Commercial Pilot Certificate - Mil Comp

[ajgeng]

Disclaimer: Shameless self-promotion...

I made a web-based test prep for the Mil Comp test. I got the idea years ago, while pissed off that I had paid $100 to sit in a classroom with 20 other people while some guy got $2000 to go over slides of the questions. I'm trying to do a better job than ASA, SheppardAir or Dauntless. The website is studygouge.com and I'm looking for people to let me know what they think. If you want to try some free Commercial test prep this month, PM me for a free account.

I have a section that tries to answer the "what ratings will I get" part, so if you've already got your commercial ticket, try

http://studygouge.com/what-ratings
and let me know if I'm giving good info. Any other feedback is welcome too, it's my first website so be ruthless!
Thanks!

 

[CAMike]

Standby....EXECUTE!

 

[BACONATOR]

Another FYI: If you are a helicopter aviator and got your military competency completed and DID NOT get an airplane instrument rating, you are ENTITLED to it.

I am telling you this because a year after I got my military competency ratings, I went to the san diego FSDO and argued (bring your NATOPS jacket and log book or copy of your logbook page showing PIC stamp and I4390 in T-34) that while we didn't get a "NATOPS" instrument rating in the T-34 we got all the training and did a checkride. I showed him the syllabus page reflecting what the I4390 tested and he agree. He then typed up a new temp certificate for me including Airplane Instrument.

Bottom line: If you are a helicopter aviator and didn't get an airplane instrument rating, GO GET IT!

 

[KCOTT]

On the T-44's baseops page there is some info/gouge about the matter towards the top, haven't really checked it out or bothered with it since I'm about 40 x's away from having to worry about it. But maybe you might find something useful for your site.
http://www.baseops.net/t44/

 

[phrogpilot73]

While I understand that you're giving free accounts right now, I saw this at the bottom of the page: "Our study guide is 100% guaranteed! If you're not satisfied for any reason, we'll give you a refund with no questions asked." Refund equates to commercial venture. Did you run this past the webmaster first?

 

[ajgeng]

Commercial venture? It's trying to be, right now its just a time and money sink. I've spent a ton of time doing research and countless phone conversations with the FAA and wasted money on webhosting and software.

Webmaster permission? Negative. Didn't know that was required. I'm not trying to sell it yet, just trying to get some feedback. Not trying to piss anyone off here, if I need to beg some forgiveness, I'd be happy to.

 

[phrogpilot73]

The webmaster is the final approval authority for all commercial ventures. I understand the whole time/money sink, but I would advise a quick PM to the webmaster asking if it's OK to post the link. Explain that you're offering free accounts for people to poke around and provide feedback.

 

[ajgeng]

The webmaster is the final approval authority for all commercial ventures. I understand the whole time/money sink, but I would advise a quick PM to the webmaster asking if it's OK to post the link. Explain that you're offering free accounts for people to poke around and provide feedback.

PM sent.

 

[ajgeng]

Another FYI: If you are a helicopter aviator and got your military competency completed and DID NOT get an airplane instrument rating, you are ENTITLED to it.

I am telling you this because a year after I got my military competency ratings, I went to the san diego FSDO and argued (bring your NATOPS jacket and log book or copy of your logbook page showing PIC stamp and I4390 in T-34) that while we didn't get a "NATOPS" instrument rating in the T-34 we got all the training and did a checkride. I showed him the syllabus page reflecting what the I4390 tested and he agree. He then typed up a new temp certificate for me including Airplane Instrument.

Bottom line: If you are a helicopter aviator and didn't get an airplane instrument rating, GO GET IT!

I can't believe the disparity in what people are able to get from the FAA. I've talked to a few FAA folks that seem to think their job is to prevent people from getting ratings. I actually heard one say "The policy from Washington is xxxx, I don't agree with it, so I don't comply." I know V-22 guys who were able to get helicopter ratings based on the 10-15 flights in the HTs and some who weren't, not to mention the whole multi-engine centerline thrust debacle. The recent FAR changes for Mil Comp Instructor is another one the FAA lower levels hate. One FAA guy told me the reason that the test is 150 questions for MCI is because those implementing the policy wanted to make it as difficult to get as they could, 150 questions was the most they could ask in the time period. A friend of mine spent months trying to get his MCI based on FRS instructor, and the guy told him he had to be a flight school instructor. Meanwhile, another guy got MCI based on squadron NATOPS evaluator. Go figure.

