Logging time question?

[siucavflight]

Here is a question for you guys, I am new to corporate, where I am at every pilot is typed in the airplane. Can both guys log PIC while flying or does one guy have to log SIC? Thanks for the answers, I am just trying to catch my logbook up, and this is the first plane I have been typed in so I want to be sure I do it correctly.

 

[ditchpilot]

I've been doing the corporate thing for 20 yrs. If both pilots are typed I log PIC only from left seat.
We swap every leg so we keep current as PIC and SIC.

 

[ILOVEBEER]

There can only be one PIC. There is ONE pilot that is the final authority. Just because you are typed does not mean you are the PIC even if you are the "sole manipulator". If your company designates you as the PIC then you can log PIC. If you are a typed copilot then you log SIC. If you are both captains and your company doesn't designate a PIC, then you have to work it out with the other guy.

That being said, it's your logbook and you can do whatever you want to do. You just have to be able to back it up when a future employer starts asking questions.

 

[BEfly]

there is a thread going on right now regarding this. Do a search for "299 line check". It's pretty informative.

 

[avbug]

It's absolutely mind boggling that so many people can be so wrong so often on such a simple subject. Moreover, one that's printed so plainly in the regulation. It's not a debatable topic, and it only requires lifting a finger to help one's self to look it up.

You needn't worry about what anyone else thinks, what so-and-so does, or how someone believes it ought to be. The regulation is very, very clear.

Logging pilot in command time is NOT the same as acting as pilot in command. Only one person may ACT as pilot in command at any given time. More than one person may LOG pilot in command at the same time.

§ 61.51 Pilot logbooks.

(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;
(ii) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or
(iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.
(2) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot-in-command time all of the flight time while acting as pilot-in-command of an operation requiring an airline transport pilot certificate.
(3) An authorized instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time while acting as an authorized instructor.
(4) A student pilot may log pilot-in-command time only when the student pilot—
(i) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft or is performing the duties of pilot of command of an airship requiring more than one pilot flight crewmember;
(ii) Has a current solo flight endorsement as required under §61.87 of this part; and
(iii) Is undergoing training for a pilot certificate or rating.

Just because you are typed does not mean you are the PIC even if you are the "sole manipulator".

No, but that's really irrelevant with respect to logging the time in accordance with the regulation, as acting as PIC is an entirely different subject than logging flight time, or logging PIC.

Acting as sole manipulator of the controls in an aircraft for which the pilot is rated does entitle him or her to log PIC.

If your company designates you as the PIC then you can log PIC.

That is entirely irrelevant with respect to Part 91 corporate operations. "Designation" by the company has no bearing on who can log what. You may be confused with Part 121 or 135, in which the person designated by the company as the PIC remains the PIC for the entire duration of the flight. However, even in those cases, one may still legally log PIC when acting as sole manipulator of the controls, if one is rated in the aircraft (category, class, and type).

The political implications of logging such time, with respect to an interview, are irrelevant when considering what one can and cannot log. One who flies for a 121 or 135 operation may well be advised to avoid logging PIC unless he or she is the acting PIC...but again, that's another subject.

 

[K.V.]

There can only be one PIC. There is ONE pilot that is the final authority. Just because you are typed does not mean you are the PIC even if you are the "sole manipulator". If your company designates you as the PIC then you can log PIC. If you are a typed copilot then you log SIC. If you are both captains and your company doesn't designate a PIC, then you have to work it out with the other guy.

That being said, it's your logbook and you can do whatever you want to do. You just have to be able to back it up when a future employer starts asking questions.

In a part 91 operation, if you're both typed and current in the aircraft, then your can both legally log PIC time (one at a time of course). It doesn't even matter which seat your sitting in as long as you're the one flying (sole manipulator). That "final authority" crap is nowhere in the regs. It's something that some of the airliners made up as a another filtration system. So it's really up to you and the other person your flying with how you want to divvy up the legs.



61.51(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person (i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges; (ii) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or (iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

 

[K.V.]

Damb Bug... you beat me to it

 

[say again]

The almighty, super God pilot Avbug has spoken!!!

 

[avbug]

No, brightspark, the regulation has spoken. If you find it to be your almighty God, then that's your problem.

 

[siucavflight]

K.V. based on what avbug, and the reg says I believe you to be wrong. Sounds like both guys can log PIC in their logbook.

 

[K.V.]

I stand corrected... log away!!

 

[say again]

No, brightspark, the regulation has spoken. If you find it to be your almighty God, then that's your problem.

