Challenger Type Question...
 

My type says CL-65 for the CRJ 200.

I've heard but never confirmed from other RJ pilots here in the regionals that it's the same type as the Challenger series...

Anybody know if that's correct?

I've heard 2 very different stories... Please someone who really knows and has flown both aircraft as PIC let us know.

Thanks

Couldn't you just ask the FSDO or is that barking up the wrong tree? Just call them and use someone elses name.

I suppose that would be one route to go, but rather than bothering them I was hoping someone on here could fill in the blanks... good thought though, but why not use your own name for such an innocent question? The FAA won't violate you for using your name when you ask such a non-confrontational question. I guess I don't understand your logic in this case.

CL65 = type rating for the CRJ series of aircraft ONLY.

The challenger series have their own type ratings. (CL600, CL604, don't know the others for the newer versions)

A semi-current list of type rating designations can be found here:
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...a/2_009_00.pdf
(pages 14-21)

Appreciate the help
 

Thanks for the info... I'll take it as truth unless someone else on the forum wants to speak up.

See the above edit to my post for additional info.

When I got my cl-65 type back in '97, I asked about the 604 type. The guys in CYUL told me that while the planes were quite similar, it was a separate type rating. At the time they did not have a short course to get the additional type.

So, unless I am out of date with this info, they are not interchangeable. It is a shame, this would open up a lot of possibilities for quite a lot of drivers.

You know they really are there to help with this type of thing, plus you are only being responsible. I do a little with the FAAST guys out of the PWM FSDO and one of the things that they always say, is that not enough people call for clarification. I got set up with them because I called on a question that I got from one of my students. Just making a quick call (and if you don't want to Identify yourself, then dont. But there is no need to lie about it) can save a lot of confusion and potential problems down the road. But keep in mind, what you will get is an INTERPRETATION. If it is that important, get it in writing or record it. They are generally more than willing to help.

Granted, the FSDO up here is the best that I have worked with thus far and way better than the ones in FL. So if you don't like them and you still have a question, call Portland, ME!

The problem with FSDO's is that you can get different answers from different ones. I think the FAA has as many answers as they do people working there.

Yes, different types but the challenger would be a breeze if you are an RJ pilot.

Thanks for the info... I guess there would be no sense in trying for a Challenger job without the exact type. I'm in the airline world so I have no clue if there are jobs out there that would hire without the type then send me to get the correct type. All I ever see are job postings requiring time in type. Seems odd to me that they all require time in type. Do they really think thousands of hours in an RJ is useless? I'm pretty sure I could handle left seat in a G5 and especially a Challenger with some training...and without having time in type.

MINFuel, I flew the CL-65 for 10 years and then flew corporate for a couple of months in the CL-604 before moving on to UPS, as stated in earlier post it is a seperate type rating. If you have flow the CL-65 for a while the CL-604 type is a joke. It should be differences training. Good Luck!

In some cases I have seen it happen, the better places to get your paycheck from will hire the person not the type. I've seen friends hire other friends over already typed guys just for that reason.

Re hatching an old thread
 

I was just curious about something. I'm going to be displaced from my base and I'm thinking I would like a new type out of it. I have contemplated proffering for displacement to the CRJ 700. Does anyone know if the CRJ 700 type is interchangable with a global express type? The link that Josh provided doesn't work anymore. thx...

Here's the listing location (updated info):
FSIMS Handbook

The link I provided for some reason doesn't have the Global Express listed, but IIRC, the Global Type rating designation is BD700. It is not the same as or interchangable with any CRJ type rating (CL65).

Hey, thanks......

Im guessing no...... One is a Canadair, the other is Bombardier. Global type is BD-700 and CRJ type is CL-600 I believe........

ARL

Plus Corporate aircraft like the global are likely to have 3 times as much avionics and goodies compared to regional jets. ie HUD, 3 FMS HF Radios and all that fun stuff. So wile the physical flying aspects may be similar the actual button pushing can be drastically different at first.:)

My understanding since our company has a Challenger 600 is that the CL 600 type will let you fly the 600 and 601, The CL 604 will let you fly the 604 and the 605 with a differences course.

After working on getting a job flying a Challenger 604/605 the types are different. With a CL-65 you would do the "short course" to get a CL-604 type. Assuming these are both PIC types you will have BOTH on your cert. The Global is a whole other $50K type rating. Its a BD-700. The CRJ-100,200,440,700,900 are all CL-65 with differences training.

The FAA makes no sense when it comes to type ratings, I have a Lr jet type and you can fly like six or seven different versions, and let me tell you there are alot of big differences between some of them. But an CL65 and CL604 are different types altogether, just good old goverment stupidity.

