pilot-in-command question...

[Tom Kreyche]

After looking online and in the FARs, I still can't see a definite answer for the following question:

Let's say two pilots are flying together in an aircraft, and the aircraft doesn't require more than one pilot and it's not a commercial aircraft. If the pilots alternate flying the aircraft by handing off the controls to the other person, do they also alternate pilot-in-command responsibilites?

The FAR/AIM defines PIC as: 1) has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight, 2) has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight.

Part 61.51(c) says a person can only log pilot-in-command time while being "the sole manipulator of the controls."

Obviously it's OK to hand over PIC during the flight. It also seems that by definition if you hand off the controls to the other person, whether you're reading a map or taking a nap--you just handed over PIC responsibility and you can't log that time. Things get a lot more complicated when the aircraft requires more than one pilot, but I'm not talking about that and I'm not talking about instructors either.

On a slightly different topic, is it legal by FAA standards to let a passenger take the controls of an aircraft?

thanks, Tom Kreyche N21TK

[Teacherjh]

>>
If the pilots alternate flying the aircraft by handing off the
controls to the other person, do they also alternate pilot-in-command
responsibilites?
<<

Not automatically. Assuming both are rated, current, and in all ways able to
BE pilot in command, then they must agree who is to =be= the top dog in charge
of the flight. They can agree that one will be, the other will be, the pilot
flying will be, the pilot NOT flying will be, but whoever they agree is PIC for
the leg in question is the final authority and the one upon whose wrath the FAA
(in theory) will fall should there be an incident.

Of course, in fact the FAA may well come after both and the question may become
moot.

But this all has to do with who IS the Top Dog of the flight. Who IS the PIC.

Now who gets to LOG PIC time ("Hands On Time", or HOT) is governed by different
rules, as you pointed out. The FAA confuses things by giving these two
DIFFERENT CONCEPTS the same name. Being Top Dog is different from logging HOT.
BEING PIC is different from LOGGING PIC.

Thus (among other things, you can log PIC time when you're HOT but not Top Dog.
Many long threads about this exist, try google. :)

>>
On a slightly different topic, is it legal by FAA standards to let a
passenger take the controls of an aircraft?
<<

I don't know of a rule against it, and I don't know of a ruling saying no. I
personally consider the passenger to be an organic autopilot, and have no
problem letting them manipulate the controls. I remain Top Dog, and continue
to log HOT (just as I would using an inorganic autopilot). If there were an
incident, it would be my responsibility, and I'd expect the FAA to try the
"careless and reckless" rule against me, so I am careful to not let the
passenger get us into a situation which would cause an incident. (besides
which I like being alive). I believe it is not inherently "careless and
reckless" to allow a passenger to manipulate the controls, although it might be
careless and reckless for me to let them go too far afield without my
intervention.

Jose

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

[Tom Kreyche]

Thanks for the opinion, however I don't see anything in the FARs to
substantiate it.

The FARs only have a concept of PIC, and do not have a concept of Top Dog
vs. HOT.

I googled and it looks like the concept of a "designated" PIC only applies
to airline transport people and the military.

Tom



"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> If the pilots alternate flying the aircraft by handing off the
> controls to the other person, do they also alternate pilot-in-command
> responsibilites?
> <<
>
> Not automatically. Assuming both are rated, current, and in all ways able
to
> BE pilot in command, then they must agree who is to =be= the top dog in
charge
> of the flight. They can agree that one will be, the other will be, the
pilot
> flying will be, the pilot NOT flying will be, but whoever they agree is
PIC for
> the leg in question is the final authority and the one upon whose wrath
the FAA
> (in theory) will fall should there be an incident.
>
> Of course, in fact the FAA may well come after both and the question may
become
> moot.
>
> But this all has to do with who IS the Top Dog of the flight. Who IS the
PIC.
>
> Now who gets to LOG PIC time ("Hands On Time", or HOT) is governed by
different
> rules, as you pointed out. The FAA confuses things by giving these two
> DIFFERENT CONCEPTS the same name. Being Top Dog is different from logging
HOT.
> BEING PIC is different from LOGGING PIC.
>

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 03:41:15 GMT, "Tom Kreyche" > wrote:

>After looking online and in the FARs, I still can't see a definite answer for the following question:
>
>Let's say two pilots are flying together in an aircraft, and the aircraft doesn't require more than one pilot and it's not a commercial aircraft. If the pilots alternate flying the aircraft by handing off the controls to the other person, do they also alternate pilot-in-command responsibilites?