Names not brightspark, but nice try. Anyway, not talking about the regs being the almighty God, but you. Go back and re-read and you will see that. It's not what you write, it's how you come across as a know-it-all and seem to look down upon people who have a question. You do know that you can log the PIC time being typed and flying, but many companies don't count that unless you've signed for the plane. So yes, it can be a debatable subject for some (but obviously not for the almighty like ypurself).

 

[say again]

You both can log PIC time, but remember that many companies only count the PIC time that you signed for the aircraft. PIC if I sign, SIC if I don't is the way I log my time. Makes for less confusion later.

 

[K.V.]

(2) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot-in-command time all of the flight time while acting as pilot-in-command of an operation requiring an airline transport pilot certificate.


Does a part 91 operation legally require an ATP??

 

[siucavflight]

(2) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot-in-command time all of the flight time while acting as pilot-in-command of an operation requiring an airline transport pilot certificate.


Does a part 91 operation legally require an ATP??

This is a good point, I have my ATP, but we operate the Gulfstream part 91, therefore no ATP is required. My chief pilot said that both pilots can log PIC, but he did not really have a reason other than "you just can". I have been logging my trips on the Gulfstream as all SIC when I am in the right seat, but I am wondering if I could be doing it as PIC, I hope it never matters as I hope to stay with this place for a long long time, but just in case I do have to interveiew somewhere I do not want to be questioned on it.

 

[2000Easyguy]

It's absolutely mind boggling that so many people can be so wrong so often on such a simple subject. Moreover, one that's printed so plainly in the regulation. It's not a debatable topic, and it only requires lifting a finger to help one's self to look it up.

You needn't worry about what anyone else thinks, what so-and-so does, or how someone believes it ought to be. The regulation is very, very clear.

Logging pilot in command time is NOT the same as acting as pilot in command. Only one person may ACT as pilot in command at any given time. More than one person may LOG pilot in command at the same time.





No, but that's really irrelevant with respect to logging the time in accordance with the regulation, as acting as PIC is an entirely different subject than logging flight time, or logging PIC.

Acting as sole manipulator of the controls in an aircraft for which the pilot is rated does entitle him or her to log PIC.



That is entirely irrelevant with respect to Part 91 corporate operations. "Designation" by the company has no bearing on who can log what. You may be confused with Part 121 or 135, in which the person designated by the company as the PIC remains the PIC for the entire duration of the flight. However, even in those cases, one may still legally log PIC when acting as sole manipulator of the controls, if one is rated in the aircraft (category, class, and type).

The political implications of logging such time, with respect to an interview, are irrelevant when considering what one can and cannot log. One who flies for a 121 or 135 operation may well be advised to avoid logging PIC unless he or she is the acting PIC...but again, that's another subject.

For such a simple subject, there seems to be many questions asked regarding this subject. Guess we're just all dummies. Even your reply comes across as convoluted.


Your flying, current and qualified, log PIC.

 

[siucavflight]

Your flying, current and qualified, log PIC.

Are you saying that both guys are logging PIC? Or just the guy flying that leg?

 

[BoilerUP]

Does a part 91 operation legally require an ATP??

No.

Ultimately it is your logbook; log what you want to log, especially if you are logging it in accordance with the FARs. However, be ready to justify everything you write in there in front of an interviewer, FAA Inspector, NTSB panel, administrative law judge, and civil jury.

Call me conservative, but in my two-captain, Part 91 operation I only log as PIC that time when I am PF and meet the Part 1 definition (resposibility and final authority for operation & safety of flight). When the other guy is driving, he is the Part 1 and 61 PIC and logs it as such.

 

[avbug]

Why would you attempt to keep a logbook based on how you think a future employer might classify your time.

I've had a lot of interviews over the years, and I've seen a lot of ways to classify time. I've had some interviews in which my four-engine large piston airplane time was lumped in the same classification as Cessna 172 time...all piston lumped together. I don't try to log according to what one particular employer might want to see ten years down the line; I log in accordance with the regulation.

So far as logbooks, I've had government agencies that spent hours going through them in detail, and other employers under 91, 121, and 135 who didn't look at them at all.

What you should log isn't the same as what you can log, and only you can decide what you should and shouldn't log. If you elect to restrict your logging in a way more conservative than the regulation, you may do so. You're only legally required to log that flight experience used to show compliance with the regulation; recency of experience, and experience necessary for any certificate, privilege, or rating. Beyond that, you aren't required to log the time at all.

 

[siucavflight]

So avbug, please tell me. Can both of us being typed and have ATPs log every leg as PIC being part 91?