Recording your flight time

[Jay Honeck]

With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new avionics
(heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
time?

And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Richard Ross]

I have been using my handheld GPS to both record the flight time and record
my flight track. For every logbook entry, I have an actual track of the
flight downloaded to my computer using Track Maker. I use the time recorded
when I start to taxi for take off and when I taxi to park after landing.

Richard

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>

[Edwin Johnson]

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:47:31 GMT, Jay Honeck > wrote:
>With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new avionics
>(heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
>folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
>time?
>
>And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
>archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
^^^^^^^

(With a smile) If you look in older logbooks (engine, airframe, or pilots),
all time was logged with actual hours:minutes. Of course they didn't have
electric Hobbs meters and most of the tachs had no time recording, simply
the rpm.

Believe most of the tachs are accurate for time only around cruise rpm
(surely there is some standard for this) so not completely accurate for time
recording except for engine time.

So 'archaic' may not be quite the correct term since _it_ is the newcomer. ;)

Either way would, of course be permissible, but remember that adding any
long list of hours/minutes, you will have to convert min on the total to get
the total hours:min time.

Incidentally, my Maule doesn't have a tach, so I use the ole' watch and
change into unit.decimal for the logbooks. (Easier adding! heehee)

Isn't it nice to have a lazy Sunday where you don't think about anything
more important than this? haahaa

Hope all have happy holidays.

....Edwin

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ Edwin Johnson ....... ~
~ http://www.shreve.net/~elj ~
~ ~
~ "Once you have flown, you will walk the ~
~ earth with your eyes turned skyward, ~
~ for there you have been, there you long ~
~ to return." -- da Vinci ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Ron Natalie]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
The "time in motion" timer in my GPS is a godsend for going back and
determining
how long you flew (of course, we have to guess as to how much of the time
was
me and how much was Margy still).

[Ron Natalie]

"Edwin Johnson" > wrote in message
...


> Either way would, of course be permissible, but remember that adding any
> long list of hours/minutes, you will have to convert min on the total to
get
> the total hours:min time.
>
Yep, the FAA (at least for most planes) doesn't mandate any scheme for
measuring
service times. All they ask is that you be consistant.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?

The two planes I fly _IN_ (I'm never PIC, but I do ride right seat) do not
have Hobbs meters. They do, however, have three sets of digital chrono's
(ADF, Clock, Transponder).

At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
master switch?

Tom

[H. Adam Stevens]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> > With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
> avionics
> > (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> > folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their
flight
> > time?
> >
> > And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> > archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using
actual
> > hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
>
> The two planes I fly _IN_ (I'm never PIC, but I do ride right seat) do not
> have Hobbs meters. They do, however, have three sets of digital chrono's
> (ADF, Clock, Transponder).
>
> At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> master switch?
>
> Tom
>
>
>

I log time from when the airplane starts moving to the time it stops moving;
So called "block-to-block" time; Using my watch; In hours and tenths.
H.

H. Adam Stevens
CP AS&MEL IA
ex N2196B, ex N739CD, ex N502TB
What next? An RV8 perhaps?

[BTIZ]

I have always used either my watch (no hobbs) or if equipped .. the hobbs...
one should only apply the 1.3factor to straight tach time.

BT

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Bob Noel]

In article <7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
> avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their
> flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?


I record engine start to engine stop (excluding the taxi time
rom the pump back to my hangar).

--
Bob Noel

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:00:59 -0800, A Lieberman >
wrote:

>I could'nt find anything in the FARS for "when" to start counting, but I
>am under the impression from my experiences, that anytime the prop is
>turning is the time you count.

You didn't look at the beginning:

14CFR Part 1

Sec 1.1

Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own
power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest
after landing; or
(2) For a glider without self-launch capability, pilot time that
commences when the glider is towed for the purpose of flight and ends when
the glider comes to rest after landing.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Robert M. Gary]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04>...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?

