299 line check

[StarHustler]

I don't care what the FAA says

Yeah! Who cares what the FAA says anyways!

 

[pilotyip]

Hey, it might be legal per the FAA, but it really does not count as far as being a PIC.

 

[Limeyflyer]

When you make captain, make a new column for Capt.PIC and there you have it. Companies always have an issue somewhere in your logbook with how you entered some numbers, as long as you can explain it you are all good.

 

[fr8r]

I don't care what the FAA says, it is bogus PIC time for your next job. You did not sign for the A/C, you are not making PIC decisions. I have hired some of these bogus PIC times pilots. They are not Captain material. But if it makes you feel good and buys beer in the bar, hey go for it.

I am sure you have hired guys like that... that is unfortunate. Maybe the interview could have gone a little different and you could have figured out that they were not the right person. I don't want to get into pissing match with you, because your mind is made up. But, many guys have been making decisions as PIC because they were flying single pilot long before they did any crew flying. Besides, the 299 check does nothing as far as teaching any pilot new skills to make them a better PIC. All of them that I have flown, the FAA guys sits in the back and does paperwork! From my crew experience, I have no problem flying as the PIC and I have not flown that 299 in our jet yet. Although I have not been the designated PIC, we do switch roles so that both pilots can get experience with this position. As always, the PIC has the final say, but it is good training and practice. I will fly our 299 in Oct. The other pilot flew it last year... so I guess he will have to log FAKE PIC time this year. Does anyone else see how ridiculous any of this is? As far as I am concerned, the 299 is a fun way for the FAA to get out of the office.

 

[pilotyip]

Content of character

I am sure you have hired guys like that... that is unfortunate. I guess he will have to log FAKE PIC time this year. Does anyone else see how ridiculous any of this is? .

If a person logs PIC under 135/121 when they do not sign for the airplane, it is a false logbook entry. It is no different than 500 hrs of Parker Pen time in an airplane they did not fly. They are pretending to be something that they are not. The question is, if those false entries are made what other deviations from expected standards will there be?

 

[avbug]

I finally got the legal interpretaion from the FAA. You can log PIC without a 299, but you have to be current and qualified in the airplane. Also have to be the sole manipulator of the controls. The 299 is also not seat specific. But, you still must have done a 297 since it is the PIC check usually done in a sim. The 299 is only for a signing captain. If you have had a 299 and you are the signing captain for that flight, you log all of it as PIC regardless of what the other guy is logging. So, this is a situation where both pilots can log PIC. Similar to using a safety pilot for practice approaches. This is all straight from the FAA.

I've read the thread, and it's the same old tired comments, virtually every one of which is wrong.

First of all, opinion is irrelevant. The poster asked a regulatory question. Simply put, if the poster is rated in the aircraft, does he need any 135 checks at all to log time in the airplane NO!!! He does not.

Logging PIC, and acting as PIC are entirely different subjects. You do not need to be the PIC, to log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls. This is not disputable, and is clearly spelled out in the regulation, as well as numerous legal interpretations.

Now, as far as your own "legal interpretation," I get the awful feeling that you spoke to someone at the FSDO level and came away with what you thought was an answer. Bottom line here; if that answer came from the FSDO level, even from your POI, it has no weight and no merit beyond a personal opinion. It's not defensible, you can never hold it up to scrutiny or in defense of your actions, and the Administrator doesn't recognize it, nor support it.

If that interpretation came from the regional or chief legal counsel, that's another matter...but as it disagrees with the FAA Chief Legal Counsel interpretations, it would appear you got a personal observation at the lower levels.

Now, from a legal point of view, PilotYip is incorrect. You may log the time. From a practical point of view, Pilotyip is very correct; if you log the time and attempt to use that time toward a 121 or 135 job, most employers will consider it inappropriate, discount it, and most likely view you in a lesser light as a result. If you log it and use it toward a Part 91 job, most employers will count it just like any other time.

Are you legal to log the time? Yes. Should you? That's really up to you. If you're applying to a certificate holder then you will need to be sure to separate the times, and not claim time that you weren't actually the acting PIC.

Back to the legality...I said if you were rated in the airplane (category, class, and if appropriate, type), you could log the time as sole manipulator. I also said you don't need the 135 checks at all to do this. This is true, HOWEVER: you must pass your 135 checks in order to manipulate the controls in the first place.

Your specific question is if you can be a rated SIC (rated in the airplane) and still log PIC legally. Yes, you may. Should you...again, up to you, but be sure you don't hold that time out as PIC to a certificate holder, because it will make you look bad. As a rated SIC, you can log the time as PIC if you wish. You can only do it as sole manipulator, and can only be sole manipulator if you are qualified to manipulate the controls in this case, under Part 135...your SIC checks, at a minimum, must be complete.

People get wrapped around the axle over the differences between logging PIC and acting as PIC. These are very different subjects, and shouldn't be confused.

Remember too that under the regulation, it's the certificate holder that designates the PIC before the flight, and the PIC remains the PIC throughotu the flight. Some pilots try to switch back and forth every other leg, and you can do that as manipulator of the controls...but the PIC remains the PIC, even if you're swapping legs. Sometimes pilots are under the mistaken impression that if they call themselves "cocaptains," they alternate being PIC every leg. In a 121 or 135 operation, this doesn't happen. You can still log it legally as PIC, but unless you're the designated PIC, that's as far as it goes.

Pilotyip is worth listening to on the subject; his advice here is strictly practical. He does the hiring and interviewing at his company, which includes light jets and big jets, and he sees a lot of people come and go. He's giving it to you straight from the horses mouth, as one who is sitting in the hiring seat, and makes the decisions that he's described. He's telling it to you as a benifit; you'll do well to listen.

 

[400pilot]

That's one of the best responses I've ever read on here......

BTW, I'm with PilotYip here. As someone who was once involved in the hiring at a 135 outfit (across the field from PilotYip), I did not want to here about "logged PIC". It meant nothing and carried no weight. I could be wrong, but as far as I know, there are no 121 operators that even accept PIC time when you weren't/aren't the aircraft commander. So really, what's the point? Is it ego? Many 91 operations do care about this as well.......

JMHO

 

[pilotyip]

If someone really wants PIC time go someplace you can get PIC time. There are tons of jobs out there that will get you great PIC time. Places were you sit in the left seat, sign for the airplane, and have the guy in the right seat say, "What do you want do to now Captain?". The PIC discussed here may be FAA legal PIC time, but it is worthless in defining your skills as a PIC, you don't sign for the airplane, you don't make the PIC decisions.

 

[fr8r]

I've read the thread, and it's the same old tired comments, virtually every one of which is wrong.

First of all, opinion is irrelevant. The poster asked a regulatory question. Simply put, if the poster is rated in the aircraft, does he need any 135 checks at all to log time in the airplane NO!!! He does not.

Logging PIC, and acting as PIC are entirely different subjects. You do not need to be the PIC, to log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls. This is not disputable, and is clearly spelled out in the regulation, as well as numerous legal interpretations.

Now, as far as your own "legal interpretation," I get the awful feeling that you spoke to someone at the FSDO level and came away with what you thought was an answer. Bottom line here; if that answer came from the FSDO level, even from your POI, it has no weight and no merit beyond a personal opinion. It's not defensible, you can never hold it up to scrutiny or in defense of your actions, and the Administrator doesn't recognize it, nor support it.

If that interpretation came from the regional or chief legal counsel, that's another matter...but as it disagrees with the FAA Chief Legal Counsel interpretations, it would appear you got a personal observation at the lower levels.

Are you legal to log the time? Yes. Should you? That's really up to you. If you're applying to a certificate holder then you will need to be sure to separate the times, and not claim time that you weren't actually the acting PIC.

I did not say that I got someones opinion. I said that I got a legal interpretation. Also, the legal interpretation is exactly what you are arguing. Also, co-captain is not a legal term in aviation. It is a fluffed up term for a type rated FO and looks good on a resume. I have never heard of anyone calling themself a co-captain for any other reason.

 

[coolarrow]

IF IT IS LEGAL, IS LEGAL it doesn't matter if you approve or dissaprove the FAA said IS LEGAL.
If some of you won't give credit for this type of flight time so what it is LEGAL. As an employer I recommend to keep your mouth shut, if you don't want that kind of applicants just don't hire them don't pick at the subject during the interview just to have something to talk about or you could end up with a law suit on your hands. This type of case will stick in the hands of a very good lawyer and you will have to pay $$$$. CASE CLOSED
(I know the majors like to pick at this, but they have lawyers on staff and have a lot of money and resources to fight for a long time).