Student as PIC in IMC? [Archive]

Bob Gardner

May 26th 04, 02:07 AM

Look at 61.51(e) and show me where it mentions flight conditions, VFR or
IFR.

Bob Gardner

"Geo. Anderson" > wrote in message
...
> I'll be taking my checkride in a few weeks and one of my goals has been
> to have at least 10 hours of actual IMC before I take the ride. It's
> going well; I'm at 9.1 and only 2 of those were just boring a hole in
> clouds on a cross country.
>
> I have been under the impression that I could log PIC time when under
> the hood but not in actual IMC, because I am not rated. Last night,
> however, I read something in the ASA oral test prep book that seemed to
> imply that this was not the case.
>
> So, assembled wizards, should I be logging PIC time in IMC? or not?
>
> tia,
> Geo. Anderson

[email protected]

May 26th 04, 02:18 AM

Teacherjh wrote:

>
>
> The trick is to understand that "PIC" means two differnt things in the two
> different contexts. In the context of logging, it means one thing, in the
> context of "final authority for the operation of the aircraft" it means
> somethning else. "PIC" and "PIC" are synonyms.

Could you explain the difference for those of us who haven't witness The Light Of
Knowledge?

Ron Rosenfeld

May 26th 04, 02:52 AM

On Tue, 25 May 2004 18:18:50 -0700, wrote:

>Could you explain the difference for those of us who haven't witness The Light Of
>Knowledge?

O ye of little faith.

The FAA has decreed that one can act as PIC without being able to log PIC.

The FAA has also decreed that one can log PIC without being qualified to
act as PIC.

The requirements to act as PIC are different from the requirements to log
PIC.

And you thought TERPs were confusing :-)

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

Teacherjh

May 26th 04, 03:01 AM

>>
>> "PIC" and "PIC" are synonyms.

Could you explain the difference for those of us who haven't witness The Light
Of
Knowledge?
<<

When the regulations were written, two concepts got the same label. The first
concept was that of The One Who Is The Final Authority Of How The Flight Will
Be Conducted. The Top Dog. The Big Banana. El Mucho Macho. The One That
Stops The Buck. The rulemakers called this person the "Pilot In Command",
abbreviated PIC.

The other concept had to do with logging time, and what the person doing the
logging was doing when the flying was happening. Sometimes there are two
pilots in an airplane, and sometimes this is required (and sometimes not).
Some pilots are getting instruction in aircraft they can't fly, some pilots are
having things demonstrated to them, and some are just along for the ride. So,
there's a place in the logbook for "What You Were Doing On The Flight". If you
were rated for the plane, and were manipulating the controls yourself, you were
essentially flying the plane, even if there was an instructor in the other
seat. One example is an IFR student in actual IMC with an instructor. He
can't be The Top Dog because he's not rated for the conditions. Somebody else
has to be Top Dog. (the instructor). However, the instructor probably never
touches the controls. So, the person Doing The Flying should be able to log
the time as "Yes I Did The Flying" time, and the rules say so. But they also
call it "Pilot in command" time, even if the pilot isn't Top Dog.

Dumb? yes. But it's what we have.

So, you can log PIC time if you are sole manipulator of the controls (in most
cases). You can lot PIC time if you are Top Dog (in most cases). Thus, there
are times when two pilots get to log PIC time, even though only one of them is
Top Dog. There are even cases where nobody can log PIC time.

Jose

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

Mark Kolber

May 26th 04, 03:09 AM

On Tue, 25 May 2004 18:18:50 -0700, wrote:

>Could you explain the difference for those of us who haven't witness The Light Of
>Knowledge?

Sure. Snip from the introduction to my personal FAQ: "The Rules of
Logging PIC"
==============================
Basic Principles

The "golden key" to understanding "The Rules" is to always keep in
mind that the FAR treats "acting as pilot in command" and "logging
pilot in command time" as =completely= different concepts. It's the
difference between (1) having final authority and responsibility for
the operation and safety of a flight (commonly referred to as "acting
as PIC") and (2) writing numbers in columns on a piece of paper while
sitting at a desk with a beer in your hand. The first reflects FAA
policy about who is permitted to be in charge of a flight. The second
reflects FAA policy about what a pilot may count toward the
requirements for certificates, ratings and currency. They =never= mean
the same thing and they have completely different rules. A pilot can
be responsible for a flight and =not= be permitted to write those
numbers down. A pilot can be technically nothing but a passenger in
the FAA's eyes and be permitted to write time in that PIC column. In
some circumstances, two pilots may sit at that desk and write numbers
in their logbooks, even though, quite obviously, only one can bear the
ultimate responsibility for a flight.

The known universe of logging rules is contained in FAR 61.51. Unless
61.51 specifically directs you to it, answering a logging question by
including the word "acting" or pointing to any other FAR is always a
mistake. On the other hand, rules about "acting" as PIC in particular
circumstances can be found in various regulations.

[snip]

Keep them straight
Acting As PIC = duty, authority, responsibility
Logging PIC Time = putting numbers in columns on a piece of paper
Different purposes, different concepts, different rules.

Mark Kolber
APA/Denver, Colorado
www.midlifeflight.com
======================
email? Remove ".no.spam"

Mark Kolber

May 26th 04, 03:10 AM

On Tue, 25 May 2004 23:04:25 GMT, "Geo. Anderson"
> wrote:

>
>So, assembled wizards, should I be logging PIC time in IMC? or not?

You may.

Rule 1 If you are a recreational, private or commercial pilot, you may
log PIC any time you are the sole manipulator of the controls of an
aircraft you are rated for. 61.51(e)(3)

"Rated" means the category and class (and type, if a type rating is
necessary for the aircraft) that is listed on the back of your pilot
certificate. =Nothing= else matters. Not instrument ratings. Not
endorsements for high performance, complex, tailwheel aircraft. Not
medical currency. Not flight reviews. Not night currency. Nothing.
There are no known exceptions.

Mark Kolber
APA/Denver, Colorado
www.midlifeflight.com
======================
email? Remove ".no.spam"

[email protected]

May 26th 04, 01:18 PM

Mark Kolber > wrote:
: Rule 1 If you are a recreational, private or commercial pilot, you may
: log PIC any time you are the sole manipulator of the controls of an
: aircraft you are rated for. 61.51(e)(3)

: "Rated" means the category and class (and type, if a type rating is
: necessary for the aircraft) that is listed on the back of your pilot
: certificate. =Nothing= else matters. Not instrument ratings. Not
: endorsements for high performance, complex, tailwheel aircraft. Not
: medical currency. Not flight reviews. Not night currency. Nothing.
: There are no known exceptions.

So, it is possible for someone to log PIC flight time who has a pilot
certificate with ratings valid for the aircraft (e.g. PPSEL), but no BFR or current
medical if they were the sole manipulator of the controls? If that is the case, then
this person could go fly with a current pilot rated for the aircraft, and they both
log PIC... one as sole manipulator and one as the legal "acting as PIC".

Hrm... that sounds fishy, because it means whenever two pilots fly together,
they can both log all the time as PIC... whomever isn't physically flying can be
legally acting as PIC at the same time.

Also, if that's true then I've got more high-performance/complex time than I
thought (sole manipulator without endorsement, buy flying with rated, endorsed pilot).

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

C J Campbell

May 26th 04, 03:27 PM

> wrote in message
...
>
> So, it is possible for someone to log PIC flight time who has a pilot
> certificate with ratings valid for the aircraft (e.g. PPSEL), but no BFR
or current
> medical if they were the sole manipulator of the controls? If that is the
case, then
> this person could go fly with a current pilot rated for the aircraft, and
they both
> log PIC... one as sole manipulator and one as the legal "acting as PIC".

In this case, yes, because the acting PIC is a required crew member. The
same is true of a safety pilot who is acting as PIC.

>
> Hrm... that sounds fishy, because it means whenever two pilots fly
together,
> they can both log all the time as PIC... whomever isn't physically flying
can be
> legally acting as PIC at the same time.

However, the acting PIC must be required by the aircraft or operation to be
a crew member in order for him to log PIC while not manipulating the
controls. A buddy just along for the ride may not log PIC, though the FAA
and everybody else may consider him to be acting PIC. There is one case of
an ATP who was considered to be PIC even though he was sleeping in the back
seat of a light twin. A CFI and private pilot were actually sitting up
front. The airplane had an accident while the ATP was asleep, and the FAA
considered him to be PIC even though the ATP and both the other pilots
insisted he was not. He could not log the time, however, because he was not
an essential crew member.

A flight instructor logs all the time he is giving instruction as PIC,
though there may be any number of reasons (currency, medical, etc.) that he
cannot act as PIC.

Say you have a plane carrying ten passengers plus crew. Up front you have a
pilot, an instructor who is giving the pilot instruction, and an examiner
who is reviewing the instructor. In the back you have a rated pilot who is
performing the duties of the required flight attendant but is also acting as
PIC. All of the pilots in this case may log PIC, but only the guy in back is
acting as PIC.

George and Mike, both rated pilots, fly up to Newtown in a Cessna 172 for
the college game. George flies the airplane and Mike acts as PIC. Only
George can log PIC even though Mike is acting as PIC.

Bill, a rated pilot but not a flight instructor, takes his friend Jill for a
ride in his Warrior. Jill holds no certificate and has never even been in a
plane before, but Bill lets her fly the airplane for awhile. Bill continues
to act as PIC. It is fairly evident that Jill can neither act as PIC nor log
the time as PIC. But does Bill log PIC during the time Jill is handling the
controls? You could argue it both ways: Bill is a required crew member and
should log the time; or you could say that he is not really required and is
unable to log the time. I tend to go with the former view because Bill could
also just set the autopilot and still log the time as PIC even though
*nobody*, strictly speaking, is handling the controls and Bill and Jill are
in the back of the airplane having a picnic.

Hilton

May 26th 04, 04:30 PM

> wrote:
> So, it is possible for someone to log PIC flight time who has a pilot
> certificate with ratings valid for the aircraft (e.g. PPSEL), but no BFR
or current
> medical if they were the sole manipulator of the controls?

Yes.

> If that is the case, then
> this person could go fly with a current pilot rated for the aircraft, and
they both
> log PIC... one as sole manipulator and one as the legal "acting as PIC".

The pilot flying logs it, the other pilot acts as PIC but cannot log PIC.

> Hrm... that sounds fishy, because it means whenever two pilots fly
together,
> they can both log all the time as PIC... whomever isn't physically flying
can be
> legally acting as PIC at the same time.

It's incorrect.

> Also, if that's true then I've got more high-performance/complex time than
I
> thought (sole manipulator without endorsement, buy flying with rated,
endorsed pilot).

Correct. Now you go tell the other guy he cannot log it and should remove
the time from his logbook. :)

Hilton

David B. Cole

May 26th 04, 07:09 PM

Funny, I have the same goal of going to the checkride with 10 hours of
actual. But unfortunately it's scheduled for Tuesday June 1st, I only
have 8 hours, and the days I'm flying between now and the checkride
don't appear to offer much hope. I'm not flying today and the
ceilings are 1600 feet, oh well. Good luck on your ride.

Dave

"Geo. Anderson" > wrote in message >...
> I'll be taking my checkride in a few weeks and one of my goals has been
> to have at least 10 hours of actual IMC before I take the ride. It's
> going well; I'm at 9.1 and only 2 of those were just boring a hole in
> clouds on a cross country.
>
> I have been under the impression that I could log PIC time when under
> the hood but not in actual IMC, because I am not rated. Last night,
> however, I read something in the ASA oral test prep book that seemed to
> imply that this was not the case.
>
> So, assembled wizards, should I be logging PIC time in IMC? or not?
>
> tia,
> Geo. Anderson

[email protected]

May 26th 04, 09:53 PM

C J Campbell > wrote:

: > wrote in message
: ...
:>
:> So, it is possible for someone to log PIC flight time who has a pilot
:> certificate with ratings valid for the aircraft (e.g. PPSEL), but no BFR
: or current
:> medical if they were the sole manipulator of the controls? If that is the
: case, then
:> this person could go fly with a current pilot rated for the aircraft, and
: they both
:> log PIC... one as sole manipulator and one as the legal "acting as PIC".

: In this case, yes, because the acting PIC is a required crew member. The
: same is true of a safety pilot who is acting as PIC.

I've looked through the FARs some and.... *zzzzzzzzz*.... Oh, sorry... I
haven't found where it stipulates what constitutes a "required crew member," except in
the obvious case of an aircraft that requires it. Also, for a safety-pilot for a
rated pilot under the hood, things are rather clear (PIC vs. SIC is mainly a matter of
agreement as to who is acting as PIC). In the non-current case above, however, it's
not clear to me that the current/rated pilot is "required." Of course it makes sense
that he would be required, because the aircraft cannot be legally flown (i.e. *acting*
as PIC) by the noncurrent pilot.

: Bill, a rated pilot but not a flight instructor, takes his friend Jill for a
: ride in his Warrior. Jill holds no certificate and has never even been in a
: plane before, but Bill lets her fly the airplane for awhile. Bill continues
: to act as PIC. It is fairly evident that Jill can neither act as PIC nor log
: the time as PIC. But does Bill log PIC during the time Jill is handling the
: controls? You could argue it both ways: Bill is a required crew member and
: should log the time; or you could say that he is not really required and is
: unable to log the time. I tend to go with the former view because Bill could
: also just set the autopilot and still log the time as PIC even though
: *nobody*, strictly speaking, is handling the controls and Bill and Jill are
: in the back of the airplane having a picnic.

Basically the same as above, except the question of Jill logging the time is
moot, since she is not rated in the category/class/[type]. Don't the regs only allow
manipulation of the controls by a rated person (strictly speaking) unless a CFI is
PIC?

....head...hurting...now....

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Ron Rosenfeld

May 26th 04, 10:42 PM

On Wed, 26 May 2004 12:18:06 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

>Hrm... that sounds fishy, because it means whenever two pilots fly together,
>they can both log all the time as PIC... whomever isn't physically flying can be
>legally acting as PIC at the same time.

You are misinterpreting.

In the situation you are discussing, the pilot NOT flying can only log PIC
if two (2) pilots are required by the regulations (or by the type of a/c).
In the type of flights we generally engage in, the only time that occurs is
when a safety pilot is required.

So, although the pilot NOT flying may be acting as PIC, he may NOT be able
to log PIC time.

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

Ron Rosenfeld

May 26th 04, 10:45 PM

On Wed, 26 May 2004 20:53:09 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

>I've looked through the FARs some and.... *zzzzzzzzz*.... Oh, sorry... I
>haven't found where it stipulates what constitutes a "required crew member,"

That phrase is NOT used in the FAR's that describe the conditions under
which PIC may be logged. So it really doesn't matter that you fell asleep
while trying to find it :-).

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

Geo. Anderson

May 27th 04, 12:06 AM

Whew! And I thought this would be one of those short, one or two
replies, threads. Thanks, guys. I'm going back to revise some logging.

Geo.

C J Campbell

May 27th 04, 03:12 AM

> wrote in message
...
>
> Basically the same as above, except the question of Jill logging the time
is
> moot, since she is not rated in the category/class/[type]. Don't the regs
only allow
> manipulation of the controls by a rated person (strictly speaking) unless
a CFI is
> PIC?
>

No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part 91
flight.

[email protected]

May 27th 04, 01:13 PM

C J Campbell > wrote:
: > wrote in message
: ...
:>
:> Basically the same as above, except the question of Jill logging the time
: is
:> moot, since she is not rated in the category/class/[type]. Don't the regs
: only allow
:> manipulation of the controls by a rated person (strictly speaking) unless
: a CFI is
:> PIC?
:>

: No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part 91
: flight.

Just curious where. Also, if a pilot takes a non-pilot flying, according to
FAR 61.51(e)(iii):

(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.

the pilot cannot log PIC time for the duration he/she is not physically manipulating
the controls? That's the way it would appear.