As are many, you are confused because of FAA terminology.

What you call PIC "responsibilities" is defined in 14 CFR 1.1:

===========================================
Pilot in command means the person who:

(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of
the flight;

(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight;
and

(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate,
for the conduct of the flight.
=========================================

As you can see, the definition has absolutely nothing to do with who is, as
you put it, "flying the aircraft" or manipulating the controls.

What is confusing is that, for the kind of non-commercial flying that most
of us are doing, *being* PIC per the definition in 1.1 has almost nothing
to do with whether or not one is permitted to *log* PIC time under the
provisions of 14 CFR 61.51:

(with the exception of a flight where two pilots are required by either the
aircraft type certificate or the regulations under which the flight is
being conducted. For most of us, that means the safety pilot regulation)

===============================
(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A recreational, private, or
commercial pilot may log pilot-in- command time only for that flight time
during which that person—

(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the
pilot is rated;

(ii) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or

(iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command of an
aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type
certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is
conducted.

==================================

This concept that ACTING as PIC is different from the right to LOG time as
PIC seems bizarre, but it is grounded in the regulations and supported by
multiple legal interpretations written by the FAA Chief Counsel.


--ron

[Teacherjh]

>>
The FARs only have a concept of PIC, and do not have a concept of Top Dog
vs. HOT.
<<

They certainly DO have the =concept= of Top Dog vs. HOT. They just don't call
it that. 1.1 of the FARs (I still call it that) defines the CONCEPT of Top
Dog, and gives it the moniker "Pilot in Command".

61.51 defines the CONCEPT of HOT (by using it in 61.51 e 1 i) but doesn't call
it anything. It also uses the CONCEPT of Top Dog (by using it in 61.51 e 1 iii
and calling it Pilot In Command). Although they have the same name, they are
different CONCEPTS. 61.51 e 1 states that you can log "Pilot in command time"
if you are HOT and rated, or in some cases when you are Top Dog.

The FARs are not well written. Whether this is deliberate or not is open to
discussion (but nothing complicated written by lawyers is an accident, and
nothing simple written by lawyers exists).

Jose


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

[G.R. Patterson III]

> Obviously it's OK to hand over PIC during the flight. It also seems that by definition if you hand off the controls to the other person, whether you're reading a map or taking a nap--you just handed over PIC responsibility and you can't log that time.

No, you did not hand over responsibility, but it's true you can't log the time.
Logging PIC and being PIC are two different things. Who is acting PIC is a matter
which should be decided before the flight.

> On a slightly different topic, is it legal by FAA standards to let a passenger take the controls of an aircraft?

Yes. When this happens, you are still PIC, but you can't log the time as PIC.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Teacherjh]

>>
> On a slightly different topic, is it legal by FAA standards to let a
passenger take the controls of an aircraft?

Yes. When this happens, you are still PIC, but you can't log the time as PIC.
<<

I don't see why not. The plane is still being operated by one rated pilot, not
two. The passenger is just an organic autopilot, and you log the time when
"George" is at the controls. Of course, George is FAA approved, and your
passenger is not, but here's a case (IMHO) where FAA approval works against
you.

Jose


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

[Newps]

Teacherjh wrote:

>
> I don't see why not. The plane is still being operated by one rated pilot, not
> two. The passenger is just an organic autopilot, and you log the time when
> "George" is at the controls. Of course, George is FAA approved, and your
> passenger is not, but here's a case (IMHO) where FAA approval works against
> you.

It's one of them stupid FAA things. Of course nobody with an IQ over 5
says to himself...."Hmmm, let's see, my 5 year old was at the controls
for 8 minutes so I have to subtract that time from my logged PIC time."
You just log it.

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:14:01 -0600, Newps > wrote
in >::

>It's one of them stupid FAA things.

You mean there are other "stupid FAA things?" :-)

Isn't the overlap implicit in the fact, that the regulations permit
logging PIC time while "sole manipulator" AND while assuming PIC
responsibility for the flight, the reason passenger-stick-time is
logged as you suggest?