RuslanM97

I want to become an airline pilot and im thinking of going to P.E.A and they offer two different training programs. One is $9000 more and it offers MEI. Does that give me an advantage over other candidates in the field in the future? Here are the details of both programs. They have other differences too.


PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM I*
(136 hours) Program Code - PEA-850
Instrument, Commercial, Multi Engine,
CFI, CFII, Glass Cockpit C-172,
Upset Recovery, DA-42 Systems,
Risk Management
Dual C-172 Glass Cockpit ……………66 hrs.
SoloC-172 Glass Cockpit ……………. 10 hrs.
Redbird FMX ……………...……………...6 hrs.
Redbird TD2 ……………...……………...…8 hrs.
Dual 8KCAB ……………...……………...…6 hrs.
Dual Complex ……………...…………….. 25 hrs.
Dual DA-42……………...……………...… 15 hrs.
Oral Single Engine ……………...…… 86 hrs.
Oral Multi-Engine…………...………… 15 hrs.
Inst, Comm, CFI/CFII, DA-42
Ground School: 175 Hours Ground
School, and Books
Total Price with DA-42...........$52,796
Prerequisite for the Professional
Program I: Private Pilot License

PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM III*
(137 hours) Program Code - PEA-854
Instrument, Commercial, Multi Engine,
CFI, CFII, MEI, Glass Cockpit C-172,
Upset Recovery, DA-42 Systems,
Risk Management
Dual C-172 Glass Cockpit …………… 45 hrs.
Redbird FMX ……………...……………...6 hrs.
Redbird TD2 ……………...……………...…8 hrs.
Dual 8KCAB ……………...……………...…6 hrs.
Dual Complex ……………...…………….. 15 hrs.
Dual DA-42……………...……………...… 55 hrs.
Solo DA-42……………...……………...……2 hrs.
Oral Single Engine ……………...…… 75 hrs.
Oral Multi-Engine…………...………… 42 hrs.
Inst, Comm, CFI/CFII, DA-42
Ground School: 175 Hours Ground
School, and Books
Total Price with DA-42............$61,392
Prerequisite for the Professional
Program III: Private Pilot License

Dfwnightflyer

Not at all. The only thing an MEI might get you is a faster track to your total hours provided you are hired into a flight school where you will be able to put it to work. Most of your time comes from leveraging your CFI/II ticket. 50 hrs of twin time is all you need to get your foot in the door at most regionals and you can get that as you go by leveraging flight time deals once you get your multi-commercial. That said IMO the MEI is the easiest of the three instructor ratings to get, especially if you tack it on straight after your multi-commercial.

TiredSoul

Word of caution.
Do not underestimate being a Multi engine instructor as it’s the most dangerous form of flight instruction.
When you’re a CFI you’ll soon find out there is very little a student can do above a 1000’ that will kill you.
As an MEI you need eyes on a stick all of the time.
The fact your student made it to a Multi does not guarantee in any shape or form that they’ve understood any of the aerodynamics basics or have mastered crosswind landings.
If they come from a different school or come walking in the door off the street with basics training many years behind them they could present a serious issue if you are not on your game 100%.
I would highly recommend getting a couple of Private and Instrument students under your belt before you get on a Multi.
At least you’ll have some idea of common student errors.
Now back to your question.
This being a buyers market.
Many schools will be willing to get you an MEI either at cost or no cost to you when you work there.
Maybe a 6-9 months payment plan or every month you work they get rid of 10% of your debt or similar.
Save yourself $9k and do your MEI at the school where you’ll end up working.

rickair7777

Yes, easy to get a good resume bulle for the price/effort.

But like TiredSoul said, actually teaching light twins is potentially dangerous.

MadmanX2

^^^^This^^^^

And I never did the MEI basically because the flight school I went to a student did a gear up on the twin, so I kept my money and went to work.

Excargodog

To put this in perspective, at one time the FAA actually considered deleting the requirement for single engine approaches in light twins because they were losing more students and MEIs practicing for single engine approaches than they ever expected single engine approaches to ever actually be required, based upon actual engine failures. Finally, jarred by death statistics, they actually did at least modify their requirements for demonstrating maneuvering near VMC.

Twin Comanches - prior to the CR engine - accounted for a goodly chunk of these disasters.

https://airfactsjournal.com/2017/03/...n-twin-pilots/

JohnBurke

The FAA modified the requirement to demonstrate single engine stalls, which used to be part of the multi requirements. The reasons are obvious, and the primary rationale in removing the single-engine stall requirement in a multi-engine aircraft was loss of unrecoverable loss of control.