Boy, if that's the case there are an awful lot of planes flying around with
unloggable PICs

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

C J Campbell

May 27th 04, 02:16 PM

> wrote in message
...
> C J Campbell > wrote:
> : > wrote in message
> : ...
> :>
> :> Basically the same as above, except the question of Jill logging the
time
> : is
> :> moot, since she is not rated in the category/class/[type]. Don't the
regs
> : only allow
> :> manipulation of the controls by a rated person (strictly speaking)
unless
> : a CFI is
> :> PIC?
> :>
>
> : No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part
91
> : flight.
>
> Just curious where. Also, if a pilot takes a non-pilot flying, according
to
> FAR 61.51(e)(iii):
>
> (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.
>
> the pilot cannot log PIC time for the duration he/she is not physically
manipulating
> the controls? That's the way it would appear.
>

That was brought up earlier in the thread. You could argue it either way.
What do you log while the plane is on autopilot?

[email protected]

May 27th 04, 04:06 PM

C J Campbell > wrote:
: manipulating
:> the controls? That's the way it would appear.
:>

: That was brought up earlier in the thread. You could argue it either way.
: What do you log while the plane is on autopilot?

In the autopilot case, one could argue that the act of engaging the autopilot
is "manipulating the flight controls." If that's not the case, the apparently if the
autopilot is on, then nobody can log PIC time (unless the pilot is solo).

I understand the comment previously about the "required crew member" not
pertaining to loggable time. Basically, if the acting PIC isn't touching the
controls, solo, or operating where "more than one pilot is required," (read: simulated
instrument safety pilot or big iron requiring more than one pilot), the acting PIC
cannot log the time.

Hrm....

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

William W. Plummer

May 27th 04, 04:06 PM

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > C J Campbell > wrote:
> > : > wrote in message
> > : ...
> > :>
> > :> Basically the same as above, except the question of Jill logging the
> time
> > : is
> > :> moot, since she is not rated in the category/class/[type]. Don't the
> regs
> > : only allow
> > :> manipulation of the controls by a rated person (strictly speaking)
> unless
> > : a CFI is
> > :> PIC?
> > :>
> >
> > : No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part
> 91
> > : flight.
> >
> > Just curious where. Also, if a pilot takes a non-pilot flying,
according
> to
> > FAR 61.51(e)(iii):
> >
> > (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.
> >
> > the pilot cannot log PIC time for the duration he/she is not physically
> manipulating
> > the controls? That's the way it would appear.
> >
>
> That was brought up earlier in the thread. You could argue it either way.
> What do you log while the plane is on autopilot?
Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight. A
piece of hardware (autopilot) cannot fill this requirement. All the
qualified pilots on board should agree who will be the PIC before the
flight.

It is interesting that an autopilot is equivalent to a pilot-made-of-meat on
some planes, however. I've been told that large planes used to require
either a 3-person crew (captain, first officer, navigator) but an autopilot
could be substituted for the navigator.

[email protected]

May 27th 04, 04:15 PM

William W. Plummer > wrote:
: Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight. A
: piece of hardware (autopilot) cannot fill this requirement. All the
: qualified pilots on board should agree who will be the PIC before the
: flight.

Right, but since this whole thing is a semantic argument about FAR minutia, it
requires being specific. What does it mean to "have a PIC?" An aircraft cannot be
legally operated unless someone is qualified to act as PIC on it. That's apparently a
different entity from *logging* PIC.

While it's true that qualified pilots on board should agree a-priori who will
be PIC, the trouble comes one of them cannot act as PIC. For example, Joe has PP-SEL
without high-performance, complex. Billy-Bob has PP-SEL with the endorsements. If
the two go flying a Comanche-250 and Joe drives, Joe gets to log it, but Billy-Bob is
acting PIC and cannot log it. If Joe drives under the hood, he can even log simulated
instrument time in this plane he cannot act as PIC in.

What a cluster-f*ck.

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

C J Campbell

May 27th 04, 04:49 PM

"William W. Plummer" > wrote in message
news:juntc.70708$gr.6808104@attbi_s52...

> Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight.

Nothing in the regulations says so. Neither does it have anything to do with
logging PIC.

Ron Rosenfeld

May 27th 04, 04:52 PM

On Thu, 27 May 2004 15:15:29 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

> While it's true that qualified pilots on board should agree a-priori who will
>be PIC, the trouble comes one of them cannot act as PIC. For example, Joe has PP-SEL
>without high-performance, complex. Billy-Bob has PP-SEL with the endorsements. If
>the two go flying a Comanche-250 and Joe drives, Joe gets to log it, but Billy-Bob is
>acting PIC and cannot log it. If Joe drives under the hood, he can even log simulated
>instrument time in this plane he cannot act as PIC in.

