Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Part 91 and Low Time
Looking to spilt 500+ hrs time building in SF >

Looking to spilt 500+ hrs time building in SF

Notices
Part 91 and Low Time Jump pilots, crop dusting, and other Part 91 jobs

Looking to spilt 500+ hrs time building in SF

Old 02-28-2015, 04:37 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 184
Default

Flight instructing isn't for everyone. Although it is still something I want to get for a personal goal and then I might instruct on the side or something. If you don't want to instruct then don't. It will only provide negative experience to the students that you teach. I know great pilots who aren't CFI's, but it's all on what YOU want to do. Just try and get paid to actually fly and not the other way around.
Av8er1550 is offline  
Old 03-03-2015, 12:14 PM
  #12  
On Reserve
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 10
Default

Originally Posted by JohnBurke View Post
Why couldn't you log the time you flew the King Air 200? You're multi engine airplane land rated, correct? The BE-20 doesn't require a type.
BE20 is single pilot a/c, so from the right seat you can log time as i) Part 135 employed, qualified and required SIC as per OpSpecs; ii) Part 135 employed while training for SIC; iii) dual on a Part 91 flight or iv) sole manipulator on a Part 91 flight.

The last two, yeah, you can log away, but most likely you are still in violation of insurance policies. Yeah, the FAA doesn't care about that, but it's not very nice to the person (PIC and/or operator) whom effectively self-insures while letting you fly (or giving dual). And it always requires such an explanation down the road when the logbook is reviewed.

In fact this is the main reason I'm getting through the insurance-approved KA initial.
ATP073116 is offline  
Old 03-03-2015, 12:26 PM
  #13  
On Reserve
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 10
Default

Thanks for the CFI route suggestion. With all due respect, I would rather not engage in the argument CFI-for-time-building vs. other-time-building, to me is sort of single vs. twin debate. Defensible positions and decent people on both sides.

As extra background, my aviation track is not airline-focused, but rather business/corporate. The ATP would be "nice to have" down the road, is required for jets under 91K & 135 PIC and for 10+ seaters under 135. I understand, of course, the difference between paper qualifications and actual minimums etc.

CFI is still an option, and I'll make that call within a month or so. But I'd like to make sure I exhausted all other alternatives.
ATP073116 is offline  
Old 03-07-2015, 07:50 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 287
Default

If you were closer to Ohio, I might have to take you up on it.

I have a PA-38 that I'm considering doing the same kind of thing in for a few hundred hours. It's got the same engine as the C152. And my operating costs are probably about $50 BEFORE splitting it in half--as long as fuel doesn't go up too much!

If anyone is interested, PM me...
FlyingSlowly is offline  
Old 03-08-2015, 06:55 AM
  #15  
Line Holder
 
nemich's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 58
Default

ATP073116, check PM
nemich is offline  
Old 03-10-2015, 01:03 PM
  #16  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 11
Default

I sent a message to ATP073116 but it seems like he hasn't replied to I will extend it to everyone else. I am trying to build 50-100 hours in SF.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/fl...acramento.html
B707 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RJ85FO
Regional
34
04-17-2017 04:16 PM
campingalan
Flight Schools and Training
4
06-16-2011 07:35 PM
jsfBoat
Part 91 and Low Time
25
01-11-2011 05:45 PM
Time2Fly
Corporate
38
08-11-2010 09:17 PM
Elcapiperu
Flight Schools and Training
2
12-22-2008 08:25 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices