way off for me... I have 350 hours, my instrument rating, and 0 ME. PP-ASEL-IA, and have been working on my Commercial as I can.

But let's say I wanted to be in a turboprop in 10-15 years. What path would one plot?

 

[LearDriver]

you will be in one much faster than 10-15 years. First get your commercial SEL & MEL, Instrument on both. Then get your instructor ratings, Airplane, Instrument and Multi-Engine.

After that start instructing. your first 100 hours of Multi can be tough to get if you are not paying for it. However there are instructing jobs which do a lot of multi training. Spend a year or so doing this and you should be ready.

Then look for a co-pilot position in a king air or citation.

If and when the economy gets moving again, there will be a lot of guys going back to work so jobs will be available again. You just need to be in position so you qualify for the jobs when they are available.

Insurance is a whole different thing with turbines. It is very expensive to be insured on a turbine airplane without an ATP. But, don't worry about that because if you can find a right seat job to start with before you know it you will have more than enough experience to be insurable as a PIC.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

It can all go much faster if you make enough AMUs. If not, Lear Driver has the best plan if you don't luck out like some Lance guy we all know

Best,

Dave

 

[Lance F]

Luck does not hurt, but LearDriver still has the right plan. The part about "you just need to be in position so you qualify". Get the ratings. And hang around places where these things happen. Chances to fly multi, turboprop, etc are NOT advertised in the local paper.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Luck does not hurt, but LearDriver still has the right plan. The part about "you just need to be in position so you qualify". Get the ratings. And hang around places where these things happen. Chances to fly multi, turboprop, etc are NOT advertised in the local paper.

And places with the right people... I bet in this matter it's like with many others... it's WHO you know more than WHAT you know. I know a guy who got on flying right seat in a Lear 45 at 400 hours PIC, and they paid for his Simuflite time... he just knew the right folks.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

It can all go much faster if you make enough AMUs. If not, Lear Driver has the best plan if you don't luck out like some Lance guy we all know

Best,

Dave

Isn't that the truth! Let's say you're not going to make a career (living) out of aviation (too much vested in the IT world)... if you were going to "do it on your own": would the advice to get your CFI, CFII, etc. still apply, or just the multi with instrument rating? Then work your way up through light- and mid- to large-piston twins (like your nice 58P) before stepping into a turbine?

 

[Everskyward]

If you have the $$$ but not the time or inclination to work for someone else you could always start with owning a single engine airplane and work your way up through piston twins to a small turboprop.

 

[TMetzinger]

Isn't that the truth! Let's say you're not going to make a career (living) out of aviation (too much vested in the IT world)... if you were going to "do it on your own": would the advice to get your CFI, CFII, etc. still apply, or just the multi with instrument rating? Then work your way up through light- and mid- to large-piston twins (like your nice 58P) before stepping into a turbine?

If you've got the money, there's no need for the instructor tickets. You will need the instrument rating and might as well get the commercial too. Expect the insurers to insist on Manufacturer-approved training like SimCom or Flight Safety, and expect a professional pilot to accompany you while you build up hours.

I know a gentleman who moved into a PC-12 with 800 hours. One year later he had 1500 hours (700 in the PC12 with a pro copilot) and had been to school for initial and recurrent training, and was insurable as a single pilot PIC.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

If you have the $$$ but not the time or inclination to work for someone else you could always start with owning a single engine airplane and work your way up through piston twins to a small turboprop.

That's the route I figured it would take, Mari. What I don't know is the generally accepted "hour marks" at which an insurance company doesn't raise eyebrows when an owner-operator moves from single-engine high performance complex aircraft (which I already have a lot of time in, in Mooneys) to light twin (Commanche, Seminole) (?? hours) to a bigger twin (Baron or Seneca) (?? hours) and then to something turbine.

 

[Everskyward]

That's the route I figured it would take, Mari. What I don't know is the generally accepted "hour marks" at which an insurance company doesn't raise eyebrows when an owner-operator moves from single-engine high performance complex aircraft (which I already have a lot of time in, in Mooneys) to light twin (Commanche, Seminole) (?? hours) to a bigger twin (Baron or Seneca) (?? hours) and then to something turbine.