I can't think of any reason to stop using the hobbs. I don't have to
leave the avionics on after the flight to check the GPS time, the
hobbs is always right there as I'm closing the door. I also use my
hobbs to track the time I've spend on each tank (even though I have an
EDM fuel flow computer). The hobbs seems like a perfect, simple
device.

[Teacherjh]

> 14CFR Part 1
>
> Sec 1.1
>
> Flight time means:
> (1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own
> power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest
> after landing; or

Ok, so I'm at Dulles. I start up, release the brakes, and start the timer.
Start taxiing (it takes forever at Dulles), do my runup, am sixteenth behind a
row of jumbos, have to hold a while for IFR release, andforty minutes later the
tower tells me position and hold. (not too far off for some flights!).
Cleared for takeoff, I accelerate to flying speed, but something isn't right,
so I abort the takeoff and taxi back to the ramp and shut down.

It's been an hour and eighteen minutes. Do you log it as 1.3? Do you log it
if you actually managed to get three feet in the air for twelve seconds before
aborting the takeoff and landing again on the mile of runway remaining?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[A Lieberman]

Tom Sixkiller wrote:

> At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> master switch?

I could'nt find anything in the FARS for "when" to start counting, but I
am under the impression from my experiences, that anytime the prop is
turning is the time you count.

Allen

[EDR]

In article <7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04>, Jay Honeck
> wrote:

> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?

I do.
I log the following:

Hobbs start/Hobbs stop
Tach start/Tach stop
Clock start/Clock stop
Wheels off/Wheels on

[Tony Cox]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
>
> It's been an hour and eighteen minutes. Do you log it as 1.3? Do you log
it
> if you actually managed to get three feet in the air for twelve seconds
before
> aborting the takeoff and landing again on the mile of runway remaining?
>

If your intent was flight (even if you didn't get off
the ground), then my understanding is that you can
indeed log it.

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message ...
>
> At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> master switch?
>
Since we are talking pilot time (we have bounced back and forth here), the
rules say: elapsed time form the time the aircraft first moves under its
own power for the purpose of flight until the time it comes to rest at
its . Since my plane rears forward a little bit at engine
start, and I don't tend to run it for very long when I finally get fully
parked, the ENGINE RUNNING (hobbs) time is usually pretty danged
close to the definition.

[Ron Natalie]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message ...
> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>
> > At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> > master switch?
>
> I could'nt find anything in the FARS for "when" to start counting, but I
> am under the impression from my experiences, that anytime the prop is
> turning is the time you count.
>
Flight time is defined in part 1.

[Mike O'Malley]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
<snip>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?

Well, most of my flying of late has been towing banners, and the Cubs don't
have ANYTHING electrical in 'em. I look at my watch after I start the
engine write it down on my sheet, go pull the left chock, walk to get the
right one, then hop in and go.

When I shut down, I write down that time as well. Then I have to go back
and convert from HH:MM to HH.(MM/60) for my logbook.

--
Mike

[A Lieberman]

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:

> You didn't look at the beginning:
>
> 14CFR Part 1
>
> Sec 1.1
>
> Flight time means:
> (1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own
> power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest
> after landing; or
> (2) For a glider without self-launch capability, pilot time that
> commences when the glider is towed for the purpose of flight and ends when
> the glider comes to rest after landing.

Thanks Ron,

Guess gliders don't have props!!! Helps to look at the "whole picture"!

Allen

[Jay Honeck]

> I log the following:
>
> Hobbs start/Hobbs stop
> Tach start/Tach stop
> Clock start/Clock stop
> Wheels off/Wheels on

Why do you log four different times? And *where* do you log them?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Hankal]

I use my Westbend clock which I fastened with velcro. I start when departing
and stop after I have cleared the active.
I may be shorting my logbook, but who cares as long as I do not inflate my
time.
Of course I can always substantiate my time since I log every fuel purchase
with tach and hobs time.
Hank

[Jeff]

I log what ever my transponder says I flew.



