banner
banner

30 Jan 2026, 18:11 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 989 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 66  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2023, 14:39 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/14/13
Posts: 6410
Post Likes: +5149
Username Protected wrote:
One that can flub the best of them, is when ATC gives you crossing restriction say 20 miles from a fix in your flight plan, but there happens to be another waypoint in your flight plan between the along track offset waypoint and the crossing restriction. It can be done, but you won't get that situation often, maybe once in hundreds of hours, and I don't believe it is in the book. It can be done, but your first time you will be heads-down headscratching melting your brain with WTH???? Prob hand fly it the first time using an E6B. ;) There are a lot of these low occurrence, high workload situations that are avionics specific.


This isn't G3000 magic, in the G1000 you highlight the waypoint, hit menu, and select "Create ATK Offset Waypoint" and then dial in the distance

[youtube]https://youtu.be/SVMMkH3QxfM[/youtube]

If you feel the need to use an E6B at any point flying behind a G1000 or G3000, then you need better training


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2023, 21:19 
Online


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 21190
Post Likes: +26677
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
One that can flub the best of them, is when ATC gives you crossing restriction say 20 miles from a fix in your flight plan, but there happens to be another waypoint in your flight plan between the along track offset waypoint and the crossing restriction. It can be done, but you won't get that situation often, maybe once in hundreds of hours, and I don't believe it is in the book.

Uh, that's simple. Go to the referenced waypoint, hit VNAV, say 20 miles prior, enter altitude, activate. It will create a waypoint 20 miles prior to the reference waypoint even if there is a flight plan waypoint between that and the reference one. It works the same regardless of the intermediate waypoint or not. It then gives you vertical guidance so you reach the crossing altitude at the right spot.

I get this a lot from ATC, like every third flight, very common for jets apparently. Not difficult with my setup (GTN 750 Xi).

Quote:
It can be done, but your first time you will be heads-down headscratching melting your brain with WTH???? Prob hand fly it the first time using an E6B. ;)

Not that hard, you can always go heading and pitch pointed in roughly the right direction, then sort it out.

Every pilot needs to know how to revert to basic modes while resolving complex situations. This was dealt with in the famous Children of Magenta video.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/5ESJH1NLMLs[/youtube]

Quote:
There are a lot of these low occurrence, high workload situations that are avionics specific.

I think the logic is pretty similar to my GTN on the high end G systems.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 12:49 
Online



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8880
Post Likes: +11633
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
For the benefit of all, I have some specific information in regards to what is required to fly an M2 from an insurance perspective.

The first thing to understand is that what really matters is what an underwriter will agree to in a specific situation. So, what I am providing is a general guideline and hopefully an explanation of why Mike's assertion is simply wrong.

I also want to be clear that I am not an insurance guy, I just know who to call to get the answers.

The most important thing to understand in the M2 insurance situation is that when they say "time in type" they DO NOT mean 525 type! They mean time in the Citation M2. So, if you have an Open Pilot that states 250 hours time in type, that means 250 hours in an M2. In this case you will have to have each non-qualifying pilot submit an application to get approved, the approval can vary from underwriter to underwriter.

This is the issue my client had, he couldn't just grab any 525 pilot as Mike had said, whereas on the King Air, he can. The only requirement is X hours in King Airs and school in the last 12 months.

It's also an issue for our pilot-owners moving into M2's, you may get an underwriter that approves you based on being 525 typed and completing M2 sim training, and they may require 10 -15 hours with another pilot in the airplane.

So, in summary, the Citation M2 (and CJ3+) are not just another 525, it doesn't matter how much Garmin experience you have, it means nothing.

The fact is that everything about aviation is harder, more complicated, more expensive and takes longer than it did just a few years ago. I've had to learn to overlook my conventional / tribal knowledge and make the phone calls and ask the questions.

We all know what happens when you ASSume.

_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:02 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14464
Post Likes: +9596
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
This is the issue my client had, he couldn't just grab any 525 pilot as Mike had said, whereas on the King Air, he can. The only requirement is X hours in King Airs and school in the last 12 months.


