A couple of questions about IPC

On 02/10/06 15:20, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 02/10/06 14:48, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
Yes, I see that, and that certainly seems to be the consensus of
everyone
offering help here. So, I will conform ;-)

No need to change your view just because you're in the minority.

I just have a different interpretation of 61.51 (e) (1) (iii), because
in my opinion, the pilot not flying is required under the FARs due to
the fact that the pilot flying isn't current for IMC.

Yup, you're right about that. I don't see how that could be disputed.

The question is why you'd think that the regs require the *other* pilot
to be there. Remember, 61.51e1iii only applies if the regs require there
to be *more than one pilot* for the particular flight.

I'm not asserting that the pilot flying (PF) is required by regs to be
there.

Ok, good. No disagreement so far.

I think the regs entitle the PF to log PIC as per 61.51 (e)(1)(i).

No disagreement there either.

Where I'm getting lost is that if the pilot-not-flying (PNF) must act as
PIC (because someone must act as PIC, and the PF cannot due to IMC
currency),
why his time cannot be logged as PIC.

I think the answer is that acting as PIC doesn't mean you can also log
PIC.

Right. More specifically, 61.51e1iii says you can log PIC time *only* under
three specified conditions (and *being* PIC is *not* one of those
conditions).

But ... 61.51 (e)(1)(iii) seems to tell me that because the PNF is
required
to be there, he can log his time as PIC.

No, that's not what 61.51e1iii says. How do you interpret it that way?

Let me state 61.51 (e)(1)(iii) in a way that I think makes my point:

"is acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one
pilot
is required by the regulations under which the flight is conducted."

Yes, that's what 61.51e1iii says. But how does that make your point?

Because 61.51 (e) is about logging pilot-in-command flight time.

It seems to me the PNF can log the time as PIC because he fits under
61.51 (e)(1)(iii).


But ... I think what you're saying is that only one crew member is
required
because if the PNF was alone, the flight would be legal (assuming he
started
flying).

Yes. The PIC is the only required pilot in the IMC/IFR scenario.

I guess I was getting hung up on the premise that the PF not being
IMC current caused the 2nd crew member to be required.

You're right that the second pilot is required. But the first one isn't!


Yeah ... I was presuming that the PNF could log the time because he was
required, and the PF could log the time because he was sole manipulator.



Do you see why I presumed the 2nd crew member was required?

Yes, and I agree with you on that. But 61.51e1iii only applies if the first
pilot is *also* required. That is, 61.51e1iii only applies if *more than
one* pilot is required for the flight.

Okay, I can't argue with that.

Thanks again.


--Gary




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