![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
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) |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Instrument Checkride passed (Long) | Paul Folbrecht | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | February 11th 05 03:41 AM |
| Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 03:16 PM |
| Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 06:54 PM |
| PC flight simulators | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 178 | December 14th 03 01:14 PM |
| CFI logging instrument time | Barry | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | November 11th 03 01:23 AM |