Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Aviation Law
Complex, & Hi-Perf Endorsements >

Complex, & Hi-Perf Endorsements

Search

Notices
Aviation Law Legal issues, FARs, and questions

Complex, & Hi-Perf Endorsements

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-23-2012 | 04:40 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Default

If you have even just a multi rating, you are covered. Prime example of grandfathering; I had a fair amount of time in C-421's before there was ever a high altitude sign-off. So I never needed to get that sign-off for high altitude and pressurization.

The high-perf endorsement is for aircraft with MORE than 200 H.P. Used to be an Arrow would qualify, but no more. The Arrow qualifies, as well as the Mooney and others, for a complex, because of the retractable gear.

I started flying in 1973, forgive me now cuz I am old, but I do seem to remember that the High-performance and complex were generally signed off in one endorsement back then.
Reply
Old 05-23-2012 | 08:37 PM
  #12  
LowSlowT2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by wizepilot
The high-perf endorsement is for aircraft with MORE than 200 H.P.
I think it used to say 200HP or more and now it says more than 200HP - which eliminated everything with an IO-360 at 200HP...a good thing. Seems like most things with more than 200HP are more utility planes than what we might traditionally think of...

Originally Posted by wizepilot
I started flying in 1973, forgive me now cuz I am old, but I do seem to remember that the High-performance and complex were generally signed off in one endorsement back then.
This is what my preliminary research has shown - they were combined, but without as much strict definition it seems. I had one old timer tell me he got a sign off for a plane with flaps, and then another sign off for a plane with electric flaps - both as "complex"....and he told me the complex and hi-perf were combined prior to '97. So, it seems to me that there was some "interpretation" and "judgement" allowed prior to the stricter definitions we have now.

I'd love to assume that since I have an ATP, I'm exempt/grandfathered/whatever for complex (and maybe hi-perf, although I don't "need" that in the immediate foreseeable future). Or that since I got my mil-comp commercial in '93 I'm grandfathered. Or....whatever. Makes sense to me that I'm grandfathered, but....

I'm probably over-thinking this. And, like I said before, if I buy this plane, I'll likely get a couple hours with a CFI just to make myself comfortable (haven't flown a Mooney since '95 and, while I'm sure I could "figure it out", it'd probably be best to get someone to go with me at least for a few bounce & goes around the pattern if nothing else) and I can get an endorsement at that time...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
garylayne
Flight Schools and Training
0
03-08-2011 03:27 PM
flyinfinn86
Aviation Law
2
01-28-2011 10:17 AM
sellener
Aviation Law
5
11-17-2009 08:29 PM
Micro
Cargo
0
10-30-2007 02:51 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 Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices