Logging Simulator Time

[Bartscher]

I just had my first opportunity to log some approaches in a simulator and that
brought up questions about how to log the time. The Frasca 141 was set up to
mimic a Cessna 172. My questions are:

1) Does this time get logged as Airplane SEL along with also being logged as a
Synthetic Trainer?

2) Do I log the time as "Day" since technically it was daytime outside the
building? (I'm assuming that I still want my Day hours + Night hours = Total
hours, so it has to be one or the other)

There was some confusion over this at the FBO and I figured I'd compound that
by looking for some answers here :-)

Eric Bartsch

[Hilton]

Bartscher wrote:
> I just had my first opportunity to log some approaches in a simulator and
that
> brought up questions about how to log the time. The Frasca 141 was set up
to
> mimic a Cessna 172. My questions are:
>
> 1) Does this time get logged as Airplane SEL along with also being logged
as a
> Synthetic Trainer?
>
> 2) Do I log the time as "Day" since technically it was daytime outside the
> building? (I'm assuming that I still want my Day hours + Night hours =
Total
> hours, so it has to be one or the other)
>
> There was some confusion over this at the FBO and I figured I'd compound
that
> by looking for some answers here :-)

This is what it is NOT logged as: simulator, ASEL, day, night, actual
instrument, simulated instrument, PIC, total, etc etc etc...

This is what it IS logged as: flight training device AND only if you had an
instructor with you.

Hilton

[Bartscher]

>This is what it is NOT logged as: simulator, ASEL, day, night, actual
>instrument, simulated instrument, PIC, total, etc etc etc...
>
>This is what it IS logged as: flight training device AND only if you had an
>instructor with you.
>
>Hilton
>

I think I'll stand behind my comment about compounding my confusion by looking
to the internet for answers. To clarify my posting, I did have a qualified CFII
with me for the sim flight.

If I read FAR 61.51 right, I CAN log as Total Time (see 61.51 b-2-v) I CAN log
simulated instrument (see 61.51 b-3-iii). Also, 61.51 g-4 looks like it
confirms that simulated instrument can be logged in the sim if as you said, an
authorized instructor is present.

What is unclear is are the answers to my two original questions:

1) Does the sim time also get logged as ASEL? (61.51 b-1-iv implies to me that
I would log it as ASEL since the sim was set up as a single engine aircraft. I
would also log it as a simulator of course.)

2) Do I log anything in the day or night columns? (61.51 b-3 is unclear on this
because paragraphs i,ii,and iii are not mutually exclusive. Otherwise you
couldn't log both day and instrument.)

I'd appreciate anyone who can reference an FAR or a section of the AIM that
spells this out more clearly than what I've already found.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch

[Andrew Sarangan]

(Bartscher) wrote in
:

> I just had my first opportunity to log some approaches in a simulator
> and that brought up questions about how to log the time. The Frasca
> 141 was set up to mimic a Cessna 172. My questions are:
>
> 1) Does this time get logged as Airplane SEL along with also being
> logged as a Synthetic Trainer?
>
> 2) Do I log the time as "Day" since technically it was daytime outside
> the building? (I'm assuming that I still want my Day hours + Night
> hours = Total hours, so it has to be one or the other)
>
> There was some confusion over this at the FBO and I figured I'd
> compound that by looking for some answers here :-)
>
> Eric Bartsch


It should be logged as ground trainer time, not as flight time. Since it
was not flight time, obviously the flight conditions are irrelevant (day,
night, imc...). Also, it should not be added to the total flight time
column (usually the last column).

[Dave S]

The device you were in was in all likelihood not considered a simulator,
but rather a flight training device. Whats the difference? A LOT of
money and probably the presence of multi-axis motion. I should think
that the time in such a Flight Training Device would be loggable as
simulated instrument, and as instrument instruction, but not towards
day/night/specific type/category/class. The devices that the boys at
Continental, Delta, Flight Safety, etc use are true Simulators, and the
time in those devices is loggable as aircraft time if I have been told
correctly. The tabletop and non-motion devices are NOT simulators, but
flight training devices. The owner of one flight school I used to train
at was quite ****ed when he discovered that the 10,000 "Aerosim" PCATD
that he bought was only legally logabble for 10 hours of primary/initial
instrument instruction and was not able to be used for up to 20 hours
(as a sim), nor for proficiency . He wrongly thought he had bought a
"simulator". Unless your device meets the true definition of a
simulator, you may not be able to log it as "flight time"

There are certain AC's that clarify the issue, and while people say the
AC's are non-regulatory, they DO specify a means of acceptable
compliance with published rules. Not following the AC's puts the burden
on YOU to prove to the FAA that what you are doing is acceptable.

Dave

Bartscher wrote:
>>This is what it is NOT logged as: simulator, ASEL, day, night, actual
>>instrument, simulated instrument, PIC, total, etc etc etc...
>>
>>This is what it IS logged as: flight training device AND only if you had an
>>instructor with you.
>>
>>Hilton
>>
>
>
> I think I'll stand behind my comment about compounding my confusion by looking
> to the internet for answers. To clarify my posting, I did have a qualified CFII
> with me for the sim flight.
>
> If I read FAR 61.51 right, I CAN log as Total Time (see 61.51 b-2-v) I CAN log
> simulated instrument (see 61.51 b-3-iii). Also, 61.51 g-4 looks like it
> confirms that simulated instrument can be logged in the sim if as you said, an
> authorized instructor is present.
>
> What is unclear is are the answers to my two original questions:
>
> 1) Does the sim time also get logged as ASEL? (61.51 b-1-iv implies to me that
> I would log it as ASEL since the sim was set up as a single engine aircraft. I
> would also log it as a simulator of course.)
>
> 2) Do I log anything in the day or night columns? (61.51 b-3 is unclear on this
> because paragraphs i,ii,and iii are not mutually exclusive. Otherwise you
> couldn't log both day and instrument.)
>
> I'd appreciate anyone who can reference an FAR or a section of the AIM that
> spells this out more clearly than what I've already found.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric Bartsch

[Greg Esres]

<<it should not be added to the total flight time column (usually the
last column). >>

Based on what?

The FARs don't define "Total Time", so you can put what you like
there.

I consider the closest thing to "Total Time" is "Pilot Time", and FTD
time counts as that.

[Bob Gardner]

If your log distinguishes between Total Time and Total Flight Time, log the
time as Total Time...but don't mix it in with flight time. As the FAA
Aviation News once said in response to a similar question, "The extension
cord isn't long enough." I have a certain amount of familiarity with this
question, since I operated an AST-300 business across the street from the
Seattle FSDO and had many, many FAA inspectors as customers (on the
taxpayer's dime, of course). I also had a letter from the FSDO laying out
exactly what the AST-300 could be used for...does the box you used have
similar authentication?

Bob Gardner

"Bartscher" > wrote in message
...
> >This is what it is NOT logged as: simulator, ASEL, day, night, actual
> >instrument, simulated instrument, PIC, total, etc etc etc...
> >
> >This is what it IS logged as: flight training device AND only if you had
an
> >instructor with you.
> >
> >Hilton
> >
>
> I think I'll stand behind my comment about compounding my confusion by
looking
> to the internet for answers. To clarify my posting, I did have a qualified
CFII
> with me for the sim flight.
>
> If I read FAR 61.51 right, I CAN log as Total Time (see 61.51 b-2-v) I CAN
log
> simulated instrument (see 61.51 b-3-iii). Also, 61.51 g-4 looks like it
> confirms that simulated instrument can be logged in the sim if as you
said, an
> authorized instructor is present.
>
> What is unclear is are the answers to my two original questions:
>
> 1) Does the sim time also get logged as ASEL? (61.51 b-1-iv implies to me
that
> I would log it as ASEL since the sim was set up as a single engine
aircraft. I
> would also log it as a simulator of course.)
>
> 2) Do I log anything in the day or night columns? (61.51 b-3 is unclear on
this
> because paragraphs i,ii,and iii are not mutually exclusive. Otherwise you
> couldn't log both day and instrument.)
>
> I'd appreciate anyone who can reference an FAR or a section of the AIM
that
> spells this out more clearly than what I've already found.
>
> Thanks,
> Eric Bartsch

