Night Currency

[Doug Campbell]

Practicing for my IFR, with a safety pilot (required crewmember)
I am not current at night. Can we fly this way, and achieve
currency? Not a passenger, since he is required crew.

Not an issue for my partner, we both need to get current
and trust each other's ability. Is it legal?
TIA, Doug

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Doug Campbell > wrote:
>Practicing for my IFR, with a safety pilot (required crewmember)
>I am not current at night. Can we fly this way, and achieve
>currency?

He's PIC and you're just the sole manipulator when you're under the hood,
but you couldn't do the takeoff or landing (unless you could do it under
the hood!) so you can't get current.

You might as well just do the T&Gs yourself before/after since there's
no way you can both be logging time at that point anyway.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[ArtP]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 04:23:40 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:

>
>He's PIC and you're just the sole manipulator when you're under the hood,
>but you couldn't do the takeoff or landing (unless you could do it under
>the hood!) so you can't get current.

As long as he is legal PIC you can do takeoffs and landings. If he is
not legal PIC you can't fly the plane with him in it.

[Nathan Young]

(Ben Jackson) wrote in message news:<gTKib.759066$Ho3.197260@sccrnsc03>...
> In article >,
> Doug Campbell > wrote:
> >Practicing for my IFR, with a safety pilot (required crewmember)
> >I am not current at night. Can we fly this way, and achieve
> >currency?
>
> He's PIC and you're just the sole manipulator when you're under the hood,
> but you couldn't do the takeoff or landing (unless you could do it under
> the hood!) so you can't get current.
>
> You might as well just do the T&Gs yourself before/after since there's
> no way you can both be logging time at that point anyway.

Agreed. Further, if something goes wrong, and you ding the plane, do
you really want to be splitting hairs over night currency
technicalities while trying to get the insurance company to pay up?

[Stephen N Mills]

Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
by FAR 61.57(b)

- Steve


On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 04:23:40 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:

>In article >,
>Doug Campbell > wrote:
>>Practicing for my IFR, with a safety pilot (required crewmember)
>>I am not current at night. Can we fly this way, and achieve
>>currency?
>
>He's PIC and you're just the sole manipulator when you're under the hood,
>but you couldn't do the takeoff or landing (unless you could do it under
>the hood!) so you can't get current.
>
>You might as well just do the T&Gs yourself before/after since there's
>no way you can both be logging time at that point anyway.

[Teacherjh]

>>
Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
by FAR 61.57(b)
<<

And an often overlooked point, takeoffs are included. You can have a logbook
full of daytime takeoffs and night landings, and they don't help a bit without
night takeoffs.

Jose

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

[Dan Luke]

"Stephen N Mills" wrote:
> Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
> by FAR 61.57(b)

Actually, to pick a tiny nit, the landings must be "to a full stop," for
which I have never found a definition in the FAR's. I do know that "full
stop" and "stop and go" mean different things to ATC.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Robert M. Gary]

(Nathan Young) wrote in message >...
> (Ben Jackson) wrote in message news:<gTKib.759066$Ho3.197260@sccrnsc03>...

> Agreed. Further, if something goes wrong, and you ding the plane, do
> you really want to be splitting hairs over night currency
> technicalities while trying to get the insurance company to pay up?

The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
who is PIC.

[Robert M. Gary]

"Dan Luke" <c172rgATbellsouthDOTnet> wrote in message >...
> "Stephen N Mills" wrote:
> > Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
> > by FAR 61.57(b)
>
> Actually, to pick a tiny nit, the landings must be "to a full stop," for
> which I have never found a definition in the FAR's. I do know that "full
> stop" and "stop and go" mean different things to ATC.

Just to make it fun, "full stop" means something different to approach
then to tower. "full stop" to tower means you're going to pull off the
runway. "full stop" to approach means you don't have the intension to
go missed. During training we often tell approach "full stop" and then
tower "touch n go". :)

[Jonathan]

That is a point I had overlooked early on. I was only logging my night
landings, since most of those flights commenced earlier during daylight.

