On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:08:01 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Brian Whatcott wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:51:08 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:


Not necessarily straw-men. An airline pilot with an atr, perhaps
backed with a cpl multiengine - ir, is not permited to fly a single
alone until he obtains that class

Brian W



That's just plain not true.

try again


There have been cases where a non pilot buys a twin, and learns to fly
in it. Those guys are not licensed for singles. No training in off
airport power off landings, for one important thing.

Casady


Few and far between.

And an ATR rating is just that - a rating.
Not a license.



Ho hum - when you're in a hole - it's best to stop digging.

If the folks who actually have a pilot ticket take it out they will
probably see under Para II "Ratings & Limitations:"
airplane single engine land.

If they DON't see that, the FAA might be interested if they
hear about single engine flight that is not in the light sport or
ultralight brackets.
And that applies to pilots with an atr (a.k.a an ATPL or ATP
depending on who issued it....)

Brian W



Mine says single engine land.

But I personally don't know, nor have I heard of any, who have a
multi-engine rating and don't have the single engine rating as well.

Do you?

You mean like most USAF pilots?
Last I heard, the USAF was teaching pilots from scratch in twin engine
planes, and they automatically got commercial, including instrument,
licenses limited to CLT twins. In piston planes, this would by the
Cessna Skymaster, and nothing else. My commercial license is for
single engine land, if it matters. My instructor told about one guy
who did have a single engine ATR, not multi. He said the usual ATR
didn't cover singles unless you took an ATR checkride in one. The
simulated emergencies are different, for one thing. In the case in
question, the inspector gradually reduced the power to simulate
accumulating ice. At one inch MP per minute, he wouldn't have had time
to dick around.

Casady

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:03:34 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:30:30 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Aug 31, 2:41*pm, wrote:
...
I think that in CT, at least, someone with a USCG Master's ticket
would still have to obtain a CT safe boating certificate to operate
recreational craft or PWC's. ...

That's an interesting thought. It would mean, I presume, that a
person with a master's license could take up to 6 people out on his
own boat for hire but would not be able to cruise it for pleasure...
Wouldn't that be odd. I'm no lawyer and I'm sure one of the local law
critters will point out my errors but I think a federal license that
gives you the right to operate a boat must be recognized by a state.
No?


No.

Just because you can operate a large tug boat, does not mean you know
how to operate a PWC, any more than it means you know how to drive a
tractor trailer, fly an airplane. or ski down Mt. Everest.

Are you joking? A person with a master's license will have a very
good handle on COLREGS and some familiarity with the applicable CFR
chapters and a lot more to loose if he gets busted breaking the law
than a person with just an operators license.

The test covers a lot of things that are not simply laws or COLREGS.

They even have a separate test for PWC's. A regular boating license
doesn't cover those, because they feel you should know things like how
to maintain steerage in an emergency. If you are about to hit
something while on a Jet Ski, instinctively closing the throttle is
the worst thing you could do. They don't have rudders. The jet blast
is how you steer. To avoid collision, you often ACCELERATE to be able
to turn sharper. A person with a master's license may not know that.
It wasn't in any of the tests or classes he took to get that ticket.

That's just ONE example. So far, it looks like you couldn't pass the
test. You don't even know what questions to ask.

There are a few laws
that vary from state to state but I strongly suspect that most pros
could pick them up with a quick glance at the state's boating
handbook. Otherwise, they're likely to have mastered much more
material than will be presented in a state licensing course.

More, perhaps, but not the same, and not a complete overlapping. How
much does a "pro" know about launching a boat at a boat ramp? Did you
know that you are not supposed to "power on" and "power off" a trailer
on a public boat ramp, using the boats motor to force a stuck boat on
or off the trailer? Do you know why? It's on the test.

YMMV but
I've spent time in small boats with professional mariners and they
were very fine boat operators. And, of course, if you can operate a
tug you can almost certainly operate a PWC (at least a sit down
one).

See, that's where you are wrong. Very wrong. It's a different skill
set.

I have been driving the same jet boat for fifty years. Never been on a
PWC, however.\

Casady

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:09:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Aug 31, 5:03*pm, wrote:
... I think a federal license that
gives you the right to operate a boat must be recognized by a state.
No?

No.

Really? What about the supremacy clause of the Constitution? You're
saying that if the feds grant a license that allows one to be master
of a motor vessel that Connecticut can make a law that voids the
federal license in CT? As I say I'm no expert but that seems so wrong
that I wonder if you could explain how it would work.

Except to say that PWCs aren't the only thrust vectored vessels and
that they and z-drives, outboards, i/o's, other jet craft, etc are
pretty well understood by professionals I'm not going to bother with
your straw man arguments. Generally professional mariners are
experienced, knowledgeable and careful. As a class I think that they
are better qualified to operate vessels than recreational boaters
who's only cert is a safe boating course.

Queen Mary II is the biggest passenger ship ever, more than 1100 feet
long, and has Z drives. Biggest ship, and it was only sixty paces from
the room to the elevator to the barstool.

Casady

On 2008-08-29 17:27:03 -0400, terry said:

By end 2009 Canadian all recreational boaters will be required to
possess suitable qualifications.

Been touch with rep. of the Power and Sail Squad. and one of the
claims made is that their course, unlike some of the more
straightforward 'Boating Safety' courses, is the only one that
qualifies for operating a boat in both Canada and USA. While that is
unlikely in short term it could be a significant advantage.

Don't bother taking the courses if you have any real experience.

Take the on-line test and be done with it.

I often challenge some on this list about their lack of experience, but
almost all of those I challenge could pass those candy-assed tests
without breathing hard.

The tests in no way demonstrate you have capability, only that you can
answer the majority of the questions the way they want them to be
answered.

If you can't pass the tests easily, get out there and learn. That's
more important than passing some silly-assed test.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-à-Deux -- Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/