I think a lot of that depends on how much you are willing to pay. I don't really have a good answer, though. Ted and Felix just bought twins so they might be able to shed more light on the subject.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Kent: If you know where you want to be and can afford it, one can make a case for going right there and doing the training and dual time to become insurable and proficient (two different things). If you have time and want to work your way up, do the ratings, trade up and enjoy yourself on the way.
For me, I purchased the TN A-36 first. Got 7 or 800 hours (I'd haveta look); then got the multi rating and moved to an A-55 Baron partnership before getting the P-Baron. Bear in mind, I had my fixed and rotary wing commercial instrument ratings out of the Army. So, the multi and multi instrument were new ratings.

There's a lot to be said for taking your time and enjoying the move up stuff. OTOH. it's much more time consuming and expensive to buy and sell planes and get sigh offs in new ones.

I'm kinna where I want to be; although, with this economy the way it is, the Baron might have to go sometime. Might have to get another career rating!

To me, becoming and instructor is a completely different issue. While it can pay for your flying and time building, early on, it will probably be in entry level aircraft--unless you know someone. Do you like to teach? Do you have time to do that? Would that be rewarding to you? We've talked about potential liability issues; decide if your comfortable.

I do like to teach, but my business is pretty demanding. I didn't feel I could devote the time to be the kind of teacher I would want to be. Didn't want folks depending on me for instruction when my business had to come first. Insurance and borrowing are an issue for me. My lender was/is highly concerned about me being a pilot. A law suit would violate loan covenants. They are willing to put up with me flying myself, but aren't happy about me flying others. Such is the life of a small business owner that is lender dependent. They would require me to have a large life insurance policy if I fly commercial or instruct. Couldn't talk them out of it.

Best,

Dave

 

[TangoWhiskey]

There's a lot to be said for taking your time and enjoying the move up stuff. OTOH. it's much more time consuming and expensive to buy and sell planes and get sigh offs in new ones.

I agree, and I think it's good to let your brain have time to adapt so that what was "oh-my-god, I can't keep up" fast to you becomes second nature... that's more easily accomplished with three 30-40 knot jumps than a single 100-120 knot jump. I bet the insurance rates reward the slower approach as well.

I'm kinna where I want to be; although, with this economy the way it is, the Baron might have to go sometime. Might have to get another career rating!

Would hate to see that bird go, I know how much you enjoy flying her. Will have to meet you and Spike for breakfast soon, and catch up. Talk business and career plans. The economy is affecting us all, that's for sure.

I do like to teach, but my business is pretty demanding. I didn't feel I could devote the time to be the kind of teacher I would want to be. Didn't want folks depending on me for instruction when my business had to come first.

I think you'd make a great instructor, Dave.

 

[wabower]

I taught a friend to fly in a 172 I had bought with some friends to teach our kids to fly. Then helped him buy a Malibu as his first plane. I had to fly with him for 30 hours or so, but they didn't require IR. He got it soon after. Then the motor quit one day and he deadsticked onto an airport, never flew it again.

Got ME in a Duchess, then bought a C-90, flew with a teacher for 30 hours and was cleared to fly it solo. Then a F-90 and B-200, all with just recurrent sim. Then got a Citation II and repeated the same drill as the King Airs. He sold the Citation last year (business had matured, didn't need the plane any longer) had accumulated almost 4000 hours in 21 years.

But at every step he was willing and capable of dancing to the insurance company music regarding training and having a babysitter for the first however many hours. If you will do that, the same drill can be repeated today. I don't know of any other method that will allow such an accelerated pace through the ratings and proficiency.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Kent:

ZzzzzzzzzzzmphWhathuh? That's Troy over there Dave.

Yeah, for once it's NOT me!

What I don't know is the generally accepted "hour marks" at which an insurance company doesn't raise eyebrows when an owner-operator moves from single-engine high performance complex aircraft (which I already have a lot of time in, in Mooneys) to light twin (Commanche, Seminole) (?? hours) to a bigger twin (Baron or Seneca) (?? hours) and then to something turbine.

