Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FAA Type Ratings - 61.31(a)(3)  
User currently offlineNWADC9 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4896 posts, RR: 10
Posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1970 times:

Under 61.31, a pilot is required to hold a type rating for large aircraft, turbojets, and "other aircraft specified by the Administrator through aircraft type certificate procedures." Are there any aircraft that fall under that "other" category?


Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineweb500sjc From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 735 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

yes, Mitsubishi MU-2


Boiler Up!
User currently offlineDiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1535 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1858 times:

While not required by 61.31(a), the Zeppelin NT requires type specific training as set forth in 61.51(h), which is very similar to a type rating.

-DiamodnFlyer


User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3934 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1765 times:

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 1):

Why the Mu-2?



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1459 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1760 times:

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 3):
Why the Mu-2?

MU-2 has unique handling charecteristics. In lieu of ailerons it used spoilerons. Without the requirement of a type rating many pilots killed themselves and others because they has to have little formal training to fly the airplane. The MU-2 is a great fast airplane that had capabilities much greater than the pilots flying them. As a result of numerous crashes from losss of control the mandate to type rate was born.


User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3934 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1747 times:

Thanks.


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineLarshjort From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1746 times:

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 3):
Why the Mu-2?

It has no ailerons, only flight spoilers which makes it a bit tricky to handle. I believe there were a few crashed in the US before it was a requirement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_MU-2#Safety_Concerns

/Lars



139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4,
User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1697 times:

To my knowledge there is no MU-2 type rating. The aircraft does require type specific training and recurrent training, but after completion a pilot will not have a type rating on his certificate. It's actually a little more stringent since recurrent isn't required to continue flying other aircraft requiring a type after the checkride is passed under Part 91. The MU-2 does require recurrent to keep flying it.

User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 778 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1597 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 7):
To my knowledge there is no MU-2 type rating. The aircraft does require type specific training and recurrent training, but after completion a pilot will not have a type rating on his certificate. It's actually a little more stringent since recurrent isn't required to continue flying other aircraft requiring a type after the checkride is passed under Part 91. The MU-2 does require recurrent to keep flying it.

The MU-2 is also cheap to acquire which adds to the aforementioned problems.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic FAA Type Ratings - 61.31(a)(3)
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
FAA Type Ratings - 61.31(a)(3) posted Thu Jul 4 2013 09:09:07 by NWADC9
Boeing 777 Type Ratings posted Thu Oct 9 2008 10:43:30 by JETBLUEATASW
767-400 And Cockpit Type Ratings posted Thu Feb 8 2007 16:20:08 by MPDPilot
UDFs And Type Ratings posted Sun Dec 17 2006 22:35:25 by 2H4
DC-10/MD-11/MD-10 Type Ratings posted Wed Feb 18 2004 00:46:34 by Iluv727s
Type Ratings, The Values... posted Sun Sep 21 2003 05:09:36 by Tarzanboy
Type Ratings posted Thu Apr 11 2002 22:48:39 by Ziggy
Common Type Ratings posted Sun Sep 16 2001 06:40:17 by Frequent Flyer
Familiarization/Type Certificates/Ratings posted Sat Apr 20 2002 01:01:50 by TechRep
Type Certificates...Flying EXP After They're Gone posted Sun Mar 3 2013 21:52:00 by United727

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format