Hello.

I am deciding on my training plan for this year. I have a CPL SELS/Tailwheel/Night/Mountain & 315h TT. Trying to get a job flying seaplanes (Ideal career track C180/182/206, DHC-2, DHC-3, DHC-6/King Air, Dash-8/Regional).

I have had quite a few operators ask if I had a multi/IFR even if they don't operate multi/IFR aircraft. I guess my first question is if this is asked to judge a persons competence level?

The real question I have requires a tad bit of background - I am insured on a Pa-24-250 that is IFR capable - I have 80h on it. I am just wondering what you guys would think was better. Getting a Multi Engine Rating or building some more IFR time - possibly getting an IFR rating on the Comanche?

P.S. If I fly the Comanche, I'll be flying with the 18000h+ retired DHC-2/King Air 200 owner who still holds a valid CPL/Cat 1 Med at 87yrs.

A long time ago, I started out with a
Group 3 (single engine) instrument rating
and I learned a lot of stuff, flying all over
North America IFR, even if it was only
single engine.

When I decided to get a multi-VFR and
multi-IFR, my single-IFR background made
it pretty straightforward.

So, doing the single-engine IFR thing worked
well for me a long time ago, but I can't claim
that it will work well for you now. I wasn't
trying to get hired to fly the crowd killers. I
was just trying to become a better pilot, which
is pretty much irrelevant most of the time.

People go absolutely bonkers for multi time -
don't forget that. I find it weird, because flying
with two engines is really not that much harder
than flying with one engine, despite what you
might hear. I try to avoid multi-engine time
as much as I can. Like doing a fat chick. Not
something I would be particularly proud of.

Flying a multi looks fun as hell.

If you feather both engines then do
surface acro, I guess so:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZBcapxGHjE


Straight and level, well, not so much.

I want a bumper sticker, please:

"Multi-engine flying: like doing a fat chick."

There are some parallels between one's sex life and ones log book. Most people have lots of solo, a fair bit of dual, and they're chasing after the Multi.

Richard_K_Spyte wrote:There are some parallels between one's sex life and ones log book. Most people have lots of solo, a fair bit of dual, and they're chasing after the Multi.

It begs the question of whether one is actually competent enough for the multi.

It's actually much easier.
You can share the load...

trampbike wrote:It's actually much easier.
You can share the load...

Most of my twin time is PIC as sole crew member.

I agree that multi flying is typically the most boring kind of flying. I take solace in the fact that all of my twin time is VFR, most of it is less than 1000 feet from some of the most awesome terrain imaginable, and none of it is straight and level on autopilot.

To the OP;

Given that you've mentioned wanting to fly seaplanes initially, I would suggest that you save your money and should rather focus your attention on finding that elusive first seaplane job.
Save whatever money your thinking on blowing on more SEL/IFR time on IFR renewals during the slow winter months when you're inevitably going to need those funds to live off from/renew your IFR.

Again, my advice is based on your stated "preferred" career progression as you mentioned in your original post.

All the best,
TPC