Troy,

FWIW, I called the insurance co at about 500TT, 50 complex, and 8 multi and I was insurable (in a twin) with something like 5 hours of dual which is very reasonable. Of course, the premium was gonna be about $5800/year, but there were discounts after 25, 50, and 100 in type, 50 and 100 multi, etc. so the premiums would have gone down pretty quick.

 

[flyersfan31]

Skip the Seminole train in it at an FBO. Go straight to Baron. You can get insured with some dual and SimCom. Fly the wings off to rack up hours. Buy your turboprop and hire a rated pilot to fly with you. They will likely need 1000-2000hrs, but if you can find a furloughed airline guy, or charter person with spare time, hook up with them. No problem.

 

[flyersfan31]

Oh, I forgot the other thing - find that gold mine to pay for it.

 

[Ted]

Ted and Felix just bought twins so they might be able to shed more light on the subject.

Gee, Mari, how'd you know I'd come and chime in?

I was something on the fast track since I knew I wanted a twin from day 1 of flying. When I got to fly the Aztec (that I now own) at 11 hours TT, that just solidified the deal. I was told by insurance companies not to call back until I had 200 TT, they just wouldn't even talk to me.

I did about 160 hours in 172/PA-28 aircraft, and got my private and instrument ratings in those. After that, I joined an opportunity to start flying a Mooney M20F. I wanted to get some more complex time, and I also wanted time flying a faster plane. I've put about 70 hours or so in the Mooney at this point, and just past 250 TT on Sunday. I do believe that having the Mooney time plus the instrument rating is what made this doable for me from an insurance standpoint considering my otherwise low hours.

When I bought the Aztec around New Years, I had I think 225 TT (although no MEL) and got insurance at what I considered to be a reasonable rate, with the requirements of 25 hours of dual (of which 10 needed to be actual or simulated instrument time) and, obviously, getting my MEL. At this point I have 12 hours in the plane, and should be going for my MEL soon. I decided I was going to wait until I had greater than 250 TT so that I could go straight to the CP-AMEL-IA anyway, but I want to do CP-ASEL-IA in the Mooney first. So, at 225 TT with about 50 complex and a PP-ASEL-IA I became insurable in a piston twin with pretty reasonable checkout requirements.

One guy I know has been flying for 3 years, and he bought a Columbia 400 somewhere along the line, and then bought a Meridian. I don't know how many hours he has or what he had to do to get to it, but it is possible in a short period of time.

I also have a friend who, without an instrument rating, managed to get a SIC position in a Pilatus part time. That really came down to knowing the right people in her case, but it is doable.

I'm not sure what your ultimate goal is. My ultimate goal is to be able to fly (most likely not on my own dollar) cabin class piston and turbine twins (including pressurized) as a side gig for fun (not full time, I have a day job already), and then fly my own plane for personal missions. So given that, the progression I've been doing is as follows (with examples):

Fixed gear trainer (172/PA-28) -> Complex single (Mooney) -> Standard Piston Twin (Aztec) -> Cabin class piston twin (Navajo) -> Cabin class turbine twin (Cheyenne)

As much as possible, I also want to try to get time in my log book when possible in the bigger planes, since that will help make me more insurable. Also, getting something like some 421 time (pressurized cabin class piston twin) in between Navajo and Cheyenne time is probably good. At this point, though, getting time in the bigger planes is pretty much down to me knowing the right people and being ready to jump at opportunities to fly.

Also, I am planning on getting all my instructor ratings (CFI/CFII/MEI), but that is mostly because I want to teach people, and people seem to want me to teach them.

 

[gismo]

One guy I know has been flying for 3 years, and he bought a Columbia 400 somewhere along the line, and then bought a Meridian. I don't know how many hours he has or what he had to do to get to it, but it is possible in a short period of time.

I'll bet one thing he had to do is pay through the nose for insurance the first year.

I also have a friend who, without an instrument rating, managed to get a SIC position in a Pilatus part time. That really came down to knowing the right people in her case, but it is doable.

SIC in a Pilatus? Is that due to a part 136 OpSpec requirement, insurance requirement, or just for the heck of it? If it's either of the last two it's not loggable as SIC although any time as sole manipulator would be loggable as PIC (probably not legal for part 135 though).