A question I still wonder is, If I only have night landings logged, would
I still be current to land at night, but just not to take off? or do I need
both night Takeoffs and night landings logged even if I only want to land
at night (with pax). Again, most of my flights which end in a night
landing, are just day-long trips where I get home late. It is a real pain to
make special trip to airport after dark just to practice night takeoffs.

What are your collective thoughts on this subject?


"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
> by FAR 61.57(b)
> <<
>
> And an often overlooked point, takeoffs are included. You can have a
logbook
> full of daytime takeoffs and night landings, and they don't help a bit
without
> night takeoffs.
>
> Jose
>
> --
> (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Hilton]

Doug Campbell wrote:
> Practicing for my IFR, with a safety pilot (required crewmember)
> I am not current at night. Can we fly this way, and achieve
> currency? Not a passenger, since he is required crew.
>
> Not an issue for my partner, we both need to get current
> and trust each other's ability. Is it legal?

Acting and logging PIC are two completely different things. Having said
that... If you are not night current, your friend can ACT as PIC, you log
the landings, he logs nothing (assuming no hood work involved). The
complexity you add with the hoodwork is not required. The person acting as
PIC needs to have a current medical, have any required endorsements, be
current in whatever is required (in this case 'night'). The person logging
the time only needs to be rated in the aircraft, he/she does not need a
current medical, endorsements, or be current at 'night' (in this case).

I have purposely ignored FBO, insurance, etc requirements - make sure you
are still insured with the (ACTING) PIC in the right seat, unless you want
to risk it financially.

Hilton

[Hilton]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
> who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
> hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
> who is PIC.

Can you back up these claims?

Hilton

[Hilton]

Jonathan wrote:
> That is a point I had overlooked early on. I was only logging my night
> landings, since most of those flights commenced earlier during daylight.
>
> A question I still wonder is, If I only have night landings logged,
would
> I still be current to land at night, but just not to take off? or do I
need
> both night Takeoffs and night landings logged even if I only want to land
> at night (with pax). Again, most of my flights which end in a night
> landing, are just day-long trips where I get home late. It is a real pain
to
> make special trip to airport after dark just to practice night takeoffs.
>
> What are your collective thoughts on this subject?

You need both night takeoffs and night landings to qualify - the FARs spell
this out very clearly. 61.57 says (in part):

"(b) Night takeoff and landing experience. (1) Except as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of an
aircraft carrying passengers during the period beginning 1 hour after sunset
and ending 1 hour before sunrise, unless within the preceding 90 days that
person has made at least three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop
during the period beginning 1 hour after sunset and ending 1 hour before
sunrise"

Hilton

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Robert M. Gary > wrote:
>go missed. During training we often tell approach "full stop" and then
>tower "touch n go". :)

Or tell approach you're going missed and do a touch n go.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Stan Gosnell]

"Hilton" > wrote in
ink.net:

> Robert M. Gary wrote:
>> The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
>> who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
>> hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
>> who is PIC.
>
> Can you back up these claims?

It's simple. The insurance company will do everything it legally (or not
so legally) can to prevent paying. That's what insurance companies do.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Gary L. Drescher]

"Jonathan" > wrote in message
news:TB2jb.563532$cF.240565@rwcrnsc53...
> That is a point I had overlooked early on. I was only logging my night
> landings, since most of those flights commenced earlier during daylight.
>
> A question I still wonder is, If I only have night landings logged,
would
> I still be current to land at night, but just not to take off? or do I
need
> both night Takeoffs and night landings logged even if I only want to land
> at night (with pax). Again, most of my flights which end in a night
> landing, are just day-long trips where I get home late. It is a real pain
to
> make special trip to airport after dark just to practice night takeoffs.
>
> What are your collective thoughts on this subject?

Look at FAR 61.57b. Even if you take off before nightfall and stay aloft
until after dawn, you still can't have a passenger on board unless you meet
the night-currency condition, which requires takeoffs as well as landings.

