Instrument Student Pilot Filing IFR

[Roy N5804F]

Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
In other words.
Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
CFII ?

Thanks for input

--
Roy
Piper Archer N5804F

[Roy Smith]

In article t>,
"Roy N5804F" > wrote:

>
> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
> In other words.
> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
> CFII ?
>
> Thanks for input

If you are not instrument rated, current, etc, it's not legal for you to
act as PIC under IFR. You can file the flight plan (i.e. type it into
DUATS, dictate it to FSS on the phone, etc) but put your instructor's name
down in the PIC box.

[Ron Natalie]

Roy N5804F wrote:
>
> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
> In other words.
> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
> CFII ?
>
> Thanks for input
>

There is no prohibition on who can file. The ONLY issue is that the
flight plan MUST bear the name (by regulation) of the pilot in command
which can't be the student. This gets sticky on DUAT (at least the
GTE one) because they always insert the registered user's name in
the PIC field.

I filed my instructor's name via FSS when I was doing my training.

[Jim Macklin]

Make sure that the CFII knows you are filing flight plans
with his name. It is the customary practice, but just be
sure that the actual filing and plan is seen by the CFII/PIC
before you file.


"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| Roy N5804F wrote:
| >
| > Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR
in his own name in
| > order to undergo instrument training while accompanied
by his CFII ?
| > In other words.
| > Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ?
The student or the
| > CFII ?
| >
| > Thanks for input
| >
|
| There is no prohibition on who can file. The ONLY issue
is that the
| flight plan MUST bear the name (by regulation) of the
pilot in command
| which can't be the student. This gets sticky on DUAT (at
least the
| GTE one) because they always insert the registered user's
name in
| the PIC field.
|
| I filed my instructor's name via FSS when I was doing my
training.

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> Make sure that the CFII knows you are filing flight plans
> with his name. It is the customary practice, but just be
> sure that the actual filing and plan is seen by the CFII/PIC
> before you file.
>
Yes, this was done with the concurrence of the instructor.

[Mark Hansen]

On 11/28/2006 04:47 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article t>,
> "Roy N5804F" > wrote:
>
>>
>> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
>> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
>> In other words.
>> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
>> CFII ?
>>
>> Thanks for input
>
> If you are not instrument rated, current, etc, it's not legal for you to
> act as PIC under IFR. You can file the flight plan (i.e. type it into
> DUATS, dictate it to FSS on the phone, etc) but put your instructor's name
> down in the PIC box.

That's interesting. During my training, I filed the IFR flight plans (based
on my CFII's direction) and used my name. I did always put "Instrument
Training Flight" in the Remarks box, but this isn't the same thing.

I guess that's another thing my instructor didn't really understand ;-(



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Mark Hansen wrote:
> That's interesting. During my training, I filed the IFR flight plans (based
> on my CFII's direction) and used my name. I did always put "Instrument
> Training Flight" in the Remarks box, but this isn't the same thing.


I did the same except I didn't bother with the remark. Nothing was ever said
that I did it incorrectly or illegally. I suspect the FAA figured out the
nature of the flight which had numerous approaches but only one landing.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Technically the name on the flight plan must be that of the PIC, which
in this case is the CFII. However, I doubt that anyone would care whose
name is on the flight plan as long as there is a qualified PIC in the
cockpit. Just the same as ATC does not care what you use for navigation
as long as you fly your clearance. The only time a question would arise
is in case of an accident or emergency. In those cases it would not
matter whose name was on the flight plan. The presumed PIC will be at
fault. In the case of a dual flight, the CFI is the presumed PIC even
if he was not actively instructing.



Roy N5804F wrote:
> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
> In other words.
> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
> CFII ?
>
> Thanks for input
>
> --
> Roy
> Piper Archer N5804F

[Roy N5804F]

Well thanks to all for the input so far.
The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
in his own name.
The basis of that opinion seems to hinge on who is PIC.
I am not sure, but I think that electronic filing via AOPA flight planner
would not give you any opportunity to use other than your own name ?
So maybe all filing would have to be done via the telephone or radio.

