The Multi-Engine Rating

by Jason Catanzariti

DISCLAIMER: The information on this web site is not to be used
in lieu of training from an FAA-certificated instructor.

            Since earning my private pilot’s license in December 2000 I’ve logged about 850 hours, 400 of which have been spent instructing. I’ve also done some aerobatics and had a few memorable adventures in warbirds. Not having had any new training in the last year or so, I decided this was a good time to add a multi-engine rating.

             On a friend’s recommendation I signed up for a two-day course at Endless Mountains Air, located at Seamans Airport in Pennsylvania. They sent me a curriculum to study and we began training a week later in a Piper Aztec.

             The plan was for me and another student to share the training. One of us would fly while the other observed from the rear seat, and then we’d switch. My fellow student was another commercial rated pilot, Geoff Orlandi. Our instructor was Delta Airlines 767 pilot Steve Barnick, who referred to Geoff and me as the “Italian Stallions”. The three of us spent a day in ground training going over multi-engine aerodynamics, procedures, and aircraft systems, then it was time to fly.      

             Multi-engine training is, ironically, mostly about flying on one engine. During normal operations the airplane flies like any other, so relatively little time is spent on standard maneuvers. After doing some stalls and steep turns to get used to the Aztec’s handling it was time to start flying on one engine.

             There is a misconception that two engines are automatically safer than one. They can be, but only if the pilot knows how to handle the situation when one engine fails. Otherwise, as the old saying goes, the second engine will simply get you to the crash faster. When an engine fails on a twin, the good engine produces asymmetric thrust – that is, the airplane yaws (rotates sideways) because there is no push from the other side. And if this weren’t bad enough, quick action is also required to secure the dead engine in a way that doesn’t exacerbate the problem.

             If an engine dies the propeller must be feathered – i.e., the prop’s blades must be twisted into a position which produces the least drag. The catch is that some props won’t feather unless they are above a certain RPM, which means a dead engine must be dealt with very quickly. At the same time, the pilot must stay above the speed at which the airplane is controllable on one engine, so there is quite a workload when things go wrong during multi-engine operations.

             Our curriculum focused on correct identification of the problem, verification of which engine had failed, and the feathering procedure. We practiced flying on one engine with the other prop actually shut down and feathered, executed single-engine approaches to land, and drilled in the order of operations necessary to fly the airplane safely when things go awry. The Aztec has 250 hp engines, and is a good single-engine performer. But seeing one of them actually stopped and feathered in flight is still quite sobering.

             Once we had some familiarity with the procedures Steve began failing engines by surprise, frequently (and purposely) at the most inopportune times. Failures came just after takeoff, during performance maneuvers, and upon interception of the final approach course to instrument landings. This kind of training felt as if someone were following me around all day randomly setting off firecrackers behind my back.

              After my first two flights I was unhappy with my instrument procedures. Most of my flying is VFR, and due to a computer problem I hadn’t been able to do any simulator work in preparation for the course. But things improved the next day. Geoff and I both flew successful single-engine ILS approaches, although I made a mistake during a missed approach by failing to retract the flaps and landing gear. Geoff wrestled a bit with steep turns, but had them under control by the end of the day. All throughout, Steve was pulling throttles back at inconvenient times, sometimes imploring us with, “Get it together Catanzariti!”, or “Let’s go Orlandi!” It’s a skillful instructor indeed who can correctly pronounce my last name while supervising a single-engine ILS approach.

             We had one slightly scary moment while I was flying a steep turn. Shortly after rolling into my 50-degree back there was a loud bang and the aircraft lurched. My first thought was that whatever Steve had done to simulate an emergency this time was over the line and not funny anymore. I shouted an expletive, but then saw Steve had the same look of alarm that I did, which was even less funny. It turned out the door had popped open rather spectacularly, which is not an emergency, but certainly got our hearts going for a moment.

             By the end of the second day Geoff and I were both feeling better about our skills. Steve seemed to agree and signed us off for our checkrides, which took place later that afternoon.

             I’m an old athletic coach, and one of my mantras is that practice should be hard so that game day is easy. That was the case for my checkride as well. The curriculum and Steve’s style of instruction were methodical, well thought out and challenging. This made the checkride seem relatively straightforward, though certainly still serious and with the ever present edge that comes from being tested.

             Gaining a multi-engine rating in some ways doesn’t carry the same privileges as the initial private pilot license. Most insurance companies will not cover a pilot for multi-engine operations without more experience, and few FBO’s will rent out this type of aircraft. I feel this is well and good because twins are very unforgiving when mishandled. The safety of an extra engine comes at a cost, and it takes experience to be able to cope with problems that can occur in multi-engine airplanes.

             However, my goal was simply to gain experience and a new type of training, and I was very pleased. Flying with airline pilots is always good because they live in the IFR system, fly their procedures at very high speeds, and generally know their stuff backwards and forwards. Steve has all that and is a passionate instructor – just what I needed at this point in my flying career.

             The fringe benefit is that if I ever get fed up with my so-called “real job” I can potentially become a freight dog. I figure that would only entail a pay cut of around 80%…

  

Me, Steve Barnick and Geoff Orlandi,
along with our Piper Aztec trainer.

(Hint: Steve and Geoff are the ones who do NOT have a
bad tie or a stupid look on their face.)