Jay Honeck wrote:

> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Fry]

"Tony Cox" > writes:

> "Teacherjh" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > It's been an hour and eighteen minutes. Do you log it as 1.3? Do you log
> it
> > if you actually managed to get three feet in the air for twelve seconds
> before
> > aborting the takeoff and landing again on the mile of runway remaining?
> >
>
> If your intent was flight (even if you didn't get off
> the ground), then my understanding is that you can
> indeed log it.

And why not? In the hypothetical (it *is*, right?), he got the engine
started, talked to Departure, Ground, and Tower, dodged big iron and
got to the starting point of the runway at a huge, confusing
airport...that's lots more work than I do to go around the patch at my
non-towered field.

[tony roberts]

> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm . . .

Here in Canada we are required to record flight time and air time.

Flight time for any leg is taken straight from the Hobbs.
Air time is Hobbs minus .2 hour per leg (for runup/taxi etc.)

That is the way that I record all of my flights.

Air time is the time that we record as TBO.
Therefore the more legs we squeeze in, the more .2 hour deductions and
the longer to TBO.

I know one pilot who doesn't have a Hobbs, and who only records about
half his actual time. Having witnessed this I personally would prefer,
in the interests of safety, to see Hobbs time as a legal requirement -
rather like an oddometer reading is required for a used car sale.
It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Jay Honeck]

> The hobbs seems like a perfect, simple
> device.

True, except most aircraft (outside of trainers) don't seem to have them.
Mine doesn't, and never did.

That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?

When I get this new transponder, I'm going to try using its internal "flight
time" clock. If it's too much of a pain, I'll go back to the tach time x
1.3.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Tony Cox]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Tony Cox" > writes:
>
> > "Teacherjh" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > It's been an hour and eighteen minutes. Do you log it as 1.3? Do you
log
> > it
> > > if you actually managed to get three feet in the air for twelve
seconds
> > before
> > > aborting the takeoff and landing again on the mile of runway
remaining?
> > >
> >
> > If your intent was flight (even if you didn't get off
> > the ground), then my understanding is that you can
> > indeed log it.
>
> And why not? In the hypothetical (it *is*, right?), he got the engine
> started, talked to Departure, Ground, and Tower, dodged big iron and
> got to the starting point of the runway at a huge, confusing
> airport...that's lots more work than I do to go around the patch at my
> non-towered field.

Yes, but if his intention was just to do a fast taxi, he'd
do all the same talking, dodging & ground navigating but
not be able to log it. Odd, don't you think?

[Tom Sixkiller]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
...
> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>
> > At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> > master switch?
>
> I could'nt find anything in the FARS for "when" to start counting, but I
> am under the impression from my experiences, that anytime the prop is
> turning is the time you count.
>

That's about what I've always used; from engine startup.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:00:59 -0800, A Lieberman >
> wrote:
>
> >I could'nt find anything in the FARS for "when" to start counting, but I
> >am under the impression from my experiences, that anytime the prop is
> >turning is the time you count.
>
> You didn't look at the beginning:
>
> 14CFR Part 1
>
> Sec 1.1
>
> Flight time means:
> (1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own
> power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest
> after landing; or
> (2) For a glider without self-launch capability, pilot time that
> commences when the glider is towed for the purpose of flight and ends when
> the glider comes to rest after landing.
>

For most people with a Hobbs, that could be an extra half hour, from master
switch "ON", to shutdown.

I wonder: does ANYONE does it that way?

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > At what point can one start recording _Flight Time_? Engine start? First
> > master switch?
> >
> Since we are talking pilot time (we have bounced back and forth here), the
> rules say: elapsed time form the time the aircraft first moves under its
> own power for the purpose of flight until the time it comes to rest at
> its . Since my plane rears forward a little bit at engine
> start, and I don't tend to run it for very long when I finally get fully
> parked, the ENGINE RUNNING (hobbs) time is usually pretty danged
> close to the definition.

