Page 1 of 1

Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:00 pm
by HAPPYDAN
The way I understand it, if an aspiring pilot chooses the Sport Pilot route, then decides to upgrade to Recreational, and then to Private, he/she must go through the entire testing process start to finish for each one. While flying hours, with some exceptions, can serve the same for each, the Knowledge, Oral, and Practical tests must be done for each. Wouldn't it be nice if he/she only had to test on those aspects that were unique to each type? Maybe get a substantial discount also? And, is the same testing in total also true for Complex A/C, Multi-engine, Seaplane, High performance and whatever? Just asking!

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:12 pm
by TimTaylor
There is no written test for complex, high performance, multi-engine, or seaplane. There is no flight test for complex and high-performance. It's just a checkout. The multi-engine and seaplane flight test is pretty much comprehensive.

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 3:00 pm
by drseti
TimTaylor wrote: seaplane flight test is pretty much comprehensive.
One can do a Seaplane add-on under Sport Pilot rules, even if he or she holds higher ratings, with no flight test required. Instead, you merely need to fly a proficiency check with a CFI. That's what I had to do at Jack Brown's two years ago - since I had no current medical at that time, I couldn't fly a checkride with a DPE. (Now, with Basic Med, I could - but it's moot, because the only seaplanes I fly are LSAs).

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:29 pm
by TimTaylor
drseti wrote:
TimTaylor wrote: seaplane flight test is pretty much comprehensive.
One can do a Seaplane add-on under Sport Pilot rules, even if he or she holds higher ratings, with no flight test required. Instead, you merely need to fly a proficiency check with a CFI. That's what I had to do at Jack Brown's two years ago - since I had no current medical at that time, I couldn't fly a checkride with a DPE. (Now, with Basic Med, I could - but it's moot, because the only seaplanes I fly are LSAs).
I did the same thing. Have you found a place that will actually rent you a seaplane to fly solo?

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:45 pm
by drseti
TimTaylor wrote: Have you found a place that will actually rent you a seaplane to fly solo?
To quote Hamlet:
Aye, there's the rub.
That problem notwithstanding, the Sport Pilot rules for adding category and class are a real game-changer. For details, see my EAA Webinar at:

http://www.eaavideo.org/detail/video/3830218310001

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:45 am
by Jim Hardin
But no one is addressing the Rec & PP question Happydan posed...

Having done Flight Reviews with pilots holding all certificates, I find the ones with less than Commercial tend to have a knowledge level that scares me a bit.

So my vote for anyone upgrading to a higher certificate, I vote full testing.

BTW, my understanding of flight exams is that you can take one without a medical provided the examiner agrees to fly the test with you while acting as PIC during the test. Now it is obvious that any solo requirements for that particular test must have been accomplished while you fully met the requirements for solo.

Re: Wouldn't it be Nice. . .

Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:51 am
by TimTaylor
Yes, it might be nice. However, some pilots go a long time before upgrading to a higher level certificate. It's probably good that they need to be fully tested, both written and flight test. It forces them to do a better job in upgrading their skills.