[Bartscher]

>I also had a letter from the FSDO laying out
>exactly what the AST-300 could be used for...does the box you used have
>similar authentication?
>
>Bob Gardner

Well, the Frasca web site was only partially useful here. They did a good job
of reviewing what parts of what ratings the 141 can be used for, but they don't
say much about how to log it.

http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/information/logtime2.htm

http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/brochures/141bro.htm

They also managed to call it both a simulator and a flight training device on
the same page (not helpful). They do claim the following: "FAA approved under
14 CFR parts 61 and 141. Guaranteed FAA Level 2 or 3 qualification We not only
build these devices to AC120-45A Level 2 or 3 standards, but we can also
guarantee that they can be qualified in conjunction with the National Simulator
Program Managers office in Atlanta". Of course I'm not quite sure what that
means.

Sounds like it is Simulated Instrument but maybe not Total Flight Time (which
seems odd, not that it has to make sense). Also, the consensus appears to be
that it was neither day or night (which does make sense since there wasn't a
visual system)

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch

[Richard Kaplan]

"Dave S" > wrote in message
nk.net...


> day/night/specific type/category/class. The devices that the boys at
> Continental, Delta, Flight Safety, etc use are true Simulators, and the

Flight Safety and Simcom (and Flight Level Aviation) use Flight Training
Devices as well for piston flight training.

Flight Safety and Simcom do not use true "simulators" until they get to
turboprops or jets.

However, a Flight Training Device can have multi-axis motion just like a
simulator.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[Bob Gardner]

"FAA approved" misleads a lot of people. It means that someone at FAA HQ has
evaluated the box and decided that it has training value. Each individual
location, however, has to be checked out by the local FSDO and a letter of
authorization issued. The FSDO came into my place with a 30-page checklist,
looking into such things as VOR sensitivity, accuracy of the turn-and-bank,
aerodynamic responses, etc. They flew the AST-300 for most of a day before
conferring their blessing on it. The fact that the box had been "approved"
by HQ meant nothing.

Bob Gardner

"Bartscher" > wrote in message
...
> >I also had a letter from the FSDO laying out
> >exactly what the AST-300 could be used for...does the box you used have
> >similar authentication?
> >
> >Bob Gardner
>
> Well, the Frasca web site was only partially useful here. They did a good
job
> of reviewing what parts of what ratings the 141 can be used for, but they
don't
> say much about how to log it.
>
> http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/information/logtime2.htm
>
> http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/brochures/141bro.htm
>
> They also managed to call it both a simulator and a flight training device
on
> the same page (not helpful). They do claim the following: "FAA approved
under
> 14 CFR parts 61 and 141. Guaranteed FAA Level 2 or 3 qualification We not
only
> build these devices to AC120-45A Level 2 or 3 standards, but we can also
> guarantee that they can be qualified in conjunction with the National
Simulator
> Program Managers office in Atlanta". Of course I'm not quite sure what
that
> means.
>
> Sounds like it is Simulated Instrument but maybe not Total Flight Time
(which
> seems odd, not that it has to make sense). Also, the consensus appears to
be
> that it was neither day or night (which does make sense since there wasn't
a
> visual system)
>
> Thanks,
> Eric Bartsch

[Bartscher]

I went to the source at Frasca and they confirmed that while the 141 can be
used for all of the purposes listed on the website (including instrument
currency which is what I was doing), it should be logged only as simulator
time, and not as total time.

From Frasca (who manufactures everything from FTDs to Level D sims):
"Usually people log it as Simulator / FTD(Flight Training Device) time.
While the time does count toward your flight time training requirement
for instrument for example, airlines, 8710's etc. usually want you to
break them out so it is easier to just leave them separate in a
simulator column and not include them in your total time. The only time
I would put a simulator flight in Total time column would be in a level
D full flight simulator as the airlines use."

Looks like the original responder was right, I stand corrected.

Eric

[Greg Esres]

<<I went to the source at Frasca...it should be logged only as
simulator time, and not as total time.>>

If you quoted them accurately, then your interpretation is incorrect.
They merely said it's more convenient to log it in a separate column,
because *some* people want you to break it out. The word "should"
doesn't apply here, because "Total Time" is not defined in the FARs
and therefore there are no rules about logging it.