Yes, you understand it correctly.

And the regs have been this way for many years.

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

[email protected]

May 27th 04, 05:55 PM

C J Campbell > wrote:
: No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part 91
: flight.

I cannot find that part of the regulation. Any coordinates?

Also, if it's not illegal to have a non-pilot manipulating the controls, then
for the duration of time that non-pilot is maniuplating the controls, nobody can log
PIC, correct?

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Stan Gosnell

May 27th 04, 06:00 PM

wrote in
:

> C J Campbell > wrote:
>: No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part
>: 91 flight.
>
> I cannot find that part of the regulation. Any coordinates?

That follows from the concept that anything not specifically prohibited is
permitted. Part 135 and Part 121 prohibit manipulation of the controls by
non-crewmembers, with specific exceptions.

--
Regards,

Stan

Teacherjh

May 27th 04, 06:38 PM

>>
Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight. A
piece of hardware (autopilot) cannot fill this requirement.
<<

Hmmm... what about RPVs? Who (if anybody) gets to log what, and why?

Jose

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

Teacherjh

May 27th 04, 06:40 PM

>>
Also, if it's not illegal to have a non-pilot manipulating the controls, then
for the duration of time that non-pilot is maniuplating the controls, nobody
can log
PIC, correct?
<<

I consider the non-pilot to be an organic autopilot, and log the time.

Jose

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

Roy Smith

May 27th 04, 07:19 PM

In article >,
(Teacherjh) wrote:

> >>
> Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight. A
> piece of hardware (autopilot) cannot fill this requirement.
> <<
>
> Hmmm... what about RPVs? Who (if anybody) gets to log what, and why?

Every RPV has an "operator" (not sure what term they use) sitting at a
computer console somewhere (perhaps halfway around the world). My
understanding is that they do indeed get to log PIC time.

Nobody says the PIC has to be inside the aircraft :-)

William W. Plummer

May 27th 04, 07:59 PM

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> (Teacherjh) wrote:
>
> > >>
> > Every flight must have a PIC to ensure the safe conduct of the flight.
A
> > piece of hardware (autopilot) cannot fill this requirement.
> > <<
> >
> > Hmmm... what about RPVs? Who (if anybody) gets to log what, and why?
>
> Every RPV has an "operator" (not sure what term they use) sitting at a
> computer console somewhere (perhaps halfway around the world). My
> understanding is that they do indeed get to log PIC time.
>
> Nobody says the PIC has to be inside the aircraft :-)
Agreed. For instance the CFI watching his student do a solo. Also, a
Marine Predator pilot told me he had to be an Instrument Rated pilot --
we're all in the same air, he said.

The need for a PIC is in 91.3 (a): "The pilot in command of an aircraft is
directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of
that aircraft."

Ron Natalie

May 27th 04, 10:42 PM

"William W. Plummer" > wrote in message news:OUqtc.7918> Agreed. > For instance the CFI
watching his student do a solo.

NO! A soloing student IS pilot in command. That's why they have a STUDENT PILOT
CERTIFICATE. If you look in part 61 you'll see it talks about what the student pilot
limitations on PIC is.

> The need for a PIC is in 91.3 (a): "The pilot in command of an aircraft is
> directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of
> that aircraft."

And how can that be someone on the ground?

Newps

May 28th 04, 12:48 AM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "William W. Plummer" > wrote in
message news:OUqtc.7918> Agreed. > For instance the CFI
> watching his student do a solo.
>
> NO! A soloing student IS pilot in command. That's why they have a
STUDENT PILOT
> CERTIFICATE. If you look in part 61 you'll see it talks about what the
student pilot
> limitations on PIC is.
>
> > The need for a PIC is in 91.3 (a): "The pilot in command of an aircraft
is
> > directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the
operation of
> > that aircraft."
>
> And how can that be someone on the ground?

I hope this works out because after 15 years in the tower that would give me
over 30,000 hours as PIC in I can't believe how many planes.