Roy


"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Technically the name on the flight plan must be that of the PIC, which
> in this case is the CFII. However, I doubt that anyone would care whose
> name is on the flight plan as long as there is a qualified PIC in the
> cockpit. Just the same as ATC does not care what you use for navigation
> as long as you fly your clearance. The only time a question would arise
> is in case of an accident or emergency. In those cases it would not
> matter whose name was on the flight plan. The presumed PIC will be at
> fault. In the case of a dual flight, the CFI is the presumed PIC even
> if he was not actively instructing.
>
>
>
> Roy N5804F wrote:
>> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name
>> in
>> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
>> In other words.
>> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
>> CFII ?
>>
>> Thanks for input
>>
>> --
>> Roy
>> Piper Archer N5804F
>
>

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Roy N5804F wrote:

> The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
> in his own name.

Let's be precise. The instrument student may file all the flight plans
he cares to. He just can't accept a clearance.

[Brad[_1_]]

Roy Smith wrote:

> If you are not instrument rated, current, etc, it's not legal for you to
> act as PIC under IFR. You can file the flight plan (i.e. type it into
> DUATS, dictate it to FSS on the phone, etc) but put your instructor's name
> down in the PIC box.

I agree. Only problem is that the official flight plan for doesn't say
PIC in the box, only "pilot's name". When I was working on my IR, my
instructor erroneously had me file my name, because it was assumed that
the instructor would be PIC. Made sense at the time since I was a
pilot and I was filing the flight plan. I was instructed that I could
file whatever I wanted to, but that I had to have an IR and meet
61.57(c) in order to accept the clearance.

After working on my CFII and investigating it further, I actually read
91.169 IFR Flight Plan: Information Required" which points to 91.157,
which specifies pilot in command as the name in the pilot's name box.
Funny, I don't remember filing dual XC flights for my private under my
instructor's name either.

Either way, I'd have a hard time believing that the flight plan would
be the determinant information of who was PIC for a flight when more
than one pilot could serve as PIC.

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Brad wrote:

> Funny, I don't remember filing dual XC flights for my private under my
> instructor's name either.

A VFR flight plan is a whole different animal, never gets beyond FSS.
Nobody will care who is listed as PIC on a VFR flight plan, it's only
used for SAR.

[Mark Hansen]

On 11/28/2006 10:32 AM, Dave Butler wrote:
> Roy N5804F wrote:
>
>> The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
>> in his own name.
>
> Let's be precise. The instrument student may file all the flight plans
> he cares to. He just can't accept a clearance.

So is it enough that the CFII is in the plane, listening to the radio
exchange while the student requests and copies/reads-back the clearance?

As PIC, the CFII would be the one officially accepting the clearance (or
not) - non-verbally. The student would only be copying it to paper and
reading it back.

Is this right?

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Mark Hansen wrote:

>>Let's be precise. The instrument student may file all the flight plans
>>he cares to. He just can't accept a clearance.
>
>
> So is it enough that the CFII is in the plane, listening to the radio
> exchange while the student requests and copies/reads-back the clearance?
>
> As PIC, the CFII would be the one officially accepting the clearance (or
> not) - non-verbally. The student would only be copying it to paper and
> reading it back.
>
> Is this right?

Works for me... but I am neither the NTSB nor the FAA.

[Jim Macklin]

The reason is in the FAR, you have to be a certificated and
current instrument rated pilot, in an aircraft certified for
IFR flight to file an IFR flight plan.

Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC condition
is a violation. IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.



"Roy N5804F" > wrote in
message
ink.net...
|
| Well thanks to all for the input so far.
| The consensus seems to be that an instrument student
cannot file an IFR plan
| in his own name.
| The basis of that opinion seems to hinge on who is PIC.
| I am not sure, but I think that electronic filing via AOPA
flight planner
| would not give you any opportunity to use other than your
own name ?
| So maybe all filing would have to be done via the
telephone or radio.
|
| Roy
|
|
| "Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
|
ups.com...
| > Technically the name on the flight plan must be that of
the PIC, which
| > in this case is the CFII. However, I doubt that anyone
would care whose
| > name is on the flight plan as long as there is a
qualified PIC in the
| > cockpit. Just the same as ATC does not care what you use
for navigation
| > as long as you fly your clearance. The only time a
question would arise
| > is in case of an accident or emergency. In those cases
it would not
| > matter whose name was on the flight plan. The presumed
PIC will be at
| > fault. In the case of a dual flight, the CFI is the
presumed PIC even
| > if he was not actively instructing.
| >
| >
| >
| > Roy N5804F wrote:
| >> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file
IFR in his own name
| >> in
| >> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied
by his CFII ?
| >> In other words.
| >> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ?
The student or the
| >> CFII ?
| >>
| >> Thanks for input
| >>
| >> --
| >> Roy
| >> Piper Archer N5804F
| >
| >
|
|
|

[Brad[_1_]]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Brad wrote:
>
> > Funny, I don't remember filing dual XC flights for my private under my
> > instructor's name either.
>
> A VFR flight plan is a whole different animal, never gets beyond FSS.
> Nobody will care who is listed as PIC on a VFR flight plan, it's only
> used for SAR.

Sure, I know that. But the regs (91.157) specify listing the PIC for a
VFR flight plan. In the event of a hypothetical accident resulting
from a non-instuctional flight flown by a certified private pilot with
a flight instructor on board, could the CFI deny PIC responsibility on
the basis of the PIC listed in the flight plan, if filed by the private
pilot?

By the way, the pilot's name never gets beyond FSS for either VFR or
IFR. Otherwise you might hear a controller say: "Dave, you are cleared
to Anytown airport as filed, maintain 3000..."

[Brad[_1_]]

Mark Hansen wrote:

> As PIC, the CFII would be the one officially accepting the clearance (or
> not) - non-verbally. The student would only be copying it to paper and
> reading it back.
>
> Is this right?

That's it. You could have your two year old ask for the clearance, or
even the guy at the front desk of the FBO, but the PIC on board is
accepting the clearance by launching a flight in accordance with it.
In the case of the student making the radio calls, he or she is just
the conduit.

[Roy N5804F]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...
>
> The reason is in the FAR, you have to be a certificated and
> current instrument rated pilot, in an aircraft certified for
> IFR flight to file an IFR flight plan.
>
> Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC condition
> is a violation. IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
> unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.

I really appreciate all the input on this topic.
So I think that the consensus of interpretation of the FARs indicates that.
1. A student instrument pilot cannot file an IFR flight plan in his own
name.
2. A student instrument pilot cannot accept an IFR clearance.
Would I be correct in saying therefore, that the first time a pilot can
practice and get real familier with the normal IFR procedures could be his
first flight after being certified ?
If that is the case I would consider that the FAR's fail to address the need
for good operational training prior to being certified for instrument
flight.
Interesting isn't it ?

[Jose[_1_]]

> 2. A student instrument pilot cannot accept an IFR clearance.
> Would I be correct in saying therefore, that the first time a pilot can
> practice and get real familier with the normal IFR procedures could be his
> first flight after being certified ?

No.

A student pilot can "relay the CFI's acceptance of a clearance", this
practice is just as good as actually accepting one.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jose ]
> Posted At: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 7:12 PM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
> Conversation: Instrument Student Pilot Filing IFR
> Subject: Re: Instrument Student Pilot Filing IFR
>
> > 2. A student instrument pilot cannot accept an IFR clearance.
> > Would I be correct in saying therefore, that the first time a pilot
can
> > practice and get real familier with the normal IFR procedures could
be
> his
> > first flight after being certified ?
>
> No.
>
> A student pilot can "relay the CFI's acceptance of a clearance", this
> practice is just as good as actually accepting one.
>
> Jose
> --
> "There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody
knows
> what they are." - (mike).
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I'm not sure if it is still a popular practice, but when a student was
ready to work actual conditions in the system the instructor knew it and
was typically willing to delegate the authority for filing, copying,
accepting, executing, and amending the clearance to the student. Notice
I said delegate the authority, not the responsibility. The CFII or ATP
still retained the responsibility because he or she was the PIC and
everything was filed under his or her license.

By the time we had students ready for the system in actual conditions;
we didn't worry about them making silly mistakes. We were only working
on polishing and conditioning responses at that point.

Of course the lawyer population has blossomed since the mid-70s, and
frivolous lawsuits are more commonplace now, so this probably isn't
still an acceptable practice.

[Roy N5804F]

"Jose" > wrote in message
om...
>> 2. A student instrument pilot cannot accept an IFR clearance.
>> Would I be correct in saying therefore, that the first time a pilot can
>> practice and get real familier with the normal IFR procedures could be
>> his first flight after being certified ?
>
> No.
>
> A student pilot can "relay the CFI's acceptance of a clearance", this
> practice is just as good as actually accepting one.
>
> Jose

Jose,
My understanding that by "accepting" you mean "reading back" ?
I think when you use the word relay, you do not mean that the student
informs ATC that he is relaying ?


