Do you have to solo to get current?

That's an interesting hiccup I've never considered before. You land. You
turn off onto the taxiway, you taxi to the approach end of the runway, no
traffice, so you keep rolling and take off. Where did the "full stop"
occur?

Jim



"Tom L." wrote in message
...


Night landings for currency have to be to full stop. 61.57(b)(1)

- Tom

On 3/8/2007 8:29:28 AM, Judah wrote:
"Skidder" wrote in
:


I don't understand why you think that a person sitting in the passenger's
seat who happens to hold a pilot's certificate is anything different than a
person who happens to not hold a pilot's certificate.

Safety pilot.


If he holds an ATP does that make the flight part 121 airline transport?

No clue, but that's not my question anyway.


--
Skidder

You're grasping. The regs do define what it means to be a PIC, SIC or
required crew member. Why would they need to define what it means to not be.
That's silly.


Well I really don't mean to be, and I'm really not trying to start an
arguement among friends.

However, it seems very plausable to me that either pilot could be considered
a safety pilot for the other for the purpose of traffic and collision
avoidance alone. I'm told that is acrually so for IFR currancy but I don't
recall actually reading it myself.



--
Skidder

On 3/8/2007 8:40:50 AM, Judah wrote:
"Skidder" wrote in
:

I appreciate your input Jim, but the regs don't say that. It says you
have to be current to carry a passenger. It does not say you have to be
current to carry another pilot seeking currency, or that anyone in an
aircraft that requires only one pilot, has to be considered a passenger.

Actually, the regs (61.57) prohibit a pilot from acting as THE PILOT IN
COMMAND of a flight if he has not, as sole manipulator of the flight
controls, performed 3 takeoffs and landings within the preceding 90 days.

Keep reading. You left out the part that says for the purpose of carring
passengers, not instructors, examiners and safety pilots.

Furthermore, according to section (2), if he is out of currency, he may act
as THE PIC of a flight under day VFR or IFR, *** provided no persons or
property are carried on board the aircraft, other than those necessary for
the conduct of the flight. ***

In what way is pilot #2 necessary for the conduct of the flight?

He clearly is not. But the entire content of 61.57 is the purpose of
excluding *passengers* unless currency requirements are met.



For further clarification, the PILOT IN COMMAND of an aircraft is defined
in 91.3

"(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and
is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft."

There can only be 1 final authority. There is only one Pilot in Command of
the aircraft, even if there are 100 other pilots in the plane.

I don't disagree with that either, but I don't think that is relative.


--
Skidder

On 3/8/2007 7:56:29 AM, Judah wrote:
"Skidder" wrote in
:

What in the regs states that, a pilot with a full set of controls in
front of him, must be considered a passenger, just because someone else
is flying the plane.

What in the regs says a pilot with a full set of controls in front of him is
considered pilot in command of an aircraft?

I didn't say he was PIC, that's a different issue.


There is mention of "SOLE MANIPULATOR of controls". But if one of the pilots is
the sole manipulator of the controls, what is the other pilot doing, except
being a passenger?

He could easily be considered a safety pilot. Nice to have an extra set of
trained eyes, especially at night.



--
Skidder

On 3/8/2007 9:32:58 AM, C J Campbell wrote:

Actually, what the regs say is that you cannot act as PIC in an airplane
carrying passengers if you have not made the three takeoffs and landings
and/or your medical is not current. Whether you log PIC is another matter
entirely, having almost nothing to do with acting as PIC. Instructors giving
instruction, for example, always log PIC even if they are not allowed to act
as PIC.

The regs also say that anyone who is not a required crewmember is a
passenger.

I haven't seen this one, which one is it? I think that would clarify a great
deal.


So, unless you both are required crewmembers, the pilot who is not acting PIC
is a passenger. A safety pilot on an instrument training flight would be a
required crewmember. An instructor giving instruction would be a required
crewmember.





--
Skidder

That's an interesting hiccup I've never considered before. You land. You
turn off onto the taxiway, you taxi to the approach end of the runway, no
traffice, so you keep rolling and take off. Where did the "full stop"
occur?

It didn't. So that one doesn't count. (At least the landing doesn't.)
I always stop somewhere when I do these.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

However, it seems very plausable to me that either pilot could be considered
a safety pilot for the other for the purpose of traffic and collision
avoidance alone. I'm told that is acrually so for IFR currancy but I don't
recall actually reading it myself.

A safety pilot is a required crewmember when the pilot flying is under
the hood. However, when the pilot flying is not under the hood, the
safety pilot is not a required crewmember. That makes him a passenger.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

Judah wrote
What role is pilot #2 playing when pilot #1 is flying the plane? Is he
a required crew member? Is he manipulating the controls?

If pilot #2 were sitting in the back seat instead of the front seat
during the flight would his role as passenger be any more or less
clear?

I think the answers are pretty cut and dry, and your attorney friend
is just trying to play loophole games with the regs because that's
what attorneys do, and it's convenient for him.

I frequently fly with my neighbor/aircraft owner/Private Pilot in his
Cessna 172.
I almost always occupy the front/right seat when either he or another
Private Pilot friend is flying the airplane (a/c owner in back seat).
I am very relieved to hear that (by your reasoning), I am just a
"passenger" and that my Flight Instructor Certificate and ATP will not
come under FAA scrutiny if one of the others bends the airplane or
violates a regulation.

HEY!! I'm not a crewmember....just a passenger. :-)

Bob Moore

If at the time you are instructing the person in the front/left seat who
happens to be sole manipulator of the controls, who has the final authority
with respect to the flight?

If it is you, because, for example, the guy in the left seat doesn't have
the necessary currency or ratings to allow him to be responsible, then I
would say you are PIC and you are responsible.

If it is not you, and the guy in the left seat is current and has every
right to accept full responsibility for the flight, then I would say you're
just a passenger who happens to have a lot of experience and knowledge
sitting in the right seat talking some.

I suspect that the FAA will still try to come after you (and perhaps after
the propellor manufacturer as well). But I don't think that has anything to
do with whether you are a required crewmember or acting as PIC...

Is there something I am missing that would imply otherwise?

A safety pilot is a required crewmember when the pilot flying is under
the hood. However, when the pilot flying is not under the hood, the
safety pilot is not a required crewmember. That makes him a passenger.


Is there a reg that states that?

It has always been my understanding that if something is not prohibited by
written law, it's not illegal, and therefor permitted.



--
Skidder