I don't think so. Time in type is time in type whether it be a CJ or a 172. B200 time in a King Air is not C90 time and vice versa. Even C182 time is not the same as R182 time according to Avemco. You'll never meet the open pilot clause unless the type matches. this is nothing new.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:17 
Online



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8880
Post Likes: +11633
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
Username Protected wrote:
This is the issue my client had, he couldn't just grab any 525 pilot as Mike had said, whereas on the King Air, he can. The only requirement is X hours in King Airs and school in the last 12 months.


I don't think so. Time in type is time in type whether it be a CJ or a 172. B200 time in a King Air is not C90 time and vice versa. Even C182 time is not the same as R182 time according to Avemco. You'll never meet the open pilot clause unless the type matches. this is nothing new.


I called my insurance guy, who is really solid and I’m just repeating what he said. You can call yours and see if they tell you something different.

These days we don’t get to tell the insurance companies how it is going to be… they tell us!

FAA says a CJ4 / PC-24 / Phenom 300E is single pilot, insurance company says HOLD MY BEER! You’re going to love this quote!
_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:19 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14464
Post Likes: +9596
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Yeah I've had it come up more times than I can count. Ask your guy if C90 time meets the time in type requirement of the open pilot clause on a B200 policy. The answer will be no.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:19 
Online



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8880
Post Likes: +11633
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
In King Airs, you do have to have training, B200 with 90 differences, etc. but almost any contract pilot is going to have time in a 90 and 200!

_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.


Last edited on 09 Nov 2023, 13:52, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:26 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14464
Post Likes: +9596
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
In King Airs, you do have to gave training, B200 with 90 differences, etc. but almost any contract pilot is going to have time in a 90 and 200!


I know at least 5 guys at my airport that have open pilot time in the 90, including me, but no time in the 200. There is nothing special about the KingAir vs the m2 in this regard... you either have the time in type or you don't. If you don't, call the insurance company and get added as named insured, and do whatever requirements they ask for to accomplish that. As Mike stated, most of the time its differences training and some number of dual hrs in type. This is standard stuff, it should not be advised to be a blocker for an owner.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 13:54 
Online



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 8880
Post Likes: +11633
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
Username Protected wrote:
In King Airs, you do have to gave training, B200 with 90 differences, etc. but almost any contract pilot is going to have time in a 90 and 200!


I know at least 5 guys at my airport that have open pilot time in the 90, including me, but no time in the 200. There is nothing special about the KingAir vs the m2 in this regard... you either have the time in type or you don't. If you don't, call the insurance company and get added as named insured, and do whatever requirements they ask for to accomplish that. As Mike stated, most of the time its differences training and some number of dual hrs in type. This is standard stuff, it should not be advised to be a blocker for an owner.


There is a HUGE difference! But, I'm too busy to argue with you guys.

Call your insurance company and ask them about the M2.
_________________
Be kind. You never know what someone is going through.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 14:12 
Online


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 21190
Post Likes: +26677
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
I called my insurance guy, who is really solid and I’m just repeating what he said. You can call yours and see if they tell you something different.

Mine did.

They counted all my mentor's CE-500 Bravo time as "time in type" for my C560V. They basically lumped all CE-500 type rating airplanes together.

This is logical since the FAA basically does the same thing. One type rating, just need some minor differences training for systems variations. In practical terms, all the CE-500 planes really are quite similar. it was a solid design in 1970 that lasted 40+ years in the market place with relatively few changes.

My insurance also accepts that I get Citation 550 sim training to fly my C560V. The sim has steam gauges and a GNS 430, my panel has glass and GTN 750. No big deal.

Quote:
FAA says a CJ4 / PC-24 / Phenom 300E is single pilot, insurance company says HOLD MY BEER! You’re going to love this quote!

Another reason to avoid those high priced newer planes that everybody thinks will cost less to own. The owner flown buyers of those just have lots of money and won't balk at 6 figure insurance premiums. They are already into about $800K/year just in cost of money, so that's no big deal. High hull value is a major driver off the total cost of ownership.