Roy

[Roy Smith]

In article et>,
"Roy N5804F" > wrote:

>
> Well thanks to all for the input so far.
> The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
> in his own name.
> The basis of that opinion seems to hinge on who is PIC.
> I am not sure, but I think that electronic filing via AOPA flight planner
> would not give you any opportunity to use other than your own name ?
> So maybe all filing would have to be done via the telephone or radio.
>
> Roy

Just put "PIC is XXX" in the comments box (fill in your instructor's name).

[Roy Smith]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote:
> Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC condition
> is a violation. IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
> unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.

I know of no FAR that says anything about who may perform secretarial
functions such as typing some information into a computerized data-entry
form, dictating information to a FSS guy on the phone, or reading back a
radio transmission to a controller.

[Mark Hansen]

On 11/28/06 17:32, Jim Carter wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jose ]
>> Posted At: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 7:12 PM
>> Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
>> Conversation: Instrument Student Pilot Filing IFR
>> Subject: Re: Instrument Student Pilot Filing IFR
>>
>> > 2. A student instrument pilot cannot accept an IFR clearance.
>> > Would I be correct in saying therefore, that the first time a pilot
> can
>> > practice and get real familier with the normal IFR procedures could
> be
>> his
>> > first flight after being certified ?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> A student pilot can "relay the CFI's acceptance of a clearance", this
>> practice is just as good as actually accepting one.
>>
>> Jose
>> --
>> "There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody
> knows
>> what they are." - (mike).
>> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
>
> I'm not sure if it is still a popular practice, but when a student was
> ready to work actual conditions in the system the instructor knew it and
> was typically willing to delegate the authority for filing, copying,
> accepting, executing, and amending the clearance to the student. Notice
> I said delegate the authority, not the responsibility. The CFII or ATP
> still retained the responsibility because he or she was the PIC and
> everything was filed under his or her license.
>
> By the time we had students ready for the system in actual conditions;
> we didn't worry about them making silly mistakes. We were only working
> on polishing and conditioning responses at that point.
>
> Of course the lawyer population has blossomed since the mid-70s, and
> frivolous lawsuits are more commonplace now, so this probably isn't
> still an acceptable practice.
>
>

Acceptable or not, this is how I was trained two years ago.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Jose[_1_]]

> My understanding that by "accepting" you mean "reading back" ?
> I think when you use the word relay, you do not mean that the student
> informs ATC that he is relaying ?

The CFI officially "accepts" the clearance, and (with a wink and a nod),
the student reads it back. I doubt ATC cares who is accepting the
clearance, so long as it is accepted (or rejected). No, the student (in
my sceneario) would not state that he is relaying a clearance, he would
just read it back.

He is, however, doing it under the authority of the CFII.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Alan Gerber]

Roy N5804F > wrote:
> If that is the case I would consider that the FAR's fail to address the need
> for good operational training prior to being certified for instrument
> flight.
> Interesting isn't it ?

Kind of like how you suddenly become qualified to accept a Class B
clearance after you pass your PP checkride.

.... Alan

--
Alan Gerber
PP-ASEL
gerber AT panix DOT com

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Actually, the only purpose I can think of for requiring the pilots name
is for search and rescue purposes. If it is for regulatory reasons,
then there should be a better way to make sure that no one else is
using your name in their flight plans. Since ATC is not verifying the
identify of the pilot every time they issue a clearance, I don't see
how the pilots name could be used for anything meaningful beyond S&R.

This also raises the question of whether a student pilot can put his
name down as PIC for a dual cross country flight.



Roy Smith wrote:
> In article et>,
> "Roy N5804F" > wrote:
>
> >
> > Well thanks to all for the input so far.
> > The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
> > in his own name.
> > The basis of that opinion seems to hinge on who is PIC.
> > I am not sure, but I think that electronic filing via AOPA flight planner
> > would not give you any opportunity to use other than your own name ?
> > So maybe all filing would have to be done via the telephone or radio.
> >
> > Roy
>
> Just put "PIC is XXX" in the comments box (fill in your instructor's name).

[Roy N5804F]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
>
> In article et>,
> "Roy N5804F" > wrote:
>
>>
>> Well thanks to all for the input so far.
>> The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR
>> plan
>> in his own name.
>> The basis of that opinion seems to hinge on who is PIC.
>> I am not sure, but I think that electronic filing via AOPA flight planner
>> would not give you any opportunity to use other than your own name ?
>> So maybe all filing would have to be done via the telephone or radio.
>>
>> Roy
>
> Just put "PIC is XXX" in the comments box (fill in your instructor's
> name).
>

Neat one Roy !