--Gary

>
>
> "Teacherjh" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >>
> > Actually, for night currency, they must be *Stop & Go*s, not just T&Gs
> > by FAR 61.57(b)
> > <<
> >
> > And an often overlooked point, takeoffs are included. You can have a
> logbook
> > full of daytime takeoffs and night landings, and they don't help a bit
> without
> > night takeoffs.
> >
> > Jose
> >
> > --
> > (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
>
>

[Nathan Young]

Stan Gosnell > wrote in message >...
> "Hilton" > wrote in
> ink.net:
>
> > Robert M. Gary wrote:
> >> The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
> >> who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
> >> hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
> >> who is PIC.
> >
> > Can you back up these claims?
>
> It's simple. The insurance company will do everything it legally (or not
> so legally) can to prevent paying. That's what insurance companies do.

My point exactly. Why give them an angle? Best case, it will delay
your payment - worst case, they may not pay.

[Robert M. Gary]

"Hilton" > wrote in message et>...
> Robert M. Gary wrote:
> > The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
> > who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
> > hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
> > who is PIC.
>
> Can you back up these claims?

My policy (AIG) says..
"This insurance does not apply under any coverage c) When the aircraft
is in flight ii) if piloted by anyone other than 1) the pilot(s)
specified in Item 5".

It says nothing about PIC (although later says there must also be a
qualified PIC as well).

Call Mark at SouthWestAviation. http://www.southwestaviation.com .
He's been in the business for a couple decades and used to work for an
underwriter. He's had many such cases. He'll tell you that the FAA's
concept of "PIC" is not what the insurance co is looking at.

[Robert M. Gary]

(Ben Jackson) wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> Robert M. Gary > wrote:
> >go missed. During training we often tell approach "full stop" and then
> >tower "touch n go". :)
>
> Or tell approach you're going missed and do a touch n go.

That would require you go missed. We're trying to save time here. :)

[Newps]

Robert M. Gary wrote:

> My policy (AIG) says..
> "This insurance does not apply under any coverage c) When the aircraft
> is in flight ii) if piloted by anyone other than 1) the pilot(s)
> specified in Item 5".

I had USAIG until this year when I switched but anyone who is current
and authorized by me can fly the plane. A person did not have to be
named to fly the plane. If I'm in the plane it also does not matter
that my 5 year old is driving.

[Gary L. Drescher]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
m...
> "Hilton" > wrote in message
et>...
> > Robert M. Gary wrote:
> > > The insurance deals with "pilot flying" and doesn't care one bit about
> > > who is "PIC". PIC is an FAA thing. If a unqualified pilot has their
> > > hands on the controls the insurance isn't going to pay regardless of
> > > who is PIC.
> >
> > Can you back up these claims?
>
> My policy (AIG) says..
> "This insurance does not apply under any coverage c) When the aircraft
> is in flight ii) if piloted by anyone other than 1) the pilot(s)
> specified in Item 5".

But how does the policy define "piloted"? Does that refer to the Pilot in
Command or to the manipulator of the controls?

--Gary

> It says nothing about PIC (although later says there must also be a
> qualified PIC as well).
>
> Call Mark at SouthWestAviation. http://www.southwestaviation.com .
> He's been in the business for a couple decades and used to work for an
> underwriter. He's had many such cases. He'll tell you that the FAA's
> concept of "PIC" is not what the insurance co is looking at.

[JerryK]

There are usually two parts to the policy. One is the named insured. The
other is the open clause. Mine has me on the named part, and anyone that
meets certain qualifications, ex. 250 hours in make and model, IFR, etc.

jerry

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:gezjb.146684$%h1.146297@sccrnsc02...
>
>
> Robert M. Gary wrote:
>
> > My policy (AIG) says..
> > "This insurance does not apply under any coverage c) When the aircraft
> > is in flight ii) if piloted by anyone other than 1) the pilot(s)
> > specified in Item 5".
>
> I had USAIG until this year when I switched but anyone who is current
> and authorized by me can fly the plane. A person did not have to be
> named to fly the plane. If I'm in the plane it also does not matter
> that my 5 year old is driving.
>