The mentality remains, however, and only a couple of years ago someone tried to do a single-engine stall in a light turboprop with me, and didn't seem to think it would be a problem. That kind of thinking should have been stamped out a long time ago.

Not too many years removed, a chief pilot for a 135 operation where I did some flying and wrench turning was going to give me a 135 ride. He noted that he'd require a single engine go-around and I told him no, it wouldn't be happening. I also told him that if he pulled an engine below 400', he wasn't getting it back, and it would be treated as an emergency. He agreed, and shortly after a single engine ILS to a mountain airport, with a two-engine touch and go, he pulled one engine to idle and said "this will count as your single engine go around.

I continued straight ahead and he asked how I planned to return to the airport. With rising terrain on all sides, I told him we weren't going back to the airport. He was of the mentality that it was okay to yank and bank low and slow on one engine in a Part 23 turboprop, and he was wrong. He wasn't happy with the outcome, either, and in fact ended up in tears. I passed. He was fired shortly after that, for decision and performance issues.

As for getting the MEI, in my opinion it's not something a brand new instructor should worry about. Many new MEI's have very little multi experience, which is stupid to begin with, but add to that very little instruction experience, and you're handling a loaded weapon from the wrong end and the safety's off. I've seen several flights that should have bee routine, go very badly, when the instructor and the student zigged when the other zagged, with runway departures, Vmc rolls just after takeoff, and fatalities. Several have been close to home.

Get the MEI if you can; you're not wrong to get the training and the certification won't hurt you. It can only help. It's also true that one of the best ways to really wrap your mind around a subject is to teach it. that said, walk when you're ready to walk, run when the time is right. Most of your instruction will be in singles anyway. The amount of students who get as far as multi training dwindles rapidly compared to student-starts; the vast majority of flight students don't complete a private pilot, let alone go on to do instrument, commercial, or multi; primary training will generally absorb most of your instruction time, unless you're working at a dedicated school that pushes high volumes of students through an entire program...and even then only a few instructors usually end up doing the multi. You can worry about multi training later. Sometimes a flight school will get you your MEI or let you use the airplane at a discount to get it, rather than paying through the nose now.

I didn't bother with my multi until I worked somewhere that wanted me to begin evaluating new hires and giving recurrent, checkrides, etc...and the company loaned me a twin to go do it, along with my CFII. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have bothered. Since then, it's come in handy in all kinds of odd ways around the globe; you never know when you might need it and better to have it for those times, whenever they might be...but don't knock yourself out. At least not right away. It's unlikely someone's going to throw you in a twin to give instruction until you've got some teaching time under your belt anyway.

JamesNoBrakes

Some of these things are hard to quantify. I watched an instructor yell at a pilot in the 727 sim because the guy simply had no idea of how to control the aircraft with an outboard engine out. A 727! Basically an DC-9 with a very very slight bit of rudder pressure needed. Some things are best to experience and understand thoroughly from teaching and experience. I had/have no problems doing Vmc demos in light twins and turboprops up until either heading change or stall, but I have always watched those like a hawk and I've seen many people over the years not keep the slight bank going, which makes the maneuver go bad real fast if you let them keep going, which I never have. I'm totally fine if someone wants to be ultra-cautious and conservative with this. Everything has a risk to it, but part of being a flight instructor is de-constructing the maneuvers and really understanding what is behind them, which can payoff significantly down the road. Spins and upset training is another good example of this. There's landing an airplane, which can differ greatly from aircraft to aircraft, and then there's understanding landing, which is really the same for each aircraft. I've seen ATP pilots that fly big jets that didn't really understand landing, they could pull it off, but I could tell the understanding just wasn't there and their results were far more random.

Should you spend a bunch more money for it at this stage? Probably not, as stated, best to do it at a school that needs multi-instructors and will pay for it. Should you get it and instruct multi-students? It's a good idea to become a more rounded pilot, reinforces a lot of fundamentals. I would always ask why an aircraft yaws and rolls when you fail an engine, and like a rapid-fire computer, I'd almost always hear "P-factor and accelerated slipstream!", then I'd ask why a 737 yaws and rolls when you fail an engine, and I'd get blank looks. It's fun to get into that setting and really teach people the understanding and how to control the aircraft. It's hard to do that racing through certificates yourself and most of us had some pretty crappy instruction at one point or another at the least. Being an instructor, you have a chance to influence that.

bamike

I'd be interested in hearing your explanation of landings so I can better understand them too.

As far as the multi-engine, anyone with that rating should know that P-factor and accelerated slipstream are critical engine factors. The reason it rolls into the dead engine is asymmetric thrust. Please correct me if I am wrong, always looking to learn.

JohnBurke

Stop the descent at or above the runway. Stop the forward motion at or before the end of the runway. Done.