[Roger[_4_]]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:47:36 -0500, Roy Smith > wrote:

>In article t>,
> "Roy N5804F" > wrote:
>
>>
>> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
>> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
>> In other words.
>> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
>> CFII ?
>>
>> Thanks for input
>
>If you are not instrument rated, current, etc, it's not legal for you to
>act as PIC under IFR. You can file the flight plan (i.e. type it into
>DUATS, dictate it to FSS on the phone, etc) but put your instructor's name
>down in the PIC box.

As a student I always filed under my name, but like some others have
mentioned, listed instrument training flight.

OTOH we were out shooting approaches (not on a flight plan) with the
weather going down. It soon became apparent we were not going to be
able to maintain VMC and told approach we'd either need to break off
or be put in the system. They just entered the plane into the system
without a whole lot of questions. The instructor mentioned to me that
I should have given his name but not to worry about it. I don't
recall them even asking for a name. Any way after a couple of
approaches we thanked them and headed for home while we could still
get in on the VOR approach. (this was before GPS approaches were
common)

OTOH (I've mentioned this before) I've had it suddenly go IMC just
after lift off almost right in front of the tower. Once second it was
10 miles and well over 3000 and just a couple seconds later I could
barely see the edge of the runway about 30 feet below and absolutely
nothing ahead. I made an off hand remark to the tower about looking
like the visibility was going down a bit to which they replied
they'd noticed that. They knew we were IMC, I knew they knew, and they
knew I knew they knew. We broke out on top still climbing out over
the down wind leg. I reported on top at 3000 or what ever it was.
They thanked me and when we hit 10 miles they announced the weather
and were now IFR only.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Dave S]

Roy N5804F wrote:
>
> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
> In other words.
> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
> CFII ?
>
> Thanks for input
>

The person who is ABLE to legally recieve the clearance is who's name is
listed as PIC. The student can file.. but the CFII's name goes on the plan.

[Roy N5804F]

Guys I appreciate all the input, no one asked me why I posed the thread
question.

But as you will all realize, I started this thread because of a personnel
experience.
I am a few hours away from my instrument check ride.

In the recent past my instructor had been asking me to plan & file weekly
IFR training flights to specified satelite airports within Class B airspace.
He looked over my planning, but never changed my routings, so I could learn
from either being "cleared as filed" or struggle with an entirely different
clearance.
I filed the IFR plans in my own name, but added "Instrument Training Flight"
in the comments section on my own inititive.
I was hoping that I might be given an easier time by ATC by declaring the
flight plan as a training flight.
Also I frequently advised clearance delivery that I was a student instrument
pilot.
At first my CFII would listen in while I gained my clearance but as the
flights accumulated and I gained proficiency he just made sure that I had
the clearance with no missing data. He also encouraged me to file at
altitudes which would put us in actual IMC as much as possible.
In fact he would chastise me if my filed height was between layers. I had
not studied the weather properly !
I felt very fortunate to be getting real IFR experience, flying well and
truly in the system, before getting the rating.

Alas, my instructor is no more and his replacement, a very decent and young
enthusiastic CFII, is astounded that I was filing and getting my own
clearances.
Now he does the planning, file the plans and gets the clearances. I fly the
plane while he talks to ATC. He is PIC and may as well take the left seat.
However, as I said, he is a nice guy and he is giving me the final few
hours that I need to log before being eligable for the checkride.
Ok I have arguably bust the FAR's, but I know which guy I would prefer in my
right seat !

Roy

[Roy N5804F]

>
> The person who is ABLE to legally recieve the clearance is who's name is
> listed as PIC. The student can file.. but the CFII's name goes on the
> plan.
>

How do the heavy crews handle this stuff. ?
Does the dispatcher list who is PIC ?

Roy

[Jim Macklin]

yep
"Roy N5804F" > wrote in
message
ink.net...
|
|
| >
| > The person who is ABLE to legally recieve the clearance
is who's name is
| > listed as PIC. The student can file.. but the CFII's
name goes on the
| > plan.
| >
|
| How do the heavy crews handle this stuff. ?
| Does the dispatcher list who is PIC ?
|
| Roy
|
|
|

[Cirrus]

Roy,
You pose an interesting question! When I did my instrument training I
always filed under my instructors name (neither of my two instructors
ever commented on this).

