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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
To BE PIC, one must be current and rated for the aircraft and the conditions.
... just aircraft - not conditions. If the pilot flying is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft in which he is rated (category/class), then he can log PIC. It doesn't matter what the weather conditions are (VMC/IMC/ Day/Night, etc.) This doesn't contradict me. Note the difference between BEING and LOGGING PIC. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
We will do a long flight, under IFR. Clearly my presence is required
because he doesn't have an IR. Does it mean that I must be PIC on that flight (because I am the only one with an IR). Yes. Can he log instrument time, or (if under the hood) simulated instrument time)? What if the whole flight is VMC on top (most likely). If under the hood in VMC, he can log PIC time and simulated instrument time. If not under the hood, and in IMC, he can log actual instrument time and PIC time. You, OTOH, might not be able to log PIC time when you are not required as safety pilot, which would be VMC while he wears the hood. The fact that you are required as Pilot In Command doesn't let you log PIC. I would be suprised if he could log it as instrument instruction, because I am not an instructor. He could not log it as dual. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Mark Hansen wrote: On 06/30/06 13:17, Robert M. Gary wrote: Brad wrote: They can't BOTH log PIC time. Actually they can if P1 is under the hood and flying and P2 is acting as PIC. Oops, I don't think that's true. This was discussed here at length about two months ago. The issue is that "acting as PIC" doesn't give a person the right to "log PIC". When reading the regs, I thought the pilot not flying would be able to log PIC as a result of 61.51 (c) (e) (1) (iii). However, the overwhelming consensus was that the specific reg referred to situations in which the pilot not flying was a required flight crew member based on the type certificate, and not because the pilot flying was under the hood and not instrument rated. The pilot flying certainly can log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls (provided he is certificated for the class/category of aircraft). The pilot not flying would be able to log PIC if he was a CFI, but that was not the case presented by the OP. -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA No, both the sole manipulator of the controls and the safety pilot can log time, regardless of whether the safety pilot is a flight instructor or not. If the safety pilot acts as PIC he can log that time as pic time. If the hooded pilot acts as PIC, then the safety pilot could log second-in-command time as a required crewmember. He's required under 91.109 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
On 06/30/06 21:03, Jose wrote:
Yes, but the flying pilot is not required to be there. There is nothing in the FARs that says the flying pilot must be there. However, the FARs do require a second crew member when the flying pilot is under the hood in VMC. Well, actually the regs don't require the hood to be there either. Strict logic says that the pilot flying under the hood is not required, so the flight actually only requires one pilot. However, the FAA =interprets= the regs as requiring two pilots in order to provide a venue for instrument training. There is no reason, given this interpretation, that they can't also interpret it the same way for IMC training. Can you please provide a reference to this interpretation? Is it written up in a legal counsel opinion somewhere? Whether they do or not is a legitimate question. Jose -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Well, actually the regs don't require the hood to be there either. Strict logic says that the pilot flying under the hood is not required, so the flight actually only requires one pilot. However, the FAA =interprets= the regs as requiring two pilots in order to provide a venue for instrument training. There is no reason, given this interpretation, that they can't also interpret it the same way for IMC training.
Can you please provide a reference to this interpretation? Is it written up in a legal counsel opinion somewhere? It is written up in the FAA FAQs, which used to be available online, but was taken down a year or two ago. Perhaps a new version is up. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 14 CFR, PART 61 ARRANGED BY SECTION MAINTAINED BY ALLAN PINKSTON PILOT EXAMINER STANDARDIZATION TEAM, AFS-640 Contact: Allan Pinkston phone: (405) 954 - 6472 E-Mail: (Please include your phone number on e-mail questions) THE ORIGINAL “Q&A” REFERENCE IS NOTED FOLLOWING EACH (GROUP OF) QUESTION (S) CHANGE NOTICE: REVISION #17, DATE: AUGUST 22, 2002 INCORPORATING Q&A #s: 471-522 WITH ALL PREVIOUS Q&As 1 - 470 VERTICAL BAR IN LEFT MARGIN DENOTES CHANGES SINCE: 12/12/2001 NOTE: INFORMATION AND REFERENCES HAVE BEEN CORRECTED TO REPRESENT THE NEW PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL PRACTICAL TEST STANDARDS EFFECTIVE AUGUST 2002. CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO Part 61 sections: 61.1, 61.13, 61.23, 61.31, 61.35, 61.39, 61.41, 61.45, 61.51, 61.57, 61.58, 61.73, 61.75, 61.77, 61.103, 61.113, 61.123, 61.129, 61.153, 61.157, 61.165, 61.183, 61.193, 61.195, 61.197, 61.215 UPDATE YOUR FAQs at http://av-info.faa.gov or http://afs600.faa.gov look under “Other Designee Information” for: FAQ 14 CFR, Part 61 & 141 THE SOURCE OF