Safety pilot - logging cross-country

To each his own, Hilton. Unless I am sitting in the left seat and doing all
the work, I do not log things just because I can find regulations that
support doing so. No logging of approaches performed by a student, no
logging of PIC if I'm really the safety pilot, etc.

Bob

"Hilton" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob Gardner wrote:
Maybe it's me, but I wouldn't consider for a moment logging a trip that I
had not personally planned and flown on my own.

A few years ago, I figured that since I wasn't PIC for the takeoff and
landing, that I couldn't log XC PIC - assuming I was safety pilot and
acting as PIC while the other gyu was under the hood.

Then I read Part 61.1, and the time on a XC that you log PIC, you can also
log XC, assuming all the other requirements are met.

Hilton

Bob Gardner wrote:
To each his own, Hilton. Unless I am sitting in the left seat and doing
all the work, I do not log things just because I can find regulations that
support doing so. No logging of approaches performed by a student, no
logging of PIC if I'm really the safety pilot, etc.

As long as you log a subset of what the FARs allow, I have no problem with
that - we know the FARs don't require that you log everything. Having said,
the issue here is what the FARs allow (and don't) and not what our opinions
or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
filled in.

Hilton

Hey Hilton,

How about answering my email to your company about the registration key.
I know you're in there.



Hilton wrote:
Bob Gardner wrote:

To each his own, Hilton. Unless I am sitting in the left seat and doing
all the work, I do not log things just because I can find regulations that
support doing so. No logging of approaches performed by a student, no
logging of PIC if I'm really the safety pilot, etc.


As long as you log a subset of what the FARs allow, I have no problem with
that - we know the FARs don't require that you log everything. Having said,
the issue here is what the FARs allow (and don't) and not what our opinions
or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
filled in.

Hilton

Newps wrote:
How about answering my email to your company about the registration key. I
know you're in there.

Gimme a hint at which email that was. We had a couple of emails get
marked as spam. Were you the one I sent an email (and key) to earlier
today? BTW: Make sure when you send an email, you say "I'm Newps" - I'll
make sure to get back to you ASAP.

BTW: WingX Version 1.7.5.0 (Beta) will be made available later this week.
It adds free weather (METARs, TAFs, winds aloft, temps aloft, etc), Seattle
Avionics Voyager and Anywhere Map support, adds a lot more runway
information, as well as numerous other improvements. If you're OK running
Betas, please try it out and let me/us know what you think.

Hilton

Hilton wrote:
BTW: WingX Version 1.7.5.0 (Beta) will be made available later this week.

I meant to add that 1.7.5.0 will be released as a patch so you must have
WingX already installed. We won't be selling 1.7.5.0 separately, it'll be
an update/patch (kinda like buying an XP machine and getting the patches).

Hilton

: or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
: who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
: he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
: the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
: filled in.

I think that the complex endorsement thing is somewhere where the FAR's
actually do what seems to be the "right way." It's hard enough (in both convenience
and expense) to get the time necessary to satisfy *insurance* requirements these
days... let alone FAR-mandated time requirements. The ability to manipulate the
controls of an aircraft for which you are rated, yet not legally allowed to act as PIC
for (complex/high-performance, no BFR, no medical, etc) lets people fly cheaper and
gain more experience in flying and in different aircraft. If they had to rent a
suitable aircraft and instructor for absolutely everything, they would be much less
inclined to casually learn things at a slower rate. You can bet your ass that if I'm
paying over $150/hour to rent a complex aircraft and instructor to get an endorsement,
I'm not going to fly it a second longer than I have to. If I can fly in a friend's
complex for the cost of (half) the fuel and a burger, I'll enjoy the flight and learn
more. The FARs dictate minimum time, but it's the *experience* and *proficiency* of
the pilot that is the intent.

/rant

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

Hi,

Sure, I understand the economics of it. But can my non-complex-endorsed
friend really make a judgement call about a gear failure? No. But as you
say, they are gaining experience in the aircraft. So why can't a student
log multi time then? It then becomes a question of semantics.

Having said all that, the key is to understanding and applying the FARs as
written and that means understanding that ACTING and LOGGING PIC are very
different things. Unfortunately, in my humble guestimation, a very low
percentage of pilots (including CFIs) don't understand/know the concept. I
only know it because of my involvement in these NGs.

Hilton


wrote in message
...
: or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my
friend
: who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time
when
: he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according
to
: the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
: filled in.

I think that the complex endorsement thing is somewhere where the FAR's
actually do what seems to be the "right way." It's hard enough (in both
convenience
and expense) to get the time necessary to satisfy *insurance* requirements
these
days... let alone FAR-mandated time requirements. The ability to
manipulate the
controls of an aircraft for which you are rated, yet not legally allowed
to act as PIC
for (complex/high-performance, no BFR, no medical, etc) lets people fly
cheaper and
gain more experience in flying and in different aircraft. If they had to
rent a
suitable aircraft and instructor for absolutely everything, they would be
much less
inclined to casually learn things at a slower rate. You can bet your ass
that if I'm
paying over $150/hour to rent a complex aircraft and instructor to get an
endorsement,
I'm not going to fly it a second longer than I have to. If I can fly in a
friend's
complex for the cost of (half) the fuel and a burger, I'll enjoy the
flight and learn
more. The FARs dictate minimum time, but it's the *experience* and
*proficiency* of
the pilot that is the intent.

/rant

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************