I remember, several years back, a lot of pilots would do their engine start,
and THEN do their ATIS, CD, Ground...

Too expensive to do it that way except for the corporate jocks, big iron...

[john smith]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > I log the following:
> > Hobbs start/Hobbs stop
> > Tach start/Tach stop
> > Clock start/Clock stop
> > Wheels off/Wheels on
>
> Why do you log four different times? And *where* do you log them?

I rent, so the airplanes have different setups.
The Champ has no electrical system, so I have Tach time. Depending on
how "fast" (that's a relative term) or slow I fly, the clock time may be
greater or less than the tach.
On other aircraft with electrical systems, a Hobbs and a Tach, the time
will varyfor several reasons.
For example, the Hobbs on the Cherokee Six is tied to the oil pressure
switch. Until the Tachometer gets above 1600 RPM, the Hobbs doesn't
move.
By recording Clock start/Clock stop, I have a true reference to Hobbs
and Tach.
By recording Wheels off/Wheels on, I have an accurate measure of actual
flight time.
What goes in the logbook is the greater of the three.
I have made my own logging cards (5x8 blank index). I have also included
blocks for logging fuel used from each tank to maintain fuel load
balance and compare to the totalizer. The Cherokee Six and Bonanza have
four tanks, do I included blocks for each.
The logging card has space for five legs on each side. I have a
four-hold punch for flip plates. I include logging cards with each
aircraft checklist.

The following block titles are used:
DATE
AIRCRAFT N-NUMBER
DEPARTURE AIRPORT
DESTINATION AIRPORT
TACH START
TACH STOP
TACH FLIGHT
HOBBS START
HOBBS STOP
HOBBS FLIGHT
CLOCK START
CLOCK STOP
CLOCK FLIGHT
WHEELS OFF
WHEELS OFF
BLOCK TIME
RIGHT TIP
RIGHT MAIN
LEFT MAIN LEFT TIP

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:vfrFb.617298$Tr4.1604490@attbi_s03...
> That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
> Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?

Time math?

[Tom Sixkiller]

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-DBA896.16481821122003@shawnews...
> I know one pilot who doesn't have a Hobbs, and who only records about
> half his actual time. Having witnessed this I personally would prefer,
> in the interests of safety, to see Hobbs time as a legal requirement -
> rather like an oddometer reading is required for a used car sale.
> It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
>

TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.

[tony roberts]

In article >,
"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote:

> "tony roberts" > wrote in message
> news:nospam-DBA896.16481821122003@shawnews...
> > I know one pilot who doesn't have a Hobbs, and who only records about
> > half his actual time. Having witnessed this I personally would prefer,
> > in the interests of safety, to see Hobbs time as a legal requirement -
> > rather like an oddometer reading is required for a used car sale.
> > It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> > 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
> >
>
> TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.
>
>


I don't even have a timer on my tach.
Nor was there one on any of the more than 6 aircraft that I trained in.
So I don't agree with your statement.

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message ...

> > It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> > 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
> >
>
> TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.
>
Nope, it's based on time in service. You can use any reliable
means of determining the service time as far as the FAA is concerned.
(Not that TBO means anything to most of us).

[Teacherjh]

>>
Yes, but if his intention was just to do a fast taxi, he'd
do all the same talking, dodging & ground navigating but
not be able to log it. Odd, don't you think?
<<

The rules say "with intention of flight" and "landed".

