Instrument PIC logging for the experts

Thank you for clearing this up once and for all g!

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

Well. if we want to pick nits (and isn't that what all
"logging" threads are about :-), the pilot in the right seat
can log Top Dog time if the sole manipulator in the right
seat 1) is not PIC (by agreement), 2) can't be PIC (not
instrument rated, no medical, etc.) *and* 3) is not a pilot
(has no pilot certificate of any type).


Nope. TopDog is not loggable. Only HOT is loggable. If you're Top Dog
(and
the situation is right) you log HOT, not Top Dog.

That's my point. HOT is what is loggable, TopDog is what you are.

I also think you meant "left" the second time you said "right".

Further, the *and* makes little sense. I think you menat "or". After
all, if
the person in question is not a pilot, he can't be PIC anyway. And in any
case, you are mixing up PIC with TopDog and HOT. The point of doing
TopDog and
HOT is to get away from the "PIC" word and express the same idea in a less
ambiguous context.

If the left seat person is not a pilot, OR isn't Top Dog, then the right
seat
person has to be Top Dog. (that is, assuming there are only two dogs
involved
But Top Dog doesn't get logged. Only HOT gets logged. Sometimes the
Top
Dog can log HOT.

There can only be one Top Dog. However, in some cases both can log HOT.
In
some cases, nobody can log HOT (something I find bizzare, but then again,
this
is the FAA). But nobody ever logs Top Dog.

Jose



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

and he's the one that screwed up and allowed them to enter IMC..

BT

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...
So the guy in
the right seat no longer gets to log PIC, since his presence is now
superflous.

Actually, it's the guy in the left seat that is superfluous. The guy (or
gal)
at the right is the Pilot In Command... the Head Honcho... the One In
Charge...
the Top Banana... el Mucho Macho... the Big Dog.

He's very much required.

Jose



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

Teacherjh wrote:
Well. if we want to pick nits (and isn't that what all
"logging" threads are about :-), the pilot in the right seat
can log Top Dog time if the sole manipulator in the right
seat 1) is not PIC (by agreement), 2) can't be PIC (not
instrument rated, no medical, etc.) *and* 3) is not a pilot
(has no pilot certificate of any type).


Nope. TopDog is not loggable. Only HOT is loggable. If you're Top Dog (and
the situation is right) you log HOT, not Top Dog.

That's my point. HOT is what is loggable, TopDog is what you are.

I also think you meant "left" the second time you said "right".

Further, the *and* makes little sense. I think you menat "or". After all, if
the person in question is not a pilot, he can't be PIC anyway. And in any
case, you are mixing up PIC with TopDog and HOT. The point of doing TopDog and
HOT is to get away from the "PIC" word and express the same idea in a less
ambiguous context.

If the left seat person is not a pilot, OR isn't Top Dog, then the right seat
person has to be Top Dog. (that is, assuming there are only two dogs involved
But Top Dog doesn't get logged. Only HOT gets logged. Sometimes the Top
Dog can log HOT.

There can only be one Top Dog. However, in some cases both can log HOT. In
some cases, nobody can log HOT (something I find bizzare, but then again, this
is the FAA). But nobody ever logs Top Dog.

Jose

No, he meant what he wrote. Despite what we all think we
understand about the logging regs for acting as PIC, there
is an interpretation from the FAA that seems to say that if
there is only one pilot in the plane, that pilot can log
PIC time even if he or she allows someone else to manipulate
the controls. The interpretation seems to be clearly in
conflict with the wording of the FARs, but it is out there
and was posted here a number of months ago.

--
David Rind

No, he meant what he wrote. Despite what we all think we
understand about the logging regs for acting as PIC, there
is an interpretation from the FAA that seems to say that if
there is only one pilot in the plane, that pilot can log
PIC time even if he or she allows someone else to manipulate
the controls. The interpretation seems to be clearly in
conflict with the wording of the FARs, but it is out there
and was posted here a number of months ago.