They are also wrong by saying that the time doesn't belong on an 8710.
It does, and in the Total Time column, because what it asks for is
Total PILOT Time, and FTD time is PILOT time.

[Andrew Sarangan]

Greg Esres > wrote in
:

> <<I went to the source at Frasca...it should be logged only as
> simulator time, and not as total time.>>
>
> If you quoted them accurately, then your interpretation is incorrect.
> They merely said it's more convenient to log it in a separate column,
> because *some* people want you to break it out. The word "should"
> doesn't apply here, because "Total Time" is not defined in the FARs
> and therefore there are no rules about logging it.
>
> They are also wrong by saying that the time doesn't belong on an 8710.
> It does, and in the Total Time column, because what it asks for is
> Total PILOT Time, and FTD time is PILOT time.
>
>

It is interesting that the 8710 asks for pilot time whereas part 61 often
refers to flight time. For example, you need 250 hours of flight time to
qualify for the commercial. I doubt one could use sim time to count as
flight time,

[Greg Esres]

<<For example, you need 250 hours of flight time to
qualify for the commercial. I doubt one could use sim time to count as
flight time, >>

Agreed. Pilot Time <> Flight Time.

No idea how OK City massages the numbers to verify the candidate has
the required experience. Perhaps they subtract out the FTD times?

[kage]

My instrument instructor, Lyle Flick---"Flick's Foggy Flying" told me that
sim time was to be SUBTACTED in one's logbook. This was b4 more advanced
sims, like the Falcon 50EX sim I get into every six months. But I don't log
that time either, as anything!

Karl

[Stan Gosnell]

"kage" > wrote in
:

> My instrument instructor, Lyle Flick---"Flick's Foggy Flying" told me
> that sim time was to be SUBTACTED in one's logbook. This was b4 more
> advanced sims, like the Falcon 50EX sim I get into every six months.
> But I don't log that time either, as anything!

I log my sim time, just so I can remember it. I stopped logging time for
anything other than currency long ago, but I still log my flights just so I
can recall what I did when, and the sim flights can be memorable.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Bob Gardner]

He told me that several times, tongue in cheek. Really miss that guy.

Bob Gardner

"kage" > wrote in message
...
> My instrument instructor, Lyle Flick---"Flick's Foggy Flying" told me that
> sim time was to be SUBTACTED in one's logbook. This was b4 more advanced
> sims, like the Falcon 50EX sim I get into every six months. But I don't
log
> that time either, as anything!
>
> Karl
>
>

[kage]

For people who never met Lyle, I'd just like to give a little info about
him. He was a "real man's" pilot. In the summer he was a fire bomber, last
in a C-119 with an additional jet engine on the top.

In the winter, he gave his version of an instrument rating. All time was at
night. All time was actual, and the more ice the better. And we had plenty
here in the NW. When a big front would be coming through you would get a
call from Lyle. "meet you at 9PM at the airport, we're going to Oakland.

He loved to turn off the pitot heat and let the airspeed go. Then turn off
the lights and pull out a cigarette and blow smoke in your face. One of his
ice deterrence moves was always fly V-27 down the coast of WA OR and CA. If
you got too much ice you just turned off your transponder and descended out
over the ocean to let it melt. Then climb back onto V-27 and turn the TXP
back on.

This never killed him. He died several years later of natural causes. His
son was the quarterback for the UW Huskies. His favorite saying, "God hates
cowards!" I can still hear him laughing.

