Logging Approaches

[John Pennekamp]

Show me your argment then. It's pretty black and white to me. Tha sole manipulator reg specifies in the first line that it applies only sport, recreational, private, and commercial pilots. The ATP portion is a separate line.

I think that only an Administrative Law Judge can interpret the FARs. But keep trying there. Chachie. Sooner or later you'll find a self serving definition that means nothing in real life, but inflates your logbook.

 

[Beetle007]

It sounds like some of you are advocating cheating the system and trying to use the FAR definition of PIC to back yourself up. That's not what the airline industry is all about. Captain is Captain. Period.

So if you were a flight instructor, you would never let your students log PIC? even if they are rated and the flying pilot?

 

[John Pennekamp]

Ok you win, if you have an ATP you can never ever log PIC time again unless you are a captain for a part 121/135 carrier. I wonder how the corporate pilots flying part 91 with an ATP manage to stay current but I guess it is just a mystery of the FAR's which I will never understand.

And that goes for you too.

 

[John Pennekamp]

So if you were a flight instructor, you would never let your students log PIC? even if they are rated and the flying pilot?

We're not talking about general aviation here. We're talking about a 121 airline.

But to answer your question, I am a CFI and of course I would "allow" my student to log whatever he/she's legally entitled to log. In fact, it's none of my business what he/she logs unless its a student pilot flying on my ticket (solo).

Does that mean anything in the industry? Of course not. United defines PIC as "aircraft commander of a 121 operation or sole manipulator of the controls of a multi engine airplane" and then tells you not to include any PIC time before your commercial license. So could you creatively interpret this to include PIC as the SIC? Probably. But you will be quickly shown the door.

The point is that if you're a Commercial rated SIC in a 121 airplane, you may legally log PIC/sole manipulator and use it to meet the requirements of a certificate or rating, but nothing else. And your SIC time meets the same purpose. So basically, this entire discussion is totally meaningless. Once you're a pilot for a 121 airline, the only reason to keep a logbook is to demonstrate currency, meet the requirements of an ATP certificate, and "build time" for a better job. Creatively interpreting PIC does not benefit either of those needs.

 

[AC560]

In the FAAs eyes why are you logging PIC time after you have your ATP? After you have your ATP, the only flight time requirements reference time served as a captain (not sole manipulator).

The FAA's opinion (or eyes as you call it) on this topic has already been stated on this thread. For you reference here it is again.

I think that only an Administrative Law Judge can interpret the FARs.

You are right here is that interpretation.

We're not talking about general aviation here. We're talking about a 121 airline.

No we are talking about part 61 (61.51 in particular) which covers how all pilots are required and allowed to log their time.

How individual airlines view logged time for application or promotion purposes has nothing to do with the FAR's.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

A designated SIC should not be logging PIC. The captain is ALWAYS the PIC. It will just muddy your logbook. You're not flying Cessnas anymore.

 

[Rekks Inbound]

OK, look at it this way. Is there a single, transport category airliner (other than a 1900) that is single pilot? No. They all require two pilots for heir operation. Therefore the designated SIC is NOT the sole operator of the controls (he/she shares the controls with the PIC) and therefore cannot log that time as PIC.

Or here is another arguement against. A CA upgrade has not completed OE. Can that type-rated future CA log the time he/she flys as PIC? No, because he/she is not qualified in the eyes of the FAA to act as PIC. Just as the SIC is not qualified, even if they hold an unrestricted type rating.

I believe the interpretation given is wrong/incomplete.

Peace.

Rekks

 

[AC560]

A designated SIC should not be logging PIC. The captain is ALWAYS the PIC. It will just muddy your logbook. You're not flying Cessnas anymore.

I don't think anyone is debating for the purposes of advancing a 121 career it is the prudent thing to do.

The idea though at an ATP pilot can longer log PIC unless a Captain on 121/135 carrier, that the regulations themselves don't allow for it, etc. are fallacies.

In short the answer should be yes this is what the regulations allow for, this though is how you should account your time if you wish to get a job or advance for an airline.

 

[John Pennekamp]

I don't think anyone is debating for the purposes of advancing a 121 career it is the prudent thing to do.

The idea though at an ATP pilot can longer log PIC unless a Captain on 121/135 carrier, that the regulations themselves don't allow for it, etc. are fallacies.

In short the answer should be yes this is what the regulations allow for, this though is how you should account your time if you wish to get a job or advance for an airline.

You're missing the point. WHY would you want to log PIC time in an airliner when you were the SIC? What does it get you?

 

[AC560]

You're missing the point. WHY would you want to log PIC time in an airliner when you were the SIC? What does it get you?

None of my comments on the thread if you review it were directed at doing such. My first post was very clear in that being PIC under part 1 has nothing to do with logging under part 61 has nothing to do with getting a job on a 121 carrier.

My comments were to correct the various people who made factually incorrect statements about what is in fact legal to log, nothing more.

 

[John Pennekamp]

None of my comments on the thread if you review it were directed at doing such. My first post was very clear in that being PIC under part 1 has nothing to do with logging under part 61 has nothing to do with getting a job on a 121 carrier.

My comments were to correct the various people who made factually incorrect statements about what is in fact legal to log, nothing more.

I agree that you are correct in that it's legal to log such time. My question to you is why do it? what use is it to anyone?

 

[twighead]

I think that only an Administrative Law Judge can interpret the FARs. But keep trying there. Chachie. Sooner or later you'll find a self serving definition that means nothing in real life, but inflates your logbook.

My interpretation was anything but self serving. According to the letter that was published here, I would be shorting my logbook under my interpretation. And if you bothered to read further you would have seen that I admitted that I was wrong.

The only thing being inflated is your ego from all the hot air comong out of your mouth, Chachie.

 

[John Pennekamp]

My interpretation was anything but self serving. According to the letter that was published here, I would be shorting my logbook under my interpretation. And if you bothered to read further you would have seen that I admitted that I was wrong.

The only thing being inflated is your ego from all the hot air comong out of your mouth, Chachie.

Oh, he slams me! You're messin' with a pro, Cessna boy. Go ahead.

No wait, riddle me this first... what use to you is the PIC time logged as SIC? Going to get that coveted Delta job with it? Or that coveted ATP certificate? Or just trying to meet the insurance requirements so that you can fly a Baron solo?

PS, how's the ass end of an ATR look in HXD?

 

[twighead]

Read again. I was the one who said that you can't log PIC time when you are an SIC. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[John Pennekamp]

Nothing more needs to be said.

That should have happened on the first page of this asinine thread!