That would be a rare case where the FAA is making sense. Of course it only
does that by contradicting itself.

What you are describing is a pilot in one seat (say the right one), a non pilot
in the other seat, and no other dogs. Only the pilot can be Top Dog. The
non-pilot has hands-on-time but can't log it because he's not a pilot. Only
HOT can be logged - Top Dog is never logged. So, in this case the FARs say
nobody gets to log HOT, but the FAA says the pilot can log HOT.

The latter makes sense.

You take a non-pilot friend for a flight, you let him act as a human autopilot,
you log the time.

Jose

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

(Teacherjh) wrote:

Nope. TopDog is not loggable. Only HOT is loggable. If you're Top Dog (and
the situation is right) you log HOT, not Top Dog.

OK, I'll buy your definitions and your point, but then
you're logging hands on time when you're not hands on. I
was making the point that there are situations where you log
time because you're top dog

I also think you meant "left" the second time you said "right".

Yep :-)


you are mixing up PIC with TopDog and HOT. The point of doing TopDog and
HOT is to get away from the "PIC" word and express the same idea in a less
ambiguous context.

I took Top Dog to be "acting (or serving) as PIC" and HOT to
be "loggable time for a rating under 61.51." Which are more
commonly used terms. Did I misunderstand you?

If the left seat person is not a pilot, OR isn't Top Dog, then the right seat
person has to be Top Dog. (that is, assuming there are only two dogs involved

Agreed. I can also say "If the left seat person is not a
pilot, AND isn't Top Dog" if I want to, although I agree
that the first implies the second. I was just covering a
lot of situations in one logical expression.

But Top Dog doesn't get logged. Only HOT gets logged. Sometimes the Top
Dog can log HOT.

But my point is that there is only one situation I'm aware
of where you can log time legally solely because you ARE TOP
DOG even though that time does not appear under 61.51 (which
I equated to your "HOT" logging.) That time is where
there's only one pilot, he's acting as PIC (TOP DOG) and
he's not manipulating the controls, but a non-pilot is.
Take a look at 61.51 (e) (which I equated to HOT time) and
try to justify the Chief Counsel's Interpretation that
permits this logging. It isn't HOT time, but the CC says
it's loggable because it's TOP DOG time, thus I say you're
logging TOP DOG time in this one situation, and HOT time in
all the others.

There can only be one Top Dog. However, in some cases both can log HOT. In
some cases, nobody can log HOT (something I find bizzare, but then again, this
is the FAA). But nobody ever logs Top Dog.

Fine, if you want to separate the concepts of
authority/responsibility from the concept of making records,
then you're right. OTOH, if you are separating time that's
loggable under 61.51 from time that's not loggable under
61.51, but is loggable because you're TOP DOG, then my
comment makes sense.

Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

but then you're logging hands on time when you're not hands on.


Well, I had to call it =something=. That's why I called it by its acronym
(to evoke hotshot) rather than "HandsOn time". And anyway, are you 'hands on'
when you engage the autopilot and sit back? (but let's not start another
thread on whether that is "real" flying)


I took Top Dog to be "acting (or serving) as PIC" and HOT to
be "loggable time for a rating under 61.51."


Exactly right. And then I stayed away from the potentially confusing "PIC"
word.


But my point is that there is only one situation I'm aware
of where you can log time legally solely because you ARE TOP
DOG even though that time does not appear under 61.51 (which
I equated to your "HOT" logging.) That time is where
there's only one pilot, he's acting as PIC (TOP DOG) and
he's not manipulating the controls, but a non-pilot is.
Take a look at 61.51 (e) (which I equated to HOT time) and
try to justify the Chief Counsel's Interpretation that
permits this logging. It isn't HOT time, but the CC says
it's loggable because it's TOP DOG time...


Chief Counsel disagrees with a straight interpretation of the regs. Not the
first time. It's in "our favor". That's probably a first.


thus I say you're
logging TOP DOG time in this one situation, and HOT time in
all the others.


.... and I say the rules let you log HOT in this situation. The non-pilot is a
human autopilot.


