Once you’re post PPL +20-30 hours and current, fly as many different types as you can. The skills you learn in adapting to new types will multiply to allow you the skill to adapt to even more new types, and thus flying situations. I was fortunate to rain in four different types (150/152/172, Cherokee, Citabria, and Cardinal RG) which all were available at club at which I learned. That breadth of skill made transition to 182 a non event, and prepared me for Aztec and C-310. With those aircraft in my experience base, the true test; I had use of my airline’s DC-8-63 full simulator – but zero training resource, other than full access to the flight manual. I taught myself to fly the sim, and logged 45 hours, with never a problem. After that, I was convinced that with the basic class skills, and good self study, an attentive pilot can fly most certified aircraft.
Certified is a big element of this. Understand that the aircraft will not be granted certification if its handling is too far away from the standard – handling characteristics are a certification requirement, with the added element that the aircraft must not every require unusual pilot skill or attention. So don’t sell yourself short. If you read and understand the flight manual, and meet the aircraft with a good attitude, transition should be easy.
Since then, I’ve flown 75 different types as PIC, and 7 more as second pilot (not type endorsed). My “personal best” for different aircraft was in two consecutive days, I flew my 150 (to and from work) where “work” was flying a modified Grand Caravan, Lake Amphibian, DA-42, and Tiger Moth. My extremes have been to have to check myself out in that Tiger Moth, in a Bellanca Viking, and in a Navajo, because there was simply no one available to check me out, and they had to be flown.
Fly the different types, they’re not really all that different! Pull, they go up, pull more they go down….
“Flying” is never the problem, IMHO. Any pilot can fly any plane after just a little training. Or as my friend Frank said when I asked him how hard “his” 767 is to fly: “If you can’t fly a 767, you sure can’t fly a 172”. … While that is a bit exaggerated, I learned what he meant later when I was allowed to fly an airliner (taxi, take-off, 3 h of cruise and landing) by the Chief Test Pilot of ATR some years ago. It was a 72-500, and I couldn’t believe how easy it was to fly, and even to land. BUT: I had little idea about the systems, or only as much as you can have after training for 2 hours in the sim (before the flight) …
I’ve flown about 150 different types, but very many of them only for 12 hours and with one or two landings. I still learned a lot, i think. I did study the POHs before the flight, i knew the speeds and the main procedures, but of course there was always a test pilot who would have handled emergencies. The ones that impressed me most were the PC-12, the TBM700C2 and the ThunderMustang, a 640 hp carbon fibre 2/3 size experimental copy of the P-51, that I only flew from the rear seat and did not land … that would have been too dangerous.
Systems knowledge is vital, particularly when something goes “bang – stop”. But the broadening of one’s skills makes it more easy to absorb the more complex systems. Once you understand well the six tank fuels system of a C-310, you’re off to a good start for more complex aircraft!
The skill to compensate for quite different “eye height” is important, in terms of “finding” the surface, rather than slamming into, or stalling onto it. That is a skill to be learned. Between the 172 taildragger, and the Sup Cub, my young charge was struggling with eye height differences, but she got it. The difference from Lake Amphibian in the water to DC-3 on the runway is a bit more to adjust to, and that took some practice, when I had concurrent test programs on both types….
A lot of people seem to think as I do.
It’s like the old sayings about hours. Some people have a lot of hours, but it’s the same hour repeated many times. Others may have less time but every hour has been different.
Different types teach you a lot, if they really are different. I love flying all sorts of aircraft, including several types that regularly get slated.
I would say the excrement hitting the fan is the best learning tool of all; if you survive……
Stickandrudderman agree as long as it doesn’t build overconfidence and increased risk tolerance. Better to enjoy a nice CRM type session on the ground, than learn too much by experience.
In an ideal world, yes!
I fly the Bonanza now for about 3,5 years. Before I owned a PA28 Arrow for 8 years, and before a C182 for about 2 years. In my opinion it took always a while to get really familiar with each aircraft, because of there different characteristics. And to be honest, although I invested more then one day with instructor when changing to the Bonanza, the different location of the gear handle had driven me nearly into an accident.
So in my opinion, I would try to get familiar with one aircraft and keep on flying with this one. This will pay off when getting into a difficult situation.
BTW: I have also flown the C152, Katana, C172, C172RG, C182RG, PA28 Archer, SR20, TB 21, DA42, Seneca, P58 but never that long as the mentioned types above.
Depends on what makes a good pilot. If a good pilot is a well rounded pilot, someone who can fly anything he steps into, then obviously the former, very different types. Basically what you would have to do to become a good test pilot. If we’re talking about proficiency on a particular type, then the latter, that type. You always want quite a few hours on each type, but that’s not easy to quantify as not all hours are the same.
I’ve now been flying the same aircraft (Robin HR100/285R) for 35 years, about 60hrs per year. I doubt whether it has made me a better pilot but it certainly makes me a safer pilot. So much of the flying and operation are now automatic responses, like riding a bike I don’t need to think about mundane things. So I don’t need checklists, I know the systems very well (usually through all sorts of failures over the years). Any changes or updates, i.e. avionics, were done progressively so I had plenty of time to get used to it.
Whenever I fly anything else it feels very odd, so I wouldn’t want to do anything very challenging. In mine I always feel ahead of the plane, not behind the curve.
I believe that any experience in other aircraft, however brief, is very useful. But whenever things get difficult you can’t beat an intimate knowledge of the plane and its responses. It leaves your brain free to deal with the tricky situations.