 

[Lance F]

I also have a friend who, without an instrument rating, managed to get a SIC position in a Pilatus part time. That really came down to knowing the right people in her case, but it is doable.

That's only because a Pilatus doesn't need an SIC.
However, I don't knock real SIC experience. In an IFR environment in a fast airplane the SIC kind of is busier than the PIC. Let me reword that to be accurate. The PNF (pilot not flying) is busier than than the PF (pilot flying). PIC/SIC is kind of a responsibility thing. PF/PNF is a workload thing.

 

[Ted]

I'll bet one thing he had to do is pay through the nose for insurance the first year.

I'd bet that is correct.

As to the Pilatus time, I don't know the details, I seem to recall it being a requirement of the operator. So, I also don't know how much of it was loggable. I do believe that any exposure to flying a plane like that is excellent experience, though.

Funny thing is, this same person gets jealous of me for flying the Aztec and getting my instrument rating done before her.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Thanks for the replies. I see from the stories related thus far that not as many hours are required between steps as I imagined--the depth of thy pocketbook seems to be a more critical driving factor. (typical, with aviation).

Ted, my goals are similar to yours. As the kids leave, I'll have more disposable income and time, both for flying and to grow a business I've been germinating. The business would provide the funds--and need--for flying transportation. Given the right ratings/opportunities, I'd love to get some right seat SIC time in bigger/faster aircraft, perhaps working with a charter outfit (extra income--even if minor--and fun experiences--not primary income). Other flying would be personal / travel and Angel Flights.

Currently I have my PP-ASEL-IA, 69 high performance (Cherokee Six) and 60 complex (Mooney time), the rest being your standard mix of Cessna/Piper fixed gear singles with a little light sport thrown in, and about 350 hours TT, about 150 of that being X/C time and 10 hours of actual vs 60 hours of simulated instrument.

Sounds like I could be insurable in a twin now, if I picked up the MEL, took recurrent training and perhaps flew with a mentor pilot for a reasonable number of hours.

 

[Ted]

Recurrent training is more a function of being in the cabin class or pressurized and up. I don't have any recurrent training requirements, just initial.

With twins being the price they are now, it's a good time to buy, if that's the route you want to go. However, they still cost just as much to feed and maintain.

If you want any other info on my twin purchase experience, shoot me a PM.

 

[flyersfan31]

Thanks for the replies. I see from the stories related thus far that not as many hours are required between steps as I imagined--the depth of thy pocketbook seems to be a more critical driving factor. (typical, with aviation).

Ted, my goals are similar to yours. As the kids leave, I'll have more disposable income and time, both for flying and to grow a business I've been germinating. The business would provide the funds--and need--for flying transportation. Given the right ratings/opportunities, I'd love to get some right seat SIC time in bigger/faster aircraft, perhaps working with a charter outfit (extra income--even if minor--and fun experiences--not primary income). Other flying would be personal / travel and Angel Flights.

Currently I have my PP-ASEL-IA, 69 high performance (Cherokee Six) and 60 complex (Mooney time), the rest being your standard mix of Cessna/Piper fixed gear singles with a little light sport thrown in, and about 350 hours TT, about 150 of that being X/C time and 10 hours of actual vs 60 hours of simulated instrument.

Sounds like I could be insurable in a twin now, if I picked up the MEL, took recurrent training and perhaps flew with a mentor pilot for a reasonable number of hours.

Complex hours seem to matter a lot more to insurers than non-complex (for obvious reasons).

 

[Ted]

Complex hours seem to matter a lot more to insurers than non-complex (for obvious reasons).

Well, they look at total time, but obviously after that they want to see how many hours you have in complex aircraft and how many hours in type. When I was looking at multi insurance they said not to call back until I had 200 TT, but if I called back at 125 TT with 100 hours of MEL time, specifically in the airplane I was asking to be insured in, it might be different. Obviously, that didn't happen.

