Welcome Guest. Sign in or Signup

4 Answers

To all MEI’s

Asked by: 3504 views FAA Regulations, Flight Instructor, Instrument Rating

Having a ATP license and being a former CFI, CFII, MEI, I feel the need to ask this question:  with the number of light twins going down lately, are the current regs sufficient (i.e.: initial training both multi and IFR,  BFR and IFR currency) or are we putting out a less-than-ideal pilot and instructor?  I can only speak for myself but when I did BFR's and ICC's, my rides were as tough, if not tougher, than the original checkride.  Mechanical problems and IMC seem to always be the main root of the crash but when a MEI loses his plane and kills 4, I begin to wonder what's going on.  Same thing when a pilot turns the wrong way for the missed approach and crashes in IMC.  Sounds like currency and training are the evils lurking here. Interested in your opinions.

4 Answers



  1. jeff on Apr 14, 2015

    Loral,

    Interesting assertion, but I am not certain the data support it. According to the Nall report, Multi engine non commercial operations accounted for only 9% of the total accidents and 22% of the fatal accidents for 2013. (Compared with 8% total accidents and 14% of the fatal accidents in 2012). When I query the NTSB accident database, I only find 2 of the recent fatal ME accidents being instructional flights (out of about 20 non fatal and 6 fatal non charter flights) This won’t include anything in the last 30 days which hasn’t made the database yet and I don’t have an easy way to parse to recent data so I can not convert it to an accurate statistic, but at least at first glance, the statement you are making does not appear to be supported by the data. According the Nall report, the percentage of ME accidents remains the same although they do account for a higher percentage of fatal accidents in 2013 (however, this has almost always been the case and does not necessarily represent a trend) Nall does not break instructional flights up by class, however the number of accidents on “instructional flights” has remained fairly consistent between 2012 and 2013 (approx 15% total accidents and 10% of the fatal accidents). I do believe your last statement has always been the case however, that proper training and currency in a particular twin is the best insurance against a fatal mishap.

    0 Votes Thumb up 0 Votes Thumb down 0 Votes



  2. Loral on Apr 14, 2015

    Jeff — I wasn’t referring to instructional flights — just multi flying in general. Families of those who died in these crashes don’t give a hoot about Nall statistics and neither do I. When 7 die in Bloomington, IL and 4 die in Fort Lauderdale five days later, that catches my attention. And those were the only ones I heard about. Bet there were others. As a former MEI, I tend to look at these crashes and ask how? Why? What happened — currency, sloppy piloting skills, what? How many piloting hours, what type of flying, etc. etc. And when I read the NTSB summaries of crashes and find things like “a major airline pilot takes a plane (not an airliner) not IFR equipped and flies into IMC, crashes and dies, I just shake my head.

    I do think the IFR currency regs are insufficient to maintain competency. I definitely think the BFR is too long a time, especially in light twins, to not have mandatory checks. Just my opinion.

    0 Votes Thumb up 0 Votes Thumb down 0 Votes



  3. jeff on Apr 14, 2015

    Loral,

    Sorry. I thought you were referring to instructional flights. My bad. I totally agree. The families of the victims dont give a hoot about Nall statistics. But then again, you answered your own question. All the regs in the world wont make a pilot safer if they do not take training, retraining, and currency seriously. I think training and currency which you mentioned is a huge part of the solution. Perhaps if there was something like a multi engine proficiency check like 61.58, which requires us turbojet pilots to take essentially an ATP level check ride every year, the multi-engine statistic would improve. Even if a ME pilot just took it upon him or herself every year to get some “retraining, including engine out and emergency procedures, Vmc demo, etc” with an experienced instructor even without a regulation requiring it, i suspect the ME accident numbers would improve. When I owned my 421 I used to go for recurrent simulator training every year, which was an intensive 3 days of ground review of systems and emergency procedures and then Simulator practice of those emergencys, even though my insurance company did not require it. I would also grab my local instructor twice a year and practice engine out procedures in my aircraft. No regulation requiring it, just my desire to fly the aircraft like a professional pilot and stay more than current. Id like to think that that was my best insurance of becomming a statistic and actually made the two engine aircraft safer than one. I personally feel that the difference in accident numbers within general aviation between general and corporate flying has more to do with the difference in the amount of recurrent training required in the corporate world than the type of aircraft flown. Id be very interested to hear other opinions on the matter. Im always looking for suggestions on making flying safer. Not sure more regulations is the answer.

    +1 Votes Thumb up 1 Votes Thumb down 0 Votes



  4. Loral on Apr 15, 2015

    And that’s why you are less likely to show up on the NTSB Accident Report. Good for you! Even though I was instructing multi engine, another MEI and I would go up and run through emergency procedures quite often. Think multi instructors sometimes get complacent because they think just because they are instructing, their skill level remains sharp. That’s directly proportional to how much instructing they are doing.

    I like the idea of a multi proficiency check other than what is required for the BFR. Think it should go hand-in-hand with IFR currency. When my students would pass their instrument check ride I told them that if they needed a safety pilot for currency give me a call. No charges from me – just a pay-it-forward kind of thing.

    Thanks for responding. I, too, would like to hear from other MEI’s but so far . . . . .

    +3 Votes Thumb up 3 Votes Thumb down 0 Votes


Answer Question

Our sincere thanks to all who contribute constructively to this forum in answering flight training questions. If you are a flight instructor or represent a flight school / FBO offering flight instruction, you are welcome to include links to your site and related contact information as it pertains to offering local flight instruction in a specific geographic area. Additionally, direct links to FAA and related official government sources of information are welcome. However we thank you for your understanding that links to other sites or text that may be construed as explicit or implicit advertising of other business, sites, or goods/services are not permitted even if such links nominally are relevant to the question asked.