So to add to your question, I'm now wondering:
I usually only file my last name, and have never received a single
question by the briefer about it. Do any of you know if you are
supposed to file first and last name? Also I had always assumed (as
mentioned by some of you) that the name only ever mattered if there was
an incident. Barring any incidents, do any of you know if ATC/FAA ever
even looks at the name on any flightplan? What if we all filed as
"Smith" one day to see if they pay attention.....

By the way, good luck on your checkride. I hope that you can work out
the issues with your new instructor. Maybe he/she doesn't realize that
they are doing things "differently"?
-Jamie

[Roy Smith]

"Roy N5804F" > wrote:
> Alas, my instructor is no more and his replacement, a very decent and young
> enthusiastic CFII, is astounded that I was filing and getting my own
> clearances.
> Now he does the planning, file the plans and gets the clearances. I fly the
> plane while he talks to ATC. He is PIC and may as well take the left seat.
> However, as I said, he is a nice guy and he is giving me the final few
> hours that I need to log before being eligable for the checkride.
> Ok I have arguably bust the FAR's, but I know which guy I would prefer in my
> right seat !

One of the hardest things about learning to be an instructor is learning to
shut up and sit on your hands. It sounds like your guy hasn't learned this
yet.

He's cheating you by doing all that stuff for you. Tell him you want to do
it all yourself (just like you used to).

On the other hand, if you're really just a few hours away from the
checkride, and you feel confident about your skills, he really is just
there for the ride and to give you some signatures when you need them.

If he really is doing all the talking on the radio, take advantage of the
workload reduction and concentrate that much more on flying perfectly. See
if you can hold altitude to +/- 20 feet and heading to +/- 1 degree.
Concentrate on flying the ILS to +/- 1 dot deflection on either needle.
This is far more accurately than you'll ever have to do on the checkride
(or in real life).

[Roy Smith]

"Cirrus" > wrote:
> I usually only file my last name, and have never received a single
> question by the briefer about it. Do any of you know if you are
> supposed to file first and last name?

I don't know of any regulation which requires you to put down two names in
the PIC box. Some things are left to common sense. It's also not the
briefer's job to enforce regulations. If you tell him the PIC's name is
Zaphod Beeblebrox, he'll type Zaphod Beeblebrox into the box on the screen.
Maybe your name is "The student pilot formerly known as Prince"?

> Also I had always assumed (as
> mentioned by some of you) that the name only ever mattered if there was
> an incident. Barring any incidents, do any of you know if ATC/FAA ever
> even looks at the name on any flightplan?

ATC only sees some subset of the fields you file in your flight plan. I
don't remember exactly which ones they get (everything up to the REMARKS
section?), but the PIC's name isn't one of them. All that stuff about home
base, souls on board, paint color, etc, is purely for SAR and accident
investigation purposes.

[Jim Macklin]

Trillian?



"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
| "Cirrus" > wrote:
| > I usually only file my last name, and have never
received a single
| > question by the briefer about it. Do any of you know if
you are
| > supposed to file first and last name?
|
| I don't know of any regulation which requires you to put
down two names in
| the PIC box. Some things are left to common sense. It's
also not the
| briefer's job to enforce regulations. If you tell him the
PIC's name is
| Zaphod Beeblebrox, he'll type Zaphod Beeblebrox into the
box on the screen.
| Maybe your name is "The student pilot formerly known as
Prince"?
|
| > Also I had always assumed (as
| > mentioned by some of you) that the name only ever
mattered if there was
| > an incident. Barring any incidents, do any of you know
if ATC/FAA ever
| > even looks at the name on any flightplan?
|
| ATC only sees some subset of the fields you file in your
flight plan. I
| don't remember exactly which ones they get (everything up
to the REMARKS
| section?), but the PIC's name isn't one of them. All that
stuff about home
| base, souls on board, paint color, etc, is purely for SAR
and accident
| investigation purposes.

[Roger[_4_]]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:50:47 -0500, Ron Natalie >
wrote:

>Roy N5804F wrote:
>>
>> Is it legal for a non-instrument rated pilot to file IFR in his own name in
>> order to undergo instrument training while accompanied by his CFII ?
>> In other words.
>> Who should file IFR for a training instrument flight ? The student or the
>> CFII ?
>>
>> Thanks for input
>>
>
>There is no prohibition on who can file. The ONLY issue is that the
>flight plan MUST bear the name (by regulation) of the pilot in command
>which can't be the student. This gets sticky on DUAT (at least the
>GTE one) because they always insert the registered user's name in
>the PIC field.