If you have intention of flight, but never actually leave the ground, you can't
stop logging. So, by that token, I have sixty eight thousand hours in a Tiger.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Tom Sixkiller]

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-B7CC3C.18191021122003@shawnews...
> In article >,
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote:
>
> > "tony roberts" > wrote in message
> > news:nospam-DBA896.16481821122003@shawnews...
> > > I know one pilot who doesn't have a Hobbs, and who only records about
> > > half his actual time. Having witnessed this I personally would prefer,
> > > in the interests of safety, to see Hobbs time as a legal requirement -
> > > rather like an oddometer reading is required for a used car sale.
> > > It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> > > 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
> > >
> >
> > TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.
> >
> >
>
>
> I don't even have a timer on my tach.
> Nor was there one on any of the more than 6 aircraft that I trained in.
> So I don't agree with your statement.

No, you don't have a timer on the tach; but that's not the time we're
talking about. The discussion is "flight time" not engine time (for purpose
of TBO).

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> > > It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> > > 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
> > >
> >
> > TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.
> >
> Nope, it's based on time in service. You can use any reliable
> means of determining the service time as far as the FAA is concerned.
> (Not that TBO means anything to most of us).

What "time" are you referring to? Years/months?

[tony roberts]

> No, you don't have a timer on the tach; but that's not the time we're
> talking about. The discussion is "flight time" not engine time (for purpose
> of TBO).

You are correct.
One of us is confused - it isn't difficult to confuse me :)
I originally said:
Flight time for any leg is taken straight from the Hobbs.
Air time is Hobbs minus .2 hour per leg (for runup/taxi etc.)

And air time is what we accumulate to determine when we reach TBO.
I don't know how it works elsewhere - this is how it works in Canada.


--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Tom Sixkiller]

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-467C25.19102921122003@shawnews...
> > No, you don't have a timer on the tach; but that's not the time we're
> > talking about. The discussion is "flight time" not engine time (for
purpose
> > of TBO).
>
> You are correct.
> One of us is confused - it isn't difficult to confuse me :)

Me too; I was born naked, crying and confused Then things really went to
hell.

> I originally said:
> Flight time for any leg is taken straight from the Hobbs.
> Air time is Hobbs minus .2 hour per leg (for runup/taxi etc.)
>
> And air time is what we accumulate to determine when we reach TBO.
> I don't know how it works elsewhere - this is how it works in Canada.

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message ...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > > > It scares me to think that there may be aircraft out there with over
> > > > 2000 TBO which are being sold as less than 1000 TBO.
> > > >
> > >
> > > TBO is based on tach time, not Hobbs time.
> > >
> > Nope, it's based on time in service. You can use any reliable
> > means of determining the service time as far as the FAA is concerned.
> > (Not that TBO means anything to most of us).
>
> What "time" are you referring to? Years/months?

Hours in service. While TBO is generally meaningless to us.
Service hours matter for those subject to 100 hour inspections as
well as many AD's that are keyed off hours.

[tony roberts]

> Me too; I was born naked, crying and confused Then things really went to
> hell.

You mean that there are two of us? :)

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Blanche]

I record tach time for maintenance (oil change, etc) and arm time
(the watch on my arm) for flying time.

[Newps]

Tom Sixkiller wrote:

> For most people with a Hobbs, that could be an extra half hour, from master
> switch "ON", to shutdown.
>
> I wonder: does ANYONE does it that way?

I do. My Hobbs does not have an oil pressure switch, it starts counting
from Master On. A typical roundtrip breakfast flight will have .2 taxi
time to the runway.

[rgb]

There a good money reason...

Where I usually rent airplaces, they changed billing time to reflect
aircraft ground time so instead of paying for exemple for 45 minutes we
pay for 0.8 hours ...

It's there way to make more money at the end.

:-(


Tom Sixkiller wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:vfrFb.617298$Tr4.1604490@attbi_s03...
>
>>That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
>>Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?
>
>
> Time math?
>
>
>
>

[Roger Tracy]

I just use tach time. I have a notebook in the plane that I record each
flight in .. along with fuel added. I just enter that same time in my
logbook.
If I end up taxing a lot for takeoff I add a tenth to it. I know I end up
cheating
myself out of logable hours .. but other than showing currency it's not
that important.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[ShawnD2112]

Nope. Still using the Mark 1 wris****ch, estimated to within about +/-5
minutes or so, recorded in decimals because I can't add in base 60. Problem
is, I keep forgetting to check my watch on takeoff (there being rather a lot
going on trying to get a Pitts off the ground and into a pattern full of
other aircraft moving at half the speed).