I currently carry $3M/$250K liability, $900K hull, $14,785/year. My insurance costs went down as compared to my MU2 with the C560V. I'm single pilot.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 14:31 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/21/08
Posts: 5869
Post Likes: +7383
Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
Username Protected wrote:
I called my insurance guy, who is really solid and I’m just repeating what he said. You can call yours and see if they tell you something different.

Mine did.

They counted all my mentor's CE-500 Bravo time as "time in type" for my C560V. They basically lumped all CE-500 type rating airplanes together.

This is logical since the FAA basically does the same thing. One type rating, just need some minor differences training for systems variations. In practical terms, all the CE-500 planes really are quite similar. it was a solid design in 1970 that lasted 40+ years in the market place with relatively few changes.

My insurance also accepts that I get Citation 550 sim training to fly my C560V. The sim has steam gauges and a GNS 430, my panel has glass and GTN 750. No big deal.

Quote:
FAA says a CJ4 / PC-24 / Phenom 300E is single pilot, insurance company says HOLD MY BEER! You’re going to love this quote!

Another reason to avoid those high priced newer planes that everybody thinks will cost less to own. The owner flown buyers of those just have lots of money and won't balk at 6 figure insurance premiums. They are already into about $800K/year just in cost of money, so that's no big deal. High hull value is a major driver off the total cost of ownership.

I currently carry $3M/$250K liability, $900K hull, $14,785/year. My insurance costs went down as compared to my MU2 with the C560V. I'm single pilot.

Mike C.

Maybe I am missing something here, but a 510 and a 525 are two completely different type ratings, so having time in one does not give you the ability to do differences training and be able to fly the other.
_________________
I'm just here for the free snacks


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 14:41 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 12/30/09
Posts: 1090
Post Likes: +969
Username Protected wrote:

Maybe I am missing something here, but a 510 and a 525 are two completely different type ratings, so having time in one does not give you the ability to do differences training and be able to fly the other.


Doug:

I may be wrong, and someone will correct me if I am, but I believe that the Mustang is a 510 type rating, the M2 is basically a re-imagined CJ and is a 525.

Brad


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 14:41 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 11/30/12
Posts: 4952
Post Likes: +5635
Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
Username Protected wrote:
In King Airs, you do have to gave training, B200 with 90 differences, etc. but almost any contract pilot is going to have time in a 90 and 200!


I know at least 5 guys at my airport that have open pilot time in the 90, including me, but no time in the 200. There is nothing special about the KingAir vs the m2 in this regard... you either have the time in type or you don't. If you don't, call the insurance company and get added as named insured, and do whatever requirements they ask for to accomplish that. As Mike stated, most of the time its differences training and some number of dual hrs in type. This is standard stuff, it should not be advised to be a blocker for an owner.

I tried to get an ex-navy pilot with hundreds of hours in the 90 (and mil equivalent) added onto my 200 insurance.

The company I was with treated him as though he had zero time in type. They wanted him to go through a full training course, and get 25 hours in a 200 before they'd cover him. Those are the same requirements they game me, with zero turbine time.

Not all insurance companies are the same, but the insurance market is VERY tight right now. Nobody's going to get a free ride into a new type.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 16:56 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/18/16
Posts: 94
Post Likes: +89
Aircraft: King Air C90
This argument about insurance is meaningless without addressing how Hull and Liability limits affect the policy.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Legacy Citation vs Turboprop
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2023, 17:04 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/21/08
Posts: 5869
Post Likes: +7383
Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
Username Protected wrote:

Maybe I am missing something here, but a 510 and a 525 are two completely different type ratings, so having time in one does not give you the ability to do differences training and be able to fly the other.


Doug:

I may be wrong, and someone will correct me if I am, but I believe that the Mustang is a 510 type rating, the M2 is basically a re-imagined CJ and is a 525.

Brad

That is correct as far as I know.
_________________
I'm just here for the free snacks


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 989 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 66  Next



Electroair (Bottom Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2026

.Plane AC Tile.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.Aircraft Associates.85x50.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.v2x.85x100.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.avnav.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.Plane Salon Beechtalk.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.suttoncreativ85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.AeroMach85x100.png.
.BT Ad.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.8flight logo.jpeg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.ElectroairTile.png.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.LogAirLower85x50.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.