That's probably OK any way as I'd bet half the students file under
their own name rather than the instructors. You call and Identify
yourself asking for a briefing and would like to file IFR for (what
ever aircraft) Unless identified as an IFR training flight FSS is
likely to have already entered that by the time you get to it. That
happened to me on a number of occasions.


>
>I filed my instructor's name via FSS when I was doing my training.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Ron Natalie]

Mark Hansen wrote:

> As PIC, the CFII would be the one officially accepting the clearance (or
> not) - non-verbally. The student would only be copying it to paper and
> reading it back.
>
It's not even so involved. The student can accept the clearance.
The PIC is just ultimately responsible. Command is more of a
responsibility thing than any particular act.

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> The reason is in the FAR, you have to be a certificated and
> current instrument rated pilot, in an aircraft certified for
> IFR flight to file an IFR flight plan.

No such FAR.
>
> Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC condition
> is a violation. IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
> unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.

PIC must be named on ANY flight plan (IFR or VFR).
91.153 (a)(3) The full name and address of the pilot in command.

The IFR plan only adds the alternate airport.

[Ron Natalie]

Roy Smith wrote:
> "Cirrus" > wrote:
>> I usually only file my last name, and have never received a single
>> question by the briefer about it. Do any of you know if you are
>> supposed to file first and last name?
>
> I don't know of any regulation which requires you to put down two names in
> the PIC box.

How about 91.153 which requires the "FULL NAME OF THE PILOT IN COMMAND"?

[Ron Natalie]

Brad wrote:

>
> Either way, I'd have a hard time believing that the flight plan would
> be the determinant information of who was PIC for a flight when more
> than one pilot could serve as PIC.
>
It's not. Specifically not in an enforcement action. The FAA goes
after whoever they determine they can injure the most with the action.

[Ron Natalie]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Brad wrote:
>
>> Funny, I don't remember filing dual XC flights for my private under my
>> instructor's name either.
>
> A VFR flight plan is a whole different animal, never gets beyond FSS.
> Nobody will care who is listed as PIC on a VFR flight plan, it's only
> used for SAR.

Nobody cares any more or less on a VFR or IFR plan. The rule is for
VFR plans (inheritted into the IFR plan). The PIC name goes NOWHERE
other than for the SAR record. ATC NEVER SEES IT.

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
Ron Natalie > wrote:

> Mark Hansen wrote:
>
> > As PIC, the CFII would be the one officially accepting the clearance (or
> > not) - non-verbally. The student would only be copying it to paper and
> > reading it back.
> >
> It's not even so involved. The student can accept the clearance.
> The PIC is just ultimately responsible. Command is more of a
> responsibility thing than any particular act.

That's not true. Being in command is the act of getting screwed when
things go wrong and they need to blame somebody.

[Jim Macklin]

(c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command
under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR, unless within the preceding 6 calendar
months, that person has:


so you're correct, you can file, but you can't fly.




"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > The reason is in the FAR, you have to be a certificated
and
| > current instrument rated pilot, in an aircraft certified
for
| > IFR flight to file an IFR flight plan.
|
| No such FAR.
| >
| > Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC
condition
| > is a violation. IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
| > unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.
|
| PIC must be named on ANY flight plan (IFR or VFR).
| 91.153 (a)(3) The full name and address of the pilot in
command.
|
| The IFR plan only adds the alternate airport.

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Brad wrote:
> Dave Butler wrote:

>>A VFR flight plan is a whole different animal, never gets beyond FSS.
>>Nobody will care who is listed as PIC on a VFR flight plan, it's only
>>used for SAR.
>
>
> Sure, I know that. But the regs (91.157) specify listing the PIC for a
> VFR flight plan. In the event of a hypothetical accident resulting
> from a non-instuctional flight flown by a certified private pilot with
> a flight instructor on board, could the CFI deny PIC responsibility on
> the basis of the PIC listed in the flight plan, if filed by the private
> pilot?

Only the NTSB or the FAA can answer that question, and if I got an
answer to it, I wouldn't believe it.

> By the way, the pilot's name never gets beyond FSS for either VFR or
> IFR. Otherwise you might hear a controller say: "Dave, you are cleared
> to Anytown airport as filed, maintain 3000..."

OK.

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> The reason is in the FAR, you have to be a certificated and
> current instrument rated pilot, in an aircraft certified for
> IFR flight to file an IFR flight plan.

There is no requirement for an instrument rating for *filing* an
instrument flight plan, only for accepting a clearance. There is no
requirement for any kind of aircraft certification for *filing* a flight
plan.