Best Plan: Ask for everything, argue everything with your logbook, designation letters, and ATFs. The guys processing your paperwork aren't the final authority, so politely appeal if they try and screw you out of something.

 

[ajgeng]

And another reason to hate NMCI.

The only reason the FAA exams aren't offered for free on Navy and Marine bases is because the electronic test is incompatible with NMCI's network. However, many Air Force, Army and Coast Guard bases offer the tests for free or cheaper at the Education Office equivalent. I'm working with DANTES in Pensacola to get this changed. There is no reason 20-40 wingers a month spend $150 each at Pensacola Aviation to take the Mil Comp Helicopter when DANTES headquarters is across town.
http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/airmen/media/faacenters.pdf

 

[BACONATOR]

I can't believe the disparity in what people are able to get from the FAA. I've talked to a few FAA folks that seem to think their job is to prevent people from getting ratings. I actually heard one say "The policy from Washington is xxxx, I don't agree with it, so I don't comply." I know V-22 guys who were able to get helicopter ratings based on the 10-15 flights in the HTs and some who weren't, not to mention the whole multi-engine centerline thrust debacle. The recent FAR changes for Mil Comp Instructor is another one the FAA lower levels hate. One FAA guy told me the reason that the test is 150 questions for MCI is because those implementing the policy wanted to make it as difficult to get as they could, 150 questions was the most they could ask in the time period. A friend of mine spent months trying to get his MCI based on FRS instructor, and the guy told him he had to be a flight school instructor. Meanwhile, another guy got MCI based on squadron NATOPS evaluator. Go figure.

Best Plan: Ask for everything, argue everything with your logbook, designation letters, and ATFs. The guys processing your paperwork aren't the final authority, so politely appeal if they try and screw you out of something.

Luckily, my guy at the SD FSDO deals with ALL the Navy/Marine Helo aviators who get stationed on the west coast and go to SD... so he knew the situation. PLUS I brought in my NATOPS jacket, showing my designation letter, hour and training breakdown in the T-34, the copy of the page from my logbook showing the T-34 I4390 AND.... the CNATRA instruction (MPTS) master curriculum guide which literally describes what is tested on the I4390... then I explained "The ONLY reason they don't give us a "NATOPS" instrument rating in the T-34 is simplicity... we don't solo IFR in the T-34 so we don't need it. Regardless we do ALL the training for IFR and an IFR checkride... plus they used to give this rating to all helicopter aviators but the precise wording of the FAR changed... it doesn't make sense". He agreed with me and voila, 10 minutes out of my day got me another couple thousand dollar's worth of civilian training/rating.

Don't let the civilian FAA worker bully you out of a rating. It is completely logical that I can handle a Cessna 172 IFR.... I have the training and the experience to do so... so my argument got me the rating. YMMV of course... but go to an FSDO in a military (aviation) town and your odds will be better, I'm sure.

 

[teabag53]

Any helo bubbas have any gouge on Mil Comp Instructor for SoCal? I'm currently in Ventura County but get to SD often. Particularly, I'm looking for success stories WRT fleet instructor designations. Please PM with FSDO details if you any...I'd be happy to travel a few hours for the more accommodating FSDO. Thanks.

 

[phrogdriver]

TB--I second that emotion.

I've bought the MCI test prep software and am working on that now. I need to go through my logbook and convert everything into FAA-speak.

This PIC crap is killing me. The military has it right--Aircraft Commander time, then FPT/CPT. Simple. None of the interlocking web of confusion the civilian PIC logging has.

 

[ajgeng]

Have you tried using msharp? I think there's an excel export, you can take FPT from flights with no AC time and all time from AC flights.

 

[phrogdriver]

Have you tried using msharp? I think there's an excel export, you can take FPT from flights with no AC time and all time from AC flights.

Good idea. Thanks. That should make some of this easier. I still want to transcribe my military logs into a civil-type e-logbook, though. I think that will make similar things like this easier in the future, especially as I get closer to having to find a civilian job. I know the next four years will go by too quickly if I don't prepare. Unfortunately many of my entries are pre-MSHARP, so will have to be handjammed.