Fine, if you want to separate the concepts of
authority/responsibility from the concept of making records,
then you're right.


Exactly what I was trying to do.


OTOH, if you are separating time that's
loggable under 61.51 from time that's not loggable under
61.51, but is loggable because you're TOP DOG, then my
comment makes sense.


Not what I was doing, and in any case "loggable because you're Top Dog (of a
one dog plane with a cat in it)" is only an opinion from Chief Council. It's
not in the FARs. Were we to get into a discussion about what non-FAR time is
loggable, or even what non-FAR activity is permissible (wanna talk icing?) it
could go on forever, and not be sorted out until the accident, and even then
only for that case and the new rule that evolves from it.

Jose



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

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. ..

"Koopas Ly" wrote in message
om...

They fly into IMC. The guy in the left seat is still controlling the
airplane, so he still gets to log PIC. Now, since the flight has gone
into IMC, there's no longer a safety pilot requirement. So the guy in
the right seat no longer gets to log PIC, since his presence is now
superflous.

His presence isn't superfluous, it's just ceased to be an opreation
requiring
more than one pilot, which is a logging issue only.

Just a minute. The operation does so require more than one pilot, since we
have specified that the actual PIC (TopDog) isn't manipulating the controls.
Someone had better be manipulating the controls, or someone will soon be
talking to the NTSB.

If the TopDog were to take the controls at the time of entering IMC, that
would be a different operation (the entire purpose of this operation is to
give the HOT some instrument time).

That's my argument and I'm sticking to it until I see something else in the
FAQ or counsel rulings.

-- David Brooks

If the TopDog were to take the controls at the time of entering IMC, that
would be a different operation (the entire purpose of this operation is to
give the HOT some instrument time)


Yanno, I've always wondered about that interpretation. Seems to be reasonable
to say that two pilots are required when "the purpose of the flight" is to give
one pilot simulated instrument time. There's only one way to do it, and that
is with a safety pilot. Thus, a two pilot operation.

But is it really still a two-pilot operation when "the entire purpose" is to
give a non-instrument rated pilot actual time? There's also only one way to do
it, but you can certainly go in the clouds single pilot.

Somewhere I remember a case where two pilots could be up front, each legal to
do their thing, but none able to be Top Dog. So if a third pilot sits in the
back and acts as Top Dog, the flight would be legal. Is this now a three-pilot
op?

And (to be a bit silly), suppose the whole purpose of the flight is to try out
a new autopilot. Right seat pilot (say, the owner of the plane) is Top Dog,
and the left seat pilot is trying the instrumentation. The right seat pilot
takes off, then hands the controls to the left seat pilot, who logs HOT while
he's sole manipulator. But all he does is turn on the autopilot and watch for
two hours. He gets to log two hours of HOT while he's sitting on his hands.
But if it were the right seat pilot who turned on the autopilot and then turned
the controls over to the left seat pilot, and then nobody touches the controls
for two hours while the autopilot does its thing, who gets to log HOT?

Jose

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

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:05:48 -0800, "David Brooks"
wrote:

The operation does so require more than one pilot,

But that's NOT what the regulations says is a requirement for a safety
pilot logging PIC time.

The regulation says (in part) that in order to LOG PIC time, one must be
acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is
required under the ... regulations under which the flight is conducted.

In the type of situations we are discussing, there is no *regulation* that
says two pilots are needed except when a safety pilot is required.


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

"David Brooks" wrote in message ...

Just a minute. The operation does so require more than one pilot, since we
have specified that the actual PIC (TopDog) isn't manipulating the controls.

The complete phrase is "an operation requiring more than one pilot under the
regulations under which the flight is conducted."

The rule was primarily designed for things like Part 135 and 121 where a
Second In Command is specifically called out for in the regs, but the FAA has
agreed that Simulated Instrument Flight also meets the definition.

Your scenario, only requires one pilot in the regulations. The fact that you
ended up using more than one, doesn't count.'