> Simply filing the flight plan OR operating in IMC condition
> is a violation.

Filing a flight plan is not a violation.

> IFR flight plan in VMC is a violation
> unless the PIC NAMED, not just PIC is legal.

Meteorological conditions have nothing to do with it. I don't find a
regulation that uses the terminology "PIC NAMED". Perhaps there is case law.

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Roy Smith wrote:

> ATC only sees some subset of the fields you file in your flight plan. I
> don't remember exactly which ones they get (everything up to the REMARKS
> section?), but the PIC's name isn't one of them. All that stuff about home
> base, souls on board, paint color, etc, is purely for SAR and accident
> investigation purposes.

ATC sees the first few characters of the REMARKS, but the string length
is limited. I forget how many characters they see. e.g. if I remark "PLA
FAY", ATC knows I plan to do practice low approaches at Fayetteville.

[Sam Spade]

Ron Natalie wrote:

> Brad wrote:
>
>>
>> Either way, I'd have a hard time believing that the flight plan would
>> be the determinant information of who was PIC for a flight when more
>> than one pilot could serve as PIC.
>>
> It's not. Specifically not in an enforcement action. The FAA goes
> after whoever they determine they can injure the most with the action.
>

Another way to look at it, they go after the required crew member(s).

[Sam Spade]

Roy N5804F wrote:

>
>
>
>>The person who is ABLE to legally recieve the clearance is who's name is
>>listed as PIC. The student can file.. but the CFII's name goes on the
>>plan.
>>
>
>
> How do the heavy crews handle this stuff. ?
> Does the dispatcher list who is PIC ?
>
> Roy
>
>
>
Depends upon the carrier.

The one I worked for did not pass any crew information to the FAA.

It is an entirely different ballgame with a FAR-required dispatch office
and reams of FAA-approved operational control procedures.

And, the air carrier flight plan required for international operations
is very different than the FAA flight plan form. I think you would have
to complete the same ICAO form if you were flying from Los Angeles to
New Zealand in your G550. ;-)

[Peter Clark]

Brain the size of a planet and here I am reading Usenet ;0

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 23:14:35 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:

>Trillian?

[Roger[_4_]]

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:32:52 -0500, Dave Butler > wrote:

>Roy N5804F wrote:
>
>> The consensus seems to be that an instrument student cannot file an IFR plan
>> in his own name.

Careful with the words can and can not. The student can do anything.
They may not doing it legally. One implies the ability to do so and
the other has implicit permission.
>
>Let's be precise. The instrument student may file all the flight plans
>he cares to. He just can't accept a clearance.

We may be getting hung up in scemantics here, but:
How so? I filed (Instrument training flight) in actual, called on the
RCO, or now GCO for the clearance,read back clearance, Accepted
vectors and the instructor sat there and watched. Had I screwed up he
would have said something. This was the last actual IFR in IMC cross
country before the check ride, but as far as the filing and accepting
clearances he had me doing that from day one.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Roger wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:32:52 -0500, Dave Butler > wrote:
>>Let's be precise. The instrument student may file all the flight plans
>>he cares to. He just can't accept a clearance.
>
>
> We may be getting hung up in scemantics here, but:
> How so? I filed (Instrument training flight) in actual, called on the
> RCO, or now GCO for the clearance,read back clearance, Accepted
> vectors and the instructor sat there and watched. Had I screwed up he
> would have said something. This was the last actual IFR in IMC cross
> country before the check ride, but as far as the filing and accepting
> clearances he had me doing that from day one.

As has been discussed in other postings on this thread, the instructor
is acting as PIC and accepts the clearance by proxy.

[Chad Speer]

Dave Butler wrote:

*****
ATC sees the first few characters of the REMARKS, but the string length
is limited. I forget how many characters they see. e.g. if I remark
"PLA FAY", ATC knows I plan to do practice low approaches at
Fayetteville.
*****

I don't know offhand the number of characters that are passed to us at
center, but it is far more than a few. Some military flight plans have
extensive remarks that I imagine can exceed 100 characters.

There's not much need to abbreviate if it's only a few words. It can
cause confusion if it's not a common abbreviation (even if it is used
extensively elsewhere). I remember the first time someone abbreviated
"pick up airborne" as PUP AIRBORNE. I asked them if they'd be
descending slowly to protect the dog's ears. ;-)


Chad Speer
PP-ASEL, IA
ATCS, Kansas City ARTCC