Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Deadly serious, no pun intended...
It can be done, but if you want to survive your hobby you're going to need to take a very professional approach, Jets aren't for Kids. Sounds like you have a reasonable grasp of that, and good expectations of your way-ahead.
Get your PPL and Instrument Rating in a light single engine plane. A cirrus is probably about right, fast and modern instruments. If you or your instructor doesn't think starting out in a cirrus is a good idea, then start in a cessna or piper and transition to the cirrus after PPL and about 100 hours.
Fly a few hundred hours ASEL. Then get a multi add-on, and start flying a twin, preferably something sporty like a Baron with glass instruments. Shoot for 1000 hours total time. That's the threshold at which a professional pilot becomes insurable as an SIC
While building prop experience, fly IFR as much as possible, limit IMC/weather to your comfort zone and the capabilities of the plane.
At this point you could move up to a turboprop, but that's going to add some complexity that's not even present in a jet, so you could probably start training on the jet at this point, although getting an honest assessment of your skills by an experienced jet instructor would be wise.
If you end up doing the twin turboprop thing for a while, use something with glass instruments and FADEC, since that's more similar to a jet.
The jet mfg. will have a recommended or mandatory course of instruction, and insurance will weigh in on that as well. You'll have to fly X number of hours with a qualified instructor or other pilot with experience in type. I would suggest doubling the number of hours the insurance requires.
Insurance will probably require annual recurrent training... you'll want that regardless. You should carefully review all of the memory items EVERY time before you go fly. Recency of experience is vital, flying at least once or twice a week, especially for the first few hundred solo hours will greatly aid in making your skills second nature and preventing degradation between recurrent sessions.
If you're going to undertake a challenging mission, hire an instructor or pro to sit right seat as a backup.
That's what I'd do in your shoes, knowing what I know now.
For perspective, airline pilots need 1500 hours to serve as SIC on a jet, and 2500 hours and 1000 hours or turbine experience to serve as PIC. And that's in a very structured system where you have dispatchers looking out for you to a degree.
Very interesting and thanks for taking the time to post it. When I start this, it won't be with the hobbyist mentality. It will be my Job to become a proficient VLJ single-pilot. My business will shift to part-time (because I can) and my flying will shift to full-time. So, I'll have roughly 8 hours per day Mon-Fri to do whatever it takes.
Sat & Sun, I'd like to spend with my Wife. Then Monday morning, back to all things airplanes. So, no hobby mind here. Just a self-disciplined approach. I'd prefer USAF Flight Training in UPT, but that is not going to happen.
It all seems like pretty good advice and I understood it, which means I'm thinking right. In fact, I understood it so well - that I have questions, if you don't mind following up.
1)
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
"Fly a few hundred hours ASEL. Then get a multi add-on, and start flying a twin, preferably something sporty like a Baron with glass instruments."
Ok, so here's one area where I have received conflicting advise. Help me hash it out. On the one hand, pilots have told me that they could actually move over to a twin immediately after the Instrument Rating. They say that it jump starts their Multi-Time and gets them up and flying something with more than one engine rapidly. They say to do it initially with a Flight Instructor for the actual Multi-Engine Training part and then with a Flight Buddy who holds legal PIC for each flight while I gain the experience before taking the Multi-Engine written/oral/flight.
What I hear you saying is different. You are saying stick with ASEL for several hundred then add-on Multi-Engine - which in my case means 'then' go out a buy a Twin. I get it. I just want to know why such significant difference in approach to the same goal? I don't have a problem doing it either way. I want to do it as fast as possible, but I won't sacrifice long-term safety or competence.
2)
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
At this point you could move up to a turboprop, but that's going to add some complexity that's not even present in a jet, so you could probably start training on the jet at this point, although getting an honest assessment of your skills by an experienced jet instructor would be wise.
I thought about this and I initially thought it was too big a jump, quite honestly. I was thinking, why not just take delivery of the VLJ and fly with someone Typed in that aircraft from Multi-Engine until I'm ready to be released into the wild in my own as PIC (meeting all the insurance requirements, etc.) while retaining that same person now as Mentor/Advisor/Check Pilot, whatever you want call them.
Again, it just seem like too big a jump and I sort of get the feeling that I run the risk of becoming too psychologically dependent on my "Mentor" to get me out of trouble. The other thing I thought about in this regard was the lack of platform experience (flying other aircraft) which steals from the depth and breadth thing everybody talks about as being good for a pilot. Coming up through the ranks of slower, more laborious aircraft types, first. I don't know how much of that is true.
3)
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
If you end up doing the twin turboprop thing for a while, use something with glass instruments and FADEC, since that's more similar to a jet.
Yes - so, this was my other dilemma. Was it more important that I did my self-paced time building in a "Twin Turbo-Prop" having conventional instruments -or- any "Twin" having full EFIS? To make things more difficult to figure out, I've even seen a Cessna Citation 525/CJ1 that cost less on the used market than some used Barons that have been heavily retrofitted. Yet, the Citation 525/CJ1 had GNS 530 WAAS, while the Baron had G1000 (though I just found a 2001 CJ1 with Collins Proline for the same price as a highly retrofitted Baron G58). On the used market, the avionics can really drive price to the point where performance per dollar spent takes on a whole new meaning.
I would think it would be much easier to transition from a Citation 525/CJ1 to a Citation IV or Phenom 300. But, I'd still be left with the same question: What fills the gap between the Citation CJ1 as the primary Time Builder and the Cessna 182 or Cirrus SR22 as the basic Trainer. Seems to me that I'd still be looking at something more advanced/complex/heavier/faster than an SR22.
So, in this scenario it would seem to be something like:
- Cessna 182 Basic Trainer (Conventional Instruments).
- Baron Multi-Engine & 1st Complex Transition (G1000).
- CJ1 Multi-Engine Jet & 2nd Complex Transition (Conventional or EFIS).
- CJ4 (Collins Proline 21) or Phenom 300 (G3000) 3rd and final Transition.
What do you think?
4)
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
For perspective, airline pilots need 1500 hours to serve as SIC on a jet, and 2500 hours and 1000 hours or turbine experience to serve as PIC. And that's in a very structured system where you have dispatchers looking out for you to a degree.
Given a good self-paced disciplined approach, I don't have a problem extending my projections out to 3,500hrs TT w/1,500 Jet or Turbo-Prop before attempting permanent single-pilot PIC in a VLJ. In fact, I won't mind bumping that up to 4,000 TT and 2,000 Jet/Turbo-Prop. Or, higher if necessary. I just want to be safe and turbine proficient once I get to the VLJ.
Thanks again!