Tom Sixkiller

May 28th 04, 05:50 AM

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> However, the acting PIC must be required by the aircraft or operation to
be
> a crew member in order for him to log PIC while not manipulating the
> controls. A buddy just along for the ride may not log PIC, though the FAA
> and everybody else may consider him to be acting PIC. There is one case of
> an ATP who was considered to be PIC even though he was sleeping in the
back
> seat of a light twin. A CFI and private pilot were actually sitting up
> front. The airplane had an accident while the ATP was asleep, and the FAA
> considered him to be PIC even though the ATP and both the other pilots
> insisted he was not. He could not log the time, however, because he was
not
> an essential crew member.

Scenario from real life: I fly with one of two partners in a Citation CJ1
which is rated for Single Pilot operations, or a Jetprop 1000. The flights
are all part 91. The partners are both SP rated in the CJ1. They're are
always (except two times when one was ill and didn't want to fly at all but
we had to be somewhere) in the left seat.

Question: What determines who is PIC, and when the other guys are PIC, what
do I log?

C J Campbell

May 28th 04, 08:08 AM

> wrote in message
...
> C J Campbell > wrote:
> : No. The regulations allow anyone to manipulate the controls for a part
91
> : flight.
>
> I cannot find that part of the regulation. Any coordinates?

You cannot find anything prohibiting it, either.

Ron Rosenfeld

May 28th 04, 12:47 PM

On Thu, 27 May 2004 21:50:11 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller" >
wrote:

>Scenario from real life: I fly with one of two partners in a Citation CJ1
>which is rated for Single Pilot operations, or a Jetprop 1000. The flights
>are all part 91. The partners are both SP rated in the CJ1. They're are
>always (except two times when one was ill and didn't want to fly at all but
>we had to be somewhere) in the left seat.
>

My answers assume you are rated in the aircraft and qualified to act as PIC
(and not as SP PIC).

>Question: What determines who is PIC ...

An agreement between you and the other pilot.

> and when the other guys are PIC, what do I log?

If you are manipulating the controls, you may log PIC.

If the pilot flying is wearing a view limiting device, and you are acting
as safety pilot, you may log PIC (if you two have agreed beforehand that
you will be the pilot responsible for the flight) or SIC.

I don't know if you would be qualified to log SIC in ordinary flying. I
don't know if the SP rated pilot can 'decide' whether or not to exercise
the privileges of that rating. If so, he could 'decide' not to exercise
them, which would make the flight regulations require a second pilot, in
which case you could log SIC time; otherwise you would not be able to log
anything.

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

Mark Kolber

May 28th 04, 04:18 PM

On Wed, 26 May 2004 12:18:06 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

> So, it is possible for someone to log PIC flight time who has a pilot
>certificate with ratings valid for the aircraft (e.g. PPSEL), but no BFR or current
>medical if they were the sole manipulator of the controls? If that is the case, then
>this person could go fly with a current pilot rated for the aircraft, and they both
>log PIC... one as sole manipulator and one as the legal "acting as PIC".
>
> Hrm... that sounds fishy, because it means whenever two pilots fly together,
>they can both log all the time as PIC... whomever isn't physically flying can be
>legally acting as PIC at the same time.

Nope.

There is no rule that allows the "legal" PIC to act as PIC except
where the regulations require more than one pilot. (Note: =not=
"another" pilot but "more than one" pilot. In the typical single
engine airplane, there is only one situation in which the regulations
require two pilots - simulated instrument conditions.

So in the two pilots flying scenario, the one who is flying the
airplane gets to write numbers in the PIC column in her logbook while
siting at his desk with a beer in her hand. The one who was in charge
does not.
>
> Also, if that's true then I've got more high-performance/complex time than I
>thought (sole manipulator without endorsement, buy flying with rated, endorsed pilot).

Yes you do.

Mark Kolber
APA/Denver, Colorado
www.midlifeflight.com
======================
email? Remove ".no.spam"

Mark Kolber

May 28th 04, 04:22 PM

On Thu, 27 May 2004 12:13:01 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

> Just curious where. Also, if a pilot takes a non-pilot flying, according to
>FAR 61.51(e)(iii):
>
>(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.
>
> the pilot cannot log PIC time for the duration he/she is not physically manipulating
>the controls? That's the way it would appear.