Basically, it seems to me that they care about seeing that you've got some experience in something with at least some similarity. That helps assure you're less likely to bend things, which is really all they care about.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Troy,

While you have some great advice here, keep in mind that getting insurable as PIC in a turboprop twin is an entirely different animal than a turboprop single. For whatever reason, the insurance companies don't like piston twins these days, and the rates and requirements reflect that. As a case in point, I asked a broker guy to help me out with an article, and we found that the premium was MORE on a mid-60s Baron 55 (with a rookie MEL pilot) than that same pilot in a late-80s Malibu worth five times as much in hull value. Other requirements were about the same WRT training, transition time, deductibles.

If you ultimately will be happy with a turboprop single, don't even bother with ME time. And for personal flying I simply don't see the point in adding a second turbine; one is adequate for almost everyone. But then we get into the single vs twin debate, and that's an entirely different discussion. There are Meridian owner/pilots out there with 500 hours TT, but you'll never see such a person insurable in a King Air.

 

[CJones]

Back a few years ago when I was considering flying Ag as a career, my boss's plan for me was:
1.) Tailwheel and commercial single. (We had several pilots flying with VFR-only Comm tickets)
2.) Fly in a recip AgCat or similar for a season to get my feet wet spraying.
3.) Go to SimCom in the off-season for Ag Turbine checkout.
4.) Start flying turbine Air Tractors the next season.

I think for the most part the insurance company was ok as long as you did the SimCom thing. Of course, the Ag industry is a bit different than the private market, but it just goes to show that it's mostly a matter of money to get to where you want to be.

 

[TMetzinger]

Troy,

While you have some great advice here, keep in mind that getting insurable as PIC in a turboprop twin is an entirely different animal than a turboprop single. For whatever reason, the insurance companies don't like piston twins these days, and the rates and requirements reflect that. As a case in point, I asked a broker guy to help me out with an article, and we found that the premium was LESS on a mid-60s Baron 55 (with a rookie MEL pilot) than that same pilot in a late-80s Malibu worth five times as much in hull value. Other requirements were about the same WRT training, transition time, deductibles.

If you ultimately will be happy with a turboprop single, don't even bother with ME time. And for personal flying I simply don't see the point in adding a second turbine; one is adequate for almost everyone. But then we get into the single vs twin debate, and that's an entirely different discussion. There are Meridian owner/pilots out there with 500 hours TT, but you'll never see such a person insurable in a King Air.

Ken, I'm sorry but what you said doesn't make any sense to me. Your statement "For whatever reason, the insurance companies don't like piston twins these days, and the rates and requirements reflect that.." implies that piston twin insurance would be more expensive than a single, followed by "...we found that the premium was LESS on a mid-60s Baron 55 (with a rookie MEL pilot) than that same pilot in a late-80s Malibu worth five times as much in hull value."

Want to try again? I can't figure out what your point is.

 

[gismo]

Troy,

While you have some great advice here, keep in mind that getting insurable as PIC in a turboprop twin is an entirely different animal than a turboprop single. For whatever reason, the insurance companies don't like piston twins these days, and the rates and requirements reflect that. As a case in point, I asked a broker guy to help me out with an article, and we found that the premium was LESS on a mid-60s Baron 55 (with a rookie MEL pilot) than that same pilot in a late-80s Malibu worth five times as much in hull value. Other requirements were about the same WRT training, transition time, deductibles.

Don't you think the main reason for that was the much higher hull value of the Malibu?

 

[Ted]

Me thinks that Ken made a typo, but I'll let him answer that.

When I was talking to a couple of insurance companies a few months back, what they all seemed to tell me was the hardest planes to insure pilots in were pressurized singles. Apparently the P210 and the Malibu were the worst. I couldn't get a good reason as to why exactly.

As I said, I didn't find it difficult to find insurance for the Aztec. You're right that they don't like piston twins - even with a "good" premium I'm paying a decent amount. Hopefully it'll go down as I get some more experience.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Ken, I'm sorry but what you said doesn't make any sense to me. Your statement "For whatever reason, the insurance companies don't like piston twins these days, and the rates and requirements reflect that.." implies that piston twin insurance would be more expensive than a single, followed by "...we found that the premium was LESS on a mid-60s Baron 55 (with a rookie MEL pilot) than that same pilot in a late-80s Malibu worth five times as much in hull value."

