Jump to content


VIP Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About cross-eyed

  • Rank
    PVT Poster
  1. I'm going to interject a little ignorance into this conversation. Would the difference be in the way the FAA treats time in a non-FAA certified aircraft for purposes of fullfilling FAA certification requirements? I'm not sure specifically what the regulation states and am, frankly, too lazy to research it for this discussion (although I find this thread extremely interesting). If the hours are in FAA certified aircraft (and meet part 61 training/experience regs), they count toward FAA pilot certification requirements. I know my cop friends who fly the ex-army OH58's cannot use their time in that aircraft to fulfill FAA certification requirements because they are not FAA certified aircraft. Beyond that, I would think that the hours, and how they were aquired, are a mainly a matter of interest to the hiring operator and their insurance company, not the FAA. If I was hiring, I would sure "count" those hours flown in the military as long as the person is FAA certified for the job required and meet my insurer's standards. Then I would want to see if their experience (aircraft type, mission experience, etc.) fits the job, etc. just as I would with any non-military experienced applicant.
  2. !!! - now don your helmet and take cover - jabs at the R22 or it's drivers always illicits a cult-like response!
  3. In your experience, what have you found to be the best avoidance technique once you spot birds in or near your flight path (remain straight/level, climb, dive, etc) and does it vary dependent on the bird's position relative to your h/c (above, below, same altitude, etc)? I have heard various recommendations but have yet to find a bird that consistently pays attention to the advice. They all seem to have their own agenda. BTW, I have only confirmed a bird strike when preflighting the next morning. I found feathers and blood in the rotorhead from what appeared to be a small bird. I have no idea when I struck it, but it was sometime during the previous flight.
  4. ARTICFOX - You will hear the "if you can fly an R22 you can fly anything" line continuously throughout your new career, mostly by folks who are also early in their new career and have learned in the R22. You'll also frequently hear words and phrases such as "twitchy", "sensitive", "harder to hover initially", "great helicopter when properly flown", "easier to transition to 300 from R22 than vice versa", etc. associated with the R22. All of which are true. Usually folks are trying to imply that if you learned in an R22, you make a better pilot. A more accurate statement is that if you learned to fly in an R22 you make a better R22/44 pilot (initially). It's also true that on average, a student takes longer to master hovering, autorotations, etc. in the R22 than in the 300. And, the R22/H300 debate is irrelevant except to folks who've only flown the R22 or the H300. Neither is a predictor of the quality of a pilot in any type helicopter.
  5. Whoa...... dude! I ask this out of complete ignorance, but what is the situation that requires a night application?
  6. Randy - Simple logistics for me. I was in FL on business and near Ormond Beach. I did some intitial research on Tomlinson Aviation and set a meeting. I did the same with HAI, to get a contrast in types of schools. I met with Neal Tomlinson first, flew with one of his guys, and cancelled the visit to HAI. I new this was the place. So Palm Beach wasn't on the list for no reason other than I loved the first place I came to and stayed.
  7. Jonathan's exactly right. The providers convinced the FCC to ban it because, with the original analog technology, the higher the altitude, the more cells you would "occupy". Since analog towers had limited capacity, it could potentially cause congestion. It's not on issue with the digital formats because they pass the signal along to the next tower (basically). I believe the FCC is re-evaluating the regulation now but it could be a while.
  8. It would have been nice for someone else on freqency (with some altitude) to offer to relay/try to contact. I once lost contact with ATC due to low altitude. I was trying to contact them to cancel flight following (too late) and they were trying to contact me, presumably they lost radar contact. A kindly fixed-wing pilot heard both and relayed the comm. for us.
  9. I'm ok with you doing that, Rey. Whatever you need.
  10. John - You should take a look at: http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/Rid.../helicopter.asp Download the RideReady demo and give it a try. If you like it, you pay and they give you an unlock code for the full database. I've used their GroundSchool software for the CPL-H and am a big fan. I didn't use the checkride prep software so I can't comment on it. If you decide to try it, let us know how you liked it. Also, I happened across a DPE's website that has some useful information, even if it is fixed-wing oriented. Take a look at his entire page, but specifically the "Common Problems on the Private Pilot Checkride" page: http://www.geocities.com/mike_shiflett/checkride_notes.htm He gives you tips on the most common problems he sees as an examiner. Good luck! Let us know how it went.
  11. Rey - I think you'll get them in time. As I recall, it took a while to accumulate a good number of reviews in the previous space. I for one feel very strongly about the school where I trained and therefore want to give the review the appropriate attention. The previous area was more a "comment" area whereas the new area has a more formal appeal. It's easier to barf out a "comment" but a "review" implies more precision. Being a bit of a procrastinator, I just haven't taken the time - yet - but fully intend to do so in the near future (that means "sometime this year" in procrastinator speak). [EDITED for grammar]
  12. I did my training at Tomlinson Aviation. Extremely pleased with everything. Spotless hangar, excellent equipment, great training, personal attention. You'd be hard-pressed to find anything negative from anyone who trained there. First rate! http://www.tomlinsonaviation.com/
  13. Corey - If you are interested in just a written test prep (i.e., FAA question database and study notes software), I recommend dauntless software's GroundSchool: www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/GroundSchool/commercial.asp I used the ASA for my PPL(H) and GroundSchool for my CPL(H). GroundSchool is far better and cheaper. You can download the demo version, then pay for an onlock code online if you like it. It's immediate gratification - no waiting on an order. Download the demo and see what you think.
  14. FW206 - you are oversimplifying. The CBi and C have different powerplants. The CBi has a HIO-360-G1A (180shp). The 300C has an HIO-360-D1A (190shp). As far as I know, these are not identical powerplants derated differently. If what you say is true, then, theoretically and without regards to regulation/certification, I could buy a CBi and operate it to 300C limits, obtain identical performance, but just need to accept shorter TBO's. a94520 - the vintage CB I used for training consistently carried two 210lb'ers with full standard fuel (30gal.) in the FL early summer and never once could not hover, t/o, cruise or land without spare power. The 300C can carry that and hover OGE (done it consistently) staying within MP limits. But, 4.1 hrs. endurance is a bit of a chuckle. Even puttering around at max endurance speed (S-L-O-W), I'm lucky to get 3hrs. on 30gal.
  15. Your searches will have more accurate results if you spell "Schwitzer" as "Schweizer". I'm not aware of anything downloadable. Depending on what your're looking for, Jeppesen has the "Helicopter Pilot Manual" which is a full helicopter PPL/CPL course written in conjunction with Schweizer. An excellent resource. They also have a separate companion "Helicopter Pilot Syllabus" which most Part 141 schools use as their syllabus, and a "Model 300CB Information Manual" which is basically an abridged version of the CB's POH.
  • Create New...