Karl
N185KG, Skywagon "curator"

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
news:Zbwjc.31287$YP5.2464949@attbi_s02...
> He told me that several times, tongue in cheek. Really miss that guy.
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> "kage" > wrote in message
> ...
> > My instrument instructor, Lyle Flick---"Flick's Foggy Flying" told me
that
> > sim time was to be SUBTACTED in one's logbook. This was b4 more advanced
> > sims, like the Falcon 50EX sim I get into every six months. But I don't
> log
> > that time either, as anything!
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
>
>

[Matt Whiting]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> Greg Esres > wrote in
> :
>
>
>><<I went to the source at Frasca...it should be logged only as
>>simulator time, and not as total time.>>
>>
>>If you quoted them accurately, then your interpretation is incorrect.
>>They merely said it's more convenient to log it in a separate column,
>>because *some* people want you to break it out. The word "should"
>>doesn't apply here, because "Total Time" is not defined in the FARs
>>and therefore there are no rules about logging it.
>>
>>They are also wrong by saying that the time doesn't belong on an 8710.
>>It does, and in the Total Time column, because what it asks for is
>>Total PILOT Time, and FTD time is PILOT time.
>>
>>
>
>
> It is interesting that the 8710 asks for pilot time whereas part 61 often
> refers to flight time. For example, you need 250 hours of flight time to
> qualify for the commercial. I doubt one could use sim time to count as
> flight time,
>

I don't see why not, you may count taxi time... :-)

Matt

[Andrew Sarangan]

Matt Whiting > wrote in
:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>> Greg Esres > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>><<I went to the source at Frasca...it should be logged only as
>>>simulator time, and not as total time.>>
>>>
>>>If you quoted them accurately, then your interpretation is incorrect.
>>>They merely said it's more convenient to log it in a separate column,
>>>because *some* people want you to break it out. The word "should"
>>>doesn't apply here, because "Total Time" is not defined in the FARs
>>>and therefore there are no rules about logging it.
>>>
>>>They are also wrong by saying that the time doesn't belong on an
>>>8710. It does, and in the Total Time column, because what it asks for
>>>is Total PILOT Time, and FTD time is PILOT time.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It is interesting that the 8710 asks for pilot time whereas part 61
>> often refers to flight time. For example, you need 250 hours of
>> flight time to qualify for the commercial. I doubt one could use sim
>> time to count as flight time,
>>
>
> I don't see why not, you may count taxi time... :-)
>
> Matt
>
>

Sure, but in order to log taxi time you must have had the intention of
flying. Just taxiing around doesn't count.

[Andrew Sarangan]

"kage" > wrote in
:

> For people who never met Lyle, I'd just like to give a little info
> about him. He was a "real man's" pilot. In the summer he was a fire
> bomber, last in a C-119 with an additional jet engine on the top.
>
> In the winter, he gave his version of an instrument rating. All time
> was at night. All time was actual, and the more ice the better. And we
> had plenty here in the NW. When a big front would be coming through
> you would get a call from Lyle. "meet you at 9PM at the airport, we're
> going to Oakland.
>
> He loved to turn off the pitot heat and let the airspeed go. Then turn
> off the lights and pull out a cigarette and blow smoke in your face.
> One of his ice deterrence moves was always fly V-27 down the coast of
> WA OR and CA. If you got too much ice you just turned off your
> transponder and descended out over the ocean to let it melt. Then
> climb back onto V-27 and turn the TXP back on.
>
> This never killed him. He died several years later of natural causes.
> His son was the quarterback for the UW Huskies. His favorite saying,
> "God hates cowards!" I can still hear him laughing.
>
> Karl
> N185KG, Skywagon "curator"
>

Please tell me this is a joke. Intentionally flying in ice, turning off
the transponder during IFR, descending without a clearance... Hmmm..

[Richard Kaplan]

"Greg Esres" > wrote in message
...

> If you quoted them accurately, then your interpretation is incorrect.
> They merely said it's more convenient to log it in a separate column,
> because *some* people want you to break it out. The word "should"
> doesn't apply here, because "Total Time" is not defined in the FARs
> and therefore there are no rules about logging it.

I agree completely.. and additional rationale is that most FTDs are approved
for instrument currency or for an IPC as long as a CFII supervises the IPC
or currency. How can one log 6 approaches, holds, and tracking navigational
courses if that time is not considered part of one's total flight time?

I think it is more accurate for Frasca to say that it is helpful to subtotal
airplane time vs. FTD time because for various purposes (i.e. employment or
future ratings) the distinction can be important between the two. But it is
hard for my to conceive how it is improper to consider FTD time to be part
of total time.



-------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com