ASEL required to operate single-engined experimentals?

[Shroudcutter]

What would an ATP AMEL pilot with no ASEL privileges require to fly a single-engine experimental, solo and with passengers?

At one time, I don't think there were any requirements unless mentioned in the operating limitations. It would be a strange limitation, as who would think to include it? Around 2005, I think there was a policy change regarding ASEL pilots flying experimental AMEL's, requiring a "type rating" for that specific aircraft in lieu of AMEL certs.

Are experimentals still no class, no category aircraft with all limitations needing to be described in the operating limitations?

[Mike M]

What would an ATP AMEL pilot with no ASEL privileges require to fly a single-engine experimental, solo and with passengers?.....

CFR 61.31, "(2) The rating limitations of this section do not apply to—(B) An experimental certificate, unless the operation involves carrying a passenger"

but limitations on E-AB aircraft normally include "17. The pilot in command of this aircraft must hold an appropriate category/class rating. If required, the pilot in command also must hold a type rating in accordance with FAR 61, or a letter of authorization issued by an FAA Flight Standards Operations Inspector."

[Frank Giger]

Um, how did you get a multi-engine rating without ever flying a single engine aircraft? I gotta hear the story of a guy starting from day one in a DC-3.

Experimentals do have categories. For instance, my little Nieuport 11 may not be type certified, but it's Single Engine Land.

If you're not using it for commercial purposes, your PPL will cover it, as it will any aircraft you have a general rating for (any twin, for instance).

[Shroudcutter]

Um, how did you get a multi-engine rating without ever flying a single engine aircraft? I gotta hear the story of a guy starting from day one in a DC-3.

Experimentals do have categories. For instance, my little Nieuport 11 may not be type certified, but it's Single Engine Land.

If you're not using it for commercial purposes, your PPL will cover it, as it will any aircraft you have a general rating for (any twin, for instance).

I didn't say I have never flown a single-engined aircraft.

It's actually quite common for military pilots to transition to civilian ratings with no ASEL privileges. When completing an 8710, many don't include single engine training time (unless they need it) because it can be a bit of a mess differentiating between PIC and SIC. Potential employers love it when you walk in and say "it's all PIC" instead of the boring conversation about "PIC versus logging PIC".

In my case, I just included (post-training) military PIC time and that was all multi-engine. Then, King Airs and biz jets.

Not a very interesting story, is it? I never had much of an interest in paying to fly, but I'm interested in experimentals.

At one time, you didn't need a rotorcraft rating to fly experimental helicopters, you could fly with an ASEL PPL. This might have changed. That's why I'm here asking questions.

I am aware that a commercial or ATP check in a single-engined aircraft is all I would need for the commercial or ATP ASEL add. I'm just curious if there is an actual requirement for SEL experimentals.

[martymayes]

Um, how did you get a multi-engine rating without ever flying a single engine aircraft?

Years ago I worked for a guy that had PP multiengine land only on his pilot certificate. He bought an Aztec, learned to fly in it and never needed a single engine class rating.

[Jim Hann]

I believe under the new 117 rules you have to have 50 cat/class for an ATP ride. I know that you can no longer add an MES rating to your ATP/MEL due to this. Of course, doesn't really matter if you just want to go fly for fun.

[Frank Giger]

Heck yeah, that's interesting!

The mysteries of military to civilian conversion are murky, and now I can see how it can happen. And it makes me want to giggle a little at the thought that a C141 driver (for instance) could get all manner of MEL endorsements in the transfer and the SEL get overlooked.

"Pilot is authorized PIC authority over a 737 but not a C172."



Adding to the giggle factor is the thought of a multi-thousand hour professional pilot plunking down the money to a one-man-show flight school for a familiarization flight in a C172 and then a check ride from a Designated Examiner to get an SEL endorsement in his log book.

At a rural uncontrolled airfield, of course.

I figured it was a gimme.

[edit]

Okay, I'm lazy and don't want to look it up, but would a Designated Examiner even need to be required for the non-commercial endorsement to SEL if said pilot already has a PPL, a commercial ticket, and everything else? Could a CFI sign off on it?

[Jim Hann]

No, it is a rating. You have to take a flight test but many tasks are waived or not required.

[raytoews]

Man I am constantly amazed at how knowlegable American pilots are about regulations. You guys can spout chapter and verse of your regs.
You have me beat hands down.
All I know is that Jim Rest taught me to fly and Orville Wright taught him and lift works.
Everything else is just beurocratic BS.

Ray from Canada.

[Frank Giger]

Ray, that's because at the end of the Revolutionary War we kicked all the Tories out but kept the lawyers.

I love my country, but man we sure do some weird stuff sometimes.