Shawn

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:7oiFb.618964$Fm2.558042@attbi_s04...
> With built-in flight timers becoming the norm in virtually all new
avionics
> (heck, even the new transponder I'm getting has one), just wondering if
> folks are migrating away from using hobbs/tach time to record their flight
> time?
>
> And if you *are* using the flight timer, have you stopped using the old
> archaic "1.3 hours" method of recording flight time? Anyone using actual
> hours and minutes in their logbook instead?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Robert M. Gary]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<vfrFb.617298$Tr4.1604490@attbi_s03>...
> > The hobbs seems like a perfect, simple
> > device.
>
> True, except most aircraft (outside of trainers) don't seem to have them.
> Mine doesn't, and never did.

My aircraft (Mooney) came from the factory with one. Some argue that
its actually the legal way to count 100 hour ADs (since the tach
doesn't give 1:1).

> That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
> Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?

Gee, I thought that was the best reason for the 1.4 hours math. Its
hard to add up a line of "1:03", "1:23", "1:55". Seems like "1,4" +
"1.6" +"1.6" is easier to add. I guess if you're using a computer it
doesn't make any difference.

> When I get this new transponder, I'm going to try using its internal "flight
> time" clock. If it's too much of a pain, I'll go back to the tach time x
> 1.3.

In my plane (constant speed prop) I find that the hobbs and the tach
are almost 1:1. I don't often do pattern work though. On a typical 4
hour flight the tach will be within .1 of the hobbs. I tend to run the
engine around 2400 RPM. I would think 1.3 would be very, very
generous. In the J-3, I just use my watch since I usually ran the
engine way below the 2200 RPM where it turned 1:1.

-Robert

[Teacherjh]

> That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
> Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?

Why doesn't the civilized world give up the 1:24 nonsense, and go with 1.4?

Now if we had an extra finger on each hand, I'd differ. Base 12 is really a
great base - most fractions are nice fractions. Base ten has only one nice
fraction.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Robert M. Gary]

(Teacherjh) wrote in message >...
> > That, and you're stuck using the ridiculous (to me) "1.4 hours" nonsense.
> > Why don't we just use "1:24", like the rest of the civilized world?
>
> Why doesn't the civilized world give up the 1:24 nonsense, and go with 1.4?
>
> Now if we had an extra finger on each hand, I'd differ. Base 12 is really a
> great base - most fractions are nice fractions. Base ten has only one nice
> fraction.

Especially for guys like me that are more than 8 flights behind in
their log books. Luckily I write receipts for my students so I can
remember those flights. I'm sure there are flights I take by myself
that I never remember when it comes time to sit in front of the T.V
and update the log book.

[Ron Natalie]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message m...

>
> My aircraft (Mooney) came from the factory with one. Some argue that
> its actually the legal way to count 100 hour ADs (since the tach
> doesn't give 1:1).

It is a legal way. The FAA says "hours" and absent any specific instruction
from the manufacturer, you can use the recording tach, a elapsed time meter,
or some other reliable record. The FAA just asks that you be consistant.
However, I don't think they'll buy the TACH multiplied by fudge argument.

[EDR]

In article >, Robert M.
Gary > wrote:

> Especially for guys like me that are more than 8 flights behind in
> their log books. Luckily I write receipts for my students so I can
> remember those flights. I'm sure there are flights I take by myself
> that I never remember when it comes time to sit in front of the T.V
> and update the log book.

That's why I use my flight logging cards. They are always attached to
my kneeboard or checklists.
Even when I get behind in my logbook entries, I just pull out the cards
and copy the information in the appropriate columns.