Possible Logbook Goofs

[Sandstorm]

Well, just about to get caught up on my logbook after 2+ years. Anyway, as I start thinking about applying for jobs with a major in the future, I realize the way I've made all my entries for certain columns may be questioned by future interviewers. I don't feel they are a big deal, but in an interview my opinion won't be as important.

First, under make and model I have the 50 seat Canadair Regional Jet listed as a CL65 (the Type Designator), instead of what should probably be
CRJ-200.

Second, I realized that after a while I had forgotten to write "N" next to the aircraft number in my entries.

Other than that everything is in order and adds up perfectly.

Is this something that I should be concerned about or am I being paranoid about nothing? Thanks in advance for input.

 

[elag777]

Well, just about to get caught up on my logbook after 2+ years. Anyway, as I start thinking about applying for jobs with a major in the future, I realize the way I've made all my entries for certain columns may be questioned by future interviewers. I don't feel they are a big deal, but in an interview my opinion won't be as important.

First, under make and model I have the 50 seat Canadair Regional Jet listed as a CL65 (the Type Designator), instead of what should probably be
CRJ-200.

Second, I realized that after a while I had forgotten to write "N" next to the aircraft number in my entries.

Other than that everything is in order and adds up perfectly.

Is this something that I should be concerned about or am I being paranoid about nothing? Thanks in advance for input.

I think you should worry more about global warming!

 

[temcgrew]

I thought aviation was good for trees. They need CO2 right?

 

[RyansDad]

I think you may be looking too much into it. CL65 and not writing in an N before the aircraft number are non issues in my opinion. I think if all your numbers add up an interviewer wont care. I know alot of guys dont keep track by the day but by the month and havent had a problem. Congrats on catching up on 2yrs worth of time though....what a chore that had to be

 

[radarlove]

Yeah, the trick is not to have your total jet PIC time jump by an extra 100 hours every page that gets turned, not whether your interviewer knows (or cares, sorry, but he doesn't) what the real identifying model of your RJ is.

Unless your interviewer flew RJs (he didn't) they wouldn't care less. He's probably military and doesn't even care about the ins and outs of N-numbers.

The logbook should be neat and organized because it's a project you accomplished without any oversight. It speaks to the quality you put into something when nobody's looking over your shoulder.

In the old days, the story goes, UAL interviewers used to use it as a test case for your ability to keep cool--they would basicallyi accuse every person walking through the door of lying in their logbook. Even the military guys that never entered an item on their own in their whole career were called to question.

Even knowing this was going to happen, you wouldn't believe the number of people who blew up, with some walking out of the interview.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

You're stuck in that CRJ for life!

No crew job at a major for you! (in my best soup nazi voice)

 

[SWA GUY]

In the old days, the story goes, UAL interviewers used to use it as a test case for your ability to keep cool--they would basicallyi accuse every person walking through the door of lying in their logbook.

'Cause that's the way to treat a prospective employee...

 

[Flex81]

I wouldn't worry about it. A friend of mine who is at F9 told the CP before his interview that he was off by about 1.5 hours and he couldn't figure out where those hours went (online app vs logbook). The CP said "we hire pilots not accountants". In my logbook, I have BE1900D instead of BE-1900 and EMB-120 instead of E120. I don't know what the right answer is, but I don't think it matters as long as they know what kind of plane it is and your logbook is neatly done.

 

[Wheres the van?]

What way do you guys fill in the info,per leg,per day or per trip.Im a little behind on my logbook,four years give or take,so just wondering will it be the easy way or the hard way.

 

[GogglesPisano]

Per day. Leave out the "N". Write "CL-65" or "Space Shuttle" in the top row and draw a line down the column to the bottom of the page. I stopped logging X-C and stopped carrying over "As Instructor" and "Dual Received" eons ago.

 

[snow-back]

What way do you guys fill in the info,per leg,per day or per trip.Im a little behind on my logbook,four years give or take,so just wondering will it be the easy way or the hard way.

When I started flying in the airlines, I always logged per trip. I've interviewed twice and been hired both times since I started at the airlines, with no questions. The fact that it's neat and everything adds up is what's important. Who cares what the N number is...especially for airline flying.

SB

 

[igneousy2]

I was a little concerned about my logbook while I was interviewing at the majors to. Trust me, if your biggest worry is if you put CL65 or CRJ200 in you logbook then don't even sweat it.

I think this fear stems from our time applying at regionals as flight instructors. I think at regional interviews they are more concerned with the genuineness of the flight time in your logbook due to the varied backgrounds of the applicants with most of them beating the minimum multi time requirement by 50 hours. Once you've got 5-6 thousand hours of documentable airline flying...it becomes a none issue. You don't like that 100 hours I got there, throw it out, I got 6,000 hours more that isn't so questionalble.

My issue in my logbook was that I hadn't logged about 2 years worth of flight time. I lost a box full of "red books" during my last move and I had one line that said 6/01 -- 6/03 SF340 - 1,700 hours. They didn't even ask to see the pay details that I had brought along to show them. I don't know if it mattered, but even if you eliminated the 1,700 hours, I still well exceeded all time requirements they had.

If the only reason I didn't get hired was because I didn't put an "N" in front of the tail numbers then I probably wouldn't be very happy working at that company anyway.

Later

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

The only problem is your logbook itself.

For all practical purposes, you need to convert to an electronic logbook. Everybody makes little errors they don't like, but with an electronic one you can fix them easily.

cliff
YIP

 

[DrewBlows]

Hi!

The only problem is your logbook itself.

For all practical purposes, you need to convert to an electronic logbook. Everybody makes little errors they don't like, but with an electronic one you can fix them easily.

cliff
YIP

I converted from conventional to electronic when I had about 1200 hours. I still used the conventional until I filled my first one up, since I have gone all electronic. When I made the switch I decided I would rid my logbook of all errors. I spent the better part of two days locating every single mistake. I then used a correction entry and it's been right ever since. With 1200 hours I had about 15 hours of mistakes or 1.25%. Not bad considering it included my student flight time. Still drove me nuts though.