The Lear is built in the good old USA (even though it's now owned by Bombardier). The Challenger isn't. Citations are the same way- my CE500 type covers about 3 million differerent variants... My guess that in part it's political. In part it's how the airplane was certified.

It all has to do with the certification efforts and desires of the manufacturer. Perhaps the good folks in CYUL didn't want CL65 drivers to be cross qualified in the corporate jet versions of very similar birds?

Between airline stints I worked as a sim instructor in SAV and got typed in the GV. That jewel of a rating is good for the G350, G450, G500, G550, GV classic and hopefully even the soon to come G650. All of these birds except the classic GV have essentially identical flight decks. The classic GV (the plane the rating is based on) is an entirely different animal, but all that is required is differences training. I would argue the GV is a lot further from the others than the CL65 is from the Challenger 604/605, but that's the way the manufacturers certified 'em.

I have the Challanger 600 and 604 type rating. One guy I fly with came out of the airlines with a CL65 type he still had to go thru upgrade/initial coure "short course" for the Cl604 type. The normal course is 21 days for the intial at FSI/CAE. You also have to remember Cl65 flying is dramatically different then flying a Challanger series aircraft. Different avionics, different deck angels for manuvers. There are Cl65 corporate shuttle versions in the non 121 world. I am seeing them more and more. I understand they are great short haul aircraft for some fortune 500 flight departments.

The GV is the essential the same aircaft as the G350/450/550 with subtle differences, the avionics are dramatically different but that is why the avionics upgrade course costs dramatically more. You can't just fly a G550 with a GV type rating. The cost is almost twice as much for the G550 course as it is for the GV course. The FAA has safe guards for a reason. IT's called SAFETY.

Someone told me it was started by the airlines who were buying CRJs. They didn't want pilots to be able to bail to a corp. job with the same type rating.

This is all hearsay and speculation.

I think the confusion comes from the fact a CRJ2 or 7 or 9 is identified as a Cl600-2etc thus it looks like the same identifier for a challenger and we all know a crj is a challenger with plugs, but it was my understanding our type ratings are CL-65 specifically to prevent airline to corporate crossover (not that getting a corporate job with an airline stink is going to be super easy anyway)

I have heard that rumor about the type as well. I also heard that in Canada it was the same type for a long time and then changed it. The airlines pushed for that with the Beech 1900 and the King Air 300/350 adn eventually got it. However a good friend of mine flys at Comair on the RJ. We were comparing notes on the aircraft and determined although they are many similarities in the aircraft they are not really that close and there are aircraft with different types that are much more similar. ie, Gulfstream 3 AC model - Gulfstream 4.

where is the safety on having the Lear 23 the same type as the Lear 55...

they are not even close.....

CL-850. CRJ-200 in corporate config with a few differences (but still a pig). Poor man's Global is the nickname I have already heard!

From reading this thread and being interested in the corporate world the 3 types it appears are "great to have" are the LRJET, CE-500, and GV? Not sure what those officially are on the certificate but it gives you the most options across the board. That being said I do want to at least ride up front in a Challenger to see the differences between the "original challenger (604)" and the CRJ-200 (which is a PIG).


1 thing that is awesome about the -200..... I commonly have a FDX guy in the jumpseat (based in MEM) and they ALWAYS freak the hell out from about 100 ft to the ground. I guess its the throttles to idle, nose DOWN, and the 10-15 degree pitch difference from 20ft to the ground.... Entertaining!

I have a type in the CL65 and just got typed in the 604 a few months ago. Totally different types, and I did the full 21 day course through Bombardier.

There are similarities but there are quite a few differences. In a nutshell, the 604 actually has more limitations, it doesn't have all the redundancies the RJ has-nor does it do as many things for you as the RJ, it does have autothrottles and VNAV, speed mode (or FLC) still sucks, panels are in different spots, electrical is different, the FMS is MUCH more capable, the EFIS is slightly different.

I flew the 604 for a year then had to go back and take the 601 Initial course....you wanna talk about regression...:)

Well that is PWM. If you are working with Bill G. or John W. you just won't find better.

These guys (plus a couple more) actually LIKE aviation.

Learguy

I can confirm it for you, I'm typed on the Challenger 600/601 (CL600 type) and on the Challenger 604 (CL604 type). Hope this helps.

They are terrific guys to work with up there no doubt. And as far as the Challenger type ratings go, none of them are valid unless you attended FSI up in Montreal in mid-January. :eek:

What? The wheelbarrow imitation freaks them out? :)