It would, under a strict reading. But (back to my "rules of logging")

==============================
Rule 4. Based on a unpublished 1977 Chief Counsel opinion (there is
some reasonable disagreement on whether it's any good), you may log
PIC if you are acting as PIC* and you are the only person on board
with the necessary aircraft ratings.

This is the answer to the silly question: "Can I log PIC while I let
my two year old fly the airplane?" Frankly, I can't imagine that the
FAA gives a hoot about this one way or another.
==============================

Here's the FAA Legal Opinion:

==============================
June 22, 1977

Mr. Thomas Beane

Dear Mr. Beane:

This letter is in response to your recent letters to the FAA Flight
Standards Service and to the Chief Counsel inquiring about the logging
of pilot-in-command (PIC) time by an airman whenever he is not the
sole manipulator of the controls.

Section 1.1 of the Federal Aviation Regulations defines Pilot in
Command as:

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.

Section 61.51(c)(2) of the Federal Aviation Regulations provides, in
pertinent part:

(2) Pilot-in-Command flight time.

A private or commercial pilot may log as pilot in command time only
that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the
controls of an aircraft for which he is rated, or when he is the sole
occupant of the aircraft, or when he acts 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.

A pilot may log PIC time in accordance with Section 61.51(c)(2)(I)
when he is not actually "flying the airplane", if the airplane is one
on which more than one pilot is required under its type certificate or
under the regulations under which the flight is conducted and he is
acting as PIC. [i]Also, a pilot, rated in category and class (e.g.
airplane single-engine) could, as the pilot who "Has final authority
and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight" log PIC
time if another pilot, not appropriately rated, was actually
manipulating the controls of the aircraft.

It should be noted that more than one pilot may log PIC time for the
same flight time. For example, one pilot receiving instruction may
log PIC time in accordance with paragraph (c)(2)(I) for the time he is
designated PIC, and another pilot may log PIC time in accordance with
(c)(2)(iii) for the same time during which he is actually giving
flight instruction.

We hope that we have satisfactorily responded to your inquiry on the
proper logging of PIC time.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY EDWARD P. FABERMAN

for NEIL R. EISNER Acting Assistant Chief Counsel Regulations &
Enforcement Division Office of the Chief Counsel -
==============================

Mark Kolber
APA/Denver, Colorado
www.midlifeflight.com
======================
email? Remove ".no.spam"

Tom Sixkiller

May 28th 04, 04:38 PM

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 27 May 2004 21:50:11 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller" >
> wrote:
>
> >Scenario from real life: I fly with one of two partners in a Citation CJ1
> >which is rated for Single Pilot operations, or a Jetprop 1000. The
flights
> >are all part 91. The partners are both SP rated in the CJ1. They're are
> >always (except two times when one was ill and didn't want to fly at all
but
> >we had to be somewhere) in the left seat.
> >
>
> My answers assume you are rated in the aircraft and qualified to act as
PIC
> (and not as SP PIC).

Only the CJ requires a type rating. I'm rated, but not SP.

>
>
> >Question: What determines who is PIC ...
>
> An agreement between you and the other pilot.
>
> > and when the other guys are PIC, what do I log?
>
> If you are manipulating the controls, you may log PIC.

And otherwise? Co-pilot?, SIC, excited passenger?? :~)

AIUI, I can't logSIC since a SIC in not required for either the CJ or the
Jetprop. In any case, I can't since it's all part 91 oeprations. Is that
understanding correct?

> If the pilot flying is wearing a view limiting device, and you are acting
> as safety pilot, you may log PIC (if you two have agreed beforehand that
> you will be the pilot responsible for the flight) or SIC.

No...they do that all at FS.

> I don't know if you would be qualified to log SIC in ordinary flying. I
> don't know if the SP rated pilot can 'decide' whether or not to exercise
> the privileges of that rating. If so, he could 'decide' not to exercise
> them, which would make the flight regulations require a second pilot, in
> which case you could log SIC time; otherwise you would not be able to log
> anything.

Thanks, Ron!!!

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