I'm new here, and perhaps this questions has been asked before, but...

Why do employers and insurance companies make such a big deal about multiengine time? I have only 70 hrs of multi time, out of 1100 hrs TT, and just don't get it.

Aside from the training for my multi rating , and the occasional recurrent training since, the engines have both been operating...and probably will be for the next several thousand hours. So it's not about the ability to handle an engine failure.

Is "multiengine time" a pseudonym for "time in heaver, complex airplanes?" Or is it assumed that twins are more "serious airplanes" than "little airplanes" like C172s and that time in twins is therefore probably more representative of what employers will pay me to do?

Like I said, I only have 70 hrs in twins (DA42s) so perhaps I will understand as I gain more experience, but for now, a twin seems just like a single with twice the probability of an engine failure or generator failure. I have noticed no major difference between the DA42 and a complex single...except it takes longer to start it.

Thanks

 

Because a twin is much more likely to be in the same category and class of what your future employer will be paying you to fly.

You may have both engines operating but you are managing a complex aircraft as well as its multiple systems and adjustments and idiosyncrasies of keeping it all running in harmony.

Multi time is not necessarily vital. They need to have a cutoff somewhere and this industry is insurance driven. If they say multi time is a requirement then they know they are not going to get someone who has 1100 hours of only 152 time. As for the hours, 50, 100, 200, 500, 100 PIC etc, those are just arbitrary numbers chosen by the insurance companies or the current hiring market.

P.S. The Da42 is BARELY a twin...it has fadec.

 

That's a useful answer, thanks.

I'm not sure I understand your last sentence, though. If multi time is valued because it represents the airplanes that I'll be flying for my employer, then why does the FADEC reduce the value of DA42 time? Don't jets have FADEC nowadays? And if fiddling with prop/mixture/throttle levers is the point, then does my C172RG time matter more than my DA42 time?

Thanks again

 

I was not devaluing your twin star time..just picking on the modern plane.

Your twin star time is every bit as valuable as Cessna 310, PA44, BE76 time etc.

From a teaching standpoint it does not really teach what it is like to handle a handful of twin such as the 310, older seneca I, or some of the underpowered apaches and a few others when things go wrong.

It is a good plane. Fadec is not something that you get experience in, it just kind of happens. It works based on smoke and mirrors as well as witchcraft and trickery. At least that is what I gathered while I was sleeping during ground at flightsafety.

 

Aside from the training for my multi rating , and the occasional recurrent training since, the engines have both been operating...and probably will be for the next several thousand hours. So it's not about the ability to handle an engine failure.

Actually, it is. If you desire to fly corporate aircraft or airline type aircraft, you are looking at aircraft with more than one engine, more complex systems than a light single, and things are happening at a faster rate. But all in all, its also about the decision making, which ONLY comes from experience. Also, the engine may be great, and running like a champ, but if you ingest a goose or two, it wont be for long...And, you still need to fly the aircraft!


"Is "multiengine time" a pseudonym for "time in heaver, complex airplanes?" Or is it assumed that twins are more "serious airplanes" than "little airplanes" like C172s and that time in twins is therefore probably more representative of what employers will pay me to do?"

Yep, that's mainly the point. A Cessna 310R, which is mainly a light twin, is more challenging to fly than a light single engine. It is about insurance, but it also depends on what your career goal is. Recreational, corporate, airline, military, etc. Anything past recreational or military you will need both time and experience because the majority of the flying is predicated on multi-engines.

 

If you have to ask......

 

You need the multi time because I said so. Seriously though, everyone else had it . What makes you so special? Are you a better pilot that you only only need 70 hrs of multi? Are you somehow entitled ?

Just letting you know how you come off asking that question here.

 

I find this multi engine thing bit odd as well. A pilot with 10 hours of multi time would almost certainly be past up for a job by someone with 100 hours multi. I personally don't think flying around on two good engines for an extra 90 hours (after earning a multi commercial add on then buying block time to be considered "employable" at 100 hours) means jack. The only good argument I have heard on this is that MEI'ing is highly valued because you are forced to constantly be thinking about multi engine topics and procedures. Too bad I don't even have a CFI yet. Oh well, I'm over it

 

instruct in a twin for 500 hours with half the time being a single engine plane with all the factors of single engine dynamics, it will make you a sharper pilot and when it happens in real life hopefully you won't vmx it into the ground. its not bad thing to have multi instructor time.

 

There is a huge difference between 10 hours multi and 100 hours multi. Actually, there is a big difference between 10 and 50. There is not nearly as huge a difference between 100 hours multi and 200 hours multi, however. Teaching multi engine is also extremely helpful, although it is better to do it after you get some multi experience.

As far as engine failures are concerned, I get a minimum of 3 engine failures every six months, like it or not. This occurs at recurrent training and checkride time, and at least one is under the hood on approach so that you can handle it in the unlikely event where it really happens to you.

Good luck, and don't underestimate the value of your light twin time. I would recommend flying something else though. Not because there is anything wrong with the Diamond, but to give you a better idea of what typical twin flying is like. A Seneca, Baron, Aztec, Navajo, Twin Commanche, Twin Otter and King Air are extremely different than your DA42.