ANSWERS IS JOHN LYNCH, AFS-840 CERTIFICATION BRANCH, WASHINGTON, DC UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED Disclaimer Statement: The answers provided to the questions in this website are not legal interpretations. Only the FAA's Office of Chief Counsel and Regional Chief Counsel can provide legal interpretations. The FAA's Office of Chief Counsel does not review this website nor does it disseminate legal interpretations through it. However, there are some answers provided in this website where the FAA Office of Chief Counsel's legal interpretations have been reprinted. However, the answers in this website address Frequently Asked Questions on 14 CFR part 61 and represents FAA Flight Standards Service policy as it relates to this regulation. The answers are provided for standardization purposes only. Without scouring the document, here's a sample that illustrates. QUESTION: Is it true that a qualified pilot can log pilot-in-command time for all flight time during which he acts as a required safety pilot per 14 CFR §91.109? ANSWER: Yes, the safety pilot can log the time as PIC time in accordance with §61.51(e)(ii) which states ". . . regulations under which the flight is conducted." {Q&A-88} As it pertains to our discussion, I also came across this in the FAQ: QUESTION: Regarding §61.51's definition of "operating an aircraft" an aircraft certified for two pilots is being operated under part 121. The PIC is "flying" the aircraft. The SIC is the non-flying pilot. Can the SIC log actual instrument flight time for those periods of actual IMC conditions when the PIC is flying the aircraft? Is the SIC considered to be "operating" the aircraft at this moment to justify logging this instrument time. ANSWER: Ref. §61.51(f) and (g); The SIC is permitted to log the time as SIC time, as per §61.51(f). However, he is not permitted to log the time as instrument time, because as per §61.51(g), the person can only log instrument time “. . . for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions . . .” {Emphasis added “operates the aircraft”]. In your scenario, you stated the SIC was the non-flying pilot. So, the SIC crewmember was not operating the aircraft. And even though you didn’t ask, the logged time has limited value. It cannot be used for the recency of experience under §61.57(c) because “ . . . operates the aircraft . . .” (otherwise meaning hands-on, flying pilot, etc.) is required. Nor can this SIC time be used for meeting the ATP instrument aeronautical experience requirements of §61.159(a)(3) [i.e., “75 hours of instrument flight time, in actual or simulated instrument conditions, subject to . . . .”] {Q&A-345} So, the non-flying safety pilot could not log instrument time even in IMC. Only the pilot flying (sole manipulator) gets that. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Jose wrote: So, the non-flying safety pilot could not log instrument time even in IMC. Only the pilot flying (sole manipulator) gets that. Yes, the non flying pilot is a passenger (even though he may actually be serving as PIC). Of course 61.51 makes an exemption for CFIIs -Robert, CFII |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Jose wrote: Well, actually the regs don't require the hood to be there either. Strict logic says that the pilot flying under the hood is not required, so the flight actually only requires one pilot. However, the FAA =interprets= the regs as requiring two pilots in order to provide a venue for instrument training. There is no reason, given this interpretation, that they can't also interpret it the same way for IMC training. I don't follow. There is no reg that says IMC flights requires multiple pilots (which is what 61.51(e) requires for multiple logging). Hood time does have such a reg. 91.109 (b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless- (1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown. In order for multiple pilots to log time in IMC you would have to point to a simular reg for actual instrument. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
91.109
(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless- In IMC, the pilot flying may keep the hood on, and thus a safety pilot would be required. The pilot flying would then log this as simulated instrument flight, even though he is in actual. The rule is carved out well enough for the feds, but it is a special exception, given that simulated instrument conditions are an artificality anyway. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Jose wrote: 91.109 (b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless- In IMC, the pilot flying may keep the hood on, and thus a safety pilot would be required. The pilot flying would then log this as simulated instrument flight, even though he is in actual. So your argument is that actual IMC is "simulated instrument flight"? Sounds like you'd have to be a real Perry Mason to argue that. -Robert |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
So your argument is that actual IMC is "simulated instrument flight"?
Sounds like you'd have to be a real Perry Mason to argue that. It is if the pilot flying is wearing a hood. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to ask you the most important question of your life. | Douglas Olson | Owning | 1 | May 22nd 05 05:15 AM |
182RG question | Paul Anton | Owning | 11 | May 16th 05 09:45 PM |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
Could the Press Grow a Spine? | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 259 | July 11th 04 08:35 PM |