Want to try again? I can't figure out what your point is.

I was confused too. I think he might have meant to say that for the same pilot, the premium was less in a late-80's Malibu than in a mid-60's Baron 55. Maybe?

 

[Ted]

I was confused too. I think he might have meant to say that for the same pilot, the premium was less in a late-80's Malibu than in a mid-60's Baron 55. Maybe?

That might be (and what I figured he meant), but kinda surprises me given what I've heard about pressurized singles and insurance.

 

[TMetzinger]

I'd bet that it's due to most pressurized PISTON singles being operated out at the very edge of their available performance. When you consider the loads placed on that engine to power pressurization and anti-ice and the avionics and...

Then add in the need for pressurized magnetos to operate that high, the extra stresses on the pressure vessel each cycle, and other factors.

Very few if any of these concerns apply to pressurized turboprop singles - they generally have good automatic pressurization controllers, PLENTY of power for all the accessories and a very reliable powerplant.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

When I first discussed moving from my A-36 to a P-Baron with my agent, he told me I just couldn't do it. After some discussion, he suggested getting my ME and at least 100 hours of ME, then raising the subject again. Which I did. In retrospect, it was doable; just very expensive insurance premiums.

OTOH, it's difficult in many places to rent twins and there are very few pressurized twins for rent (pistons). So, one may have to purchase and sell planes or partnerships to move up. It could be much less expensive to just go to the plane one wants and pay the freight while building time if one is sure that's where they want to be and they have the bucks. Alex has been faced with this. He wanted a P-Baron and can't seem to fine one in which to build time.

Best.

Dave

 

[Ted]

I'd bet that it's due to most pressurized PISTON singles being operated out at the very edge of their available performance. When you consider the loads placed on that engine to power pressurization and anti-ice and the avionics and...

Then add in the need for pressurized magnetos to operate that high, the extra stresses on the pressure vessel each cycle, and other factors.

Very few if any of these concerns apply to pressurized turboprop singles - they generally have good automatic pressurization controllers, PLENTY of power for all the accessories and a very reliable powerplant.

That wouldn't surprise me, but I suppose the question is how much of that actually leads to insurance claims? Reliability issues are another matter entirely, unless they actually lead to wrecks. I don't know, just speculating. We have one guy at the airport who owns a P210 and a 414. He actually frequently flies the 414 even when it's just him because he has so many reliability problems with the P210.

Also, the pressurized magnetos come with all turbocharged engines, pressurized or not.

 

[Clark1961]

Also, the pressurized magnetos come with all turbocharged engines, pressurized or not.

I'm not sure where this comment is coming from but it's not a true statement. I suppose that it's likely that the TSIO-360-FB is in the minority but it definitely doesn't have pressurized mags. Of course pressurized mags can be added but they certainly don't come from the factory that way.

For the turbo Dakota the lack of pressurized mags is usually no big deal since the best performance is in the 8 to 10 thousand range. Best speed is up above 18 thousand though...and I'll get there one of these days.

 

[TMetzinger]

That wouldn't surprise me, but I suppose the question is how much of that actually leads to insurance claims? Reliability issues are another matter entirely, unless they actually lead to wrecks. I don't know, just speculating. We have one guy at the airport who owns a P210 and a 414. He actually frequently flies the 414 even when it's just him because he has so many reliability problems with the P210.

Also, the pressurized magnetos come with all turbocharged engines, pressurized or not.

I think the issue is that those airplanes have a high accident rate, and I'm of the opinion that pilots give them credit for more performance and weather capabilities than they actually have (which leads to the high rate). I also believe that they have significantly higher repair costs too, even for "minor" damage. And as previously noted, not all turboed airplanes have pressurized mags.

 

[Ted]

I think the issue is that those airplanes have a high accident rate, and I'm of the opinion that pilots give them credit for more performance and weather capabilities than they actually have. I believe that they have significantly higher repair costs too, even for "minor" damage. And as previously noted, not all turboed airplanes have pressurized mags.

Now all of those reasons definitely make sense and sound likely.

 

[Missa]

Hey Troy, if you got that kind of money... how about owning a citibra based in Williamsport?!?!?