299 line check

[727Niteflyer]

but the qualfications are covered in 135, 121 and 61. you have to fullfill the qualifications before you can log it.

 

[brokeflyer]

Does anyone have the definite answer for this? If you are typed, 293 and 297 current, is a 299 required to log PIC time in an aircraft? Basically, can you log PIC if you are not the signing captain? I have read some posts on this, but there are several opinions. I read the regs as that it is legal to log PIC for logging purposes.

log yes, ACT, no.

 

[avbug]

but the qualfications are covered in 135, 121 and 61. you have to fullfill the qualifications before you can log it.

No. You must fulfill the requirements before you can ACT as PIC.

Logging of PIC is entirely another subject.

 

[727Niteflyer]

No. You must fulfill the requirements before you can ACT as PIC.

Logging of PIC is entirely another subject.

so you dont need to be qualified as a pic to log it ?

 

[fr8r]

so you dont need to be qualified as a pic to log it ?

wrong.

§ 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;

 

[fr8r]

The orginal question was how it related to 135. In 135 to be PIC you need to be qualified. If your not qualified why would you want to log it ? 91 is much different.

doesnt logging pic kind of elude that you were the pic of the aircraft.

Ive never heard of an arguement like this in 135 or 121. If your checked as an SIC you can log PIC ?

Logging PIC doesnt mean your acting as PIC ?

This is weird.

With the exception of 737drvr and Pilotyip, I dont think any of the others on here have a clue of what your talking about.

727Niteflyer,
Since when does FAR 61 & 91 have nothing to do with FAR 135 & 121? Also, a .299 line check only makes you qualified to SERVE as PIC. The type rating makes you qualified to LOG PIC.

avbug,
It's nice to see that at least one person on this entire forum gets it. Thanks.

 

[727Niteflyer]

727Niteflyer,
Since when does FAR 61 & 91 have nothing to do with FAR 135 & 121? Also, a .299 line check only makes you qualified to SERVE as PIC. The type rating makes you qualified to LOG PIC.

avbug,
It's nice to see that at least one person on this entire forum gets it. Thanks.

you guys are lost. when you fly 135 or 91 you also fly under 61 and 91 regs. you never ignore 61 or 91 you have to fullfill the qualifications of them all. so to be a pic under 135 for instance, you have fullfill the qulifications of 61 and those listed in 135.

If you are flying under 135 regs you have to have a line check before you fullfill the qualifications of a pic (its the completion of training). sitting in the right seat of an aircraft without the qualification and saying your pic when your manipulating the controls does not make you pic. therefore you cannot log it.

 

[fr8r]

Jeppesen's FARs Explained by Kent Jackson

"There are 2 ways to log PIC time that are pertinent to this question. The first is as the pilot responsible for the safety and operation of an aircraft during flight time. If a pilot is designated as a PIC for a flight by the certificate holder, as required by 135.109, that person is designated as PIC for the entire flight, no matter who is actually manipulating the controls of the aircraft, because that pilot is responsible for the safety and operation of the aircraft. The second way to log PIC flight time that is pertinent to this questions is to be the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated. Thus, a multi-engine airplane flown under Part 135 by 2 pilots can have both pilots logging time as PIC when the appropriately rated SIC is manipulating the controls. We stress however, that here we are discussing LOGGING of flight time for the purpose of FAR61.51, where you are keeping a record to show recent flight experience or to show that you meet the requirements for a higher rating."

Then they say:

"Your question does not say if the SIC in your example is fully qualified as a PIC, or only an SIC. This is important, because even though an SIC can log PIC time, that pilot has not qualified to SERVE as a PIC under part 135. An example of the difference is 135.225(d), which raises IFR landing minimums for PIC's of turbine powered airplanes flown under Part 135 who have not SERVED at least 100 hours as PIC in that type of airplane. SERVED and LOGGED are not the same in this context, and no matter how the SIC logs his time, he has not SERVED as a PIC until he has completed the training and check rides necessary for certification as a Part 135 PIC."

So if you are only SIC qualified under 135, but typed & current in the airplane, you can LOG PIC.

from actechbooks.com with the book available on it:
"About the authors:
Kent Jackson and Lori Jackson are attorneys with the law firm of Jackson, Wade, and Blanck, LLC. The firm promotes and fosters the aviation industry by getting clients through the conflicting requirements of the FAA, IRS, and other international, federal, and local governing bodies. Jackson, Wade, & Blanck, LLC provides extensive assistance in structuring the acquisition, ownership, and operation of aircraft. Jackson, Wade, & Blanck has represented clients in acquisitions from all major aircraft manufacturers including Augusta, Bell, Boeing, Bombardier, Cessna, Dassault, Eclipse, Fairchild Dornier, Galaxy, Gulfstream, Learjet, Pilatus, Raytheon, and Sikorsky. The firm represents pilots and companies in enforcing actions before the DOT, FAA, IRS, and other agencies."

Again, my initial question was about logging time. I know some airlines don't care about that time, and rightly so, but you should differentiate that in your log notes. then you won't have to explain anything to anyone. Let it be know up front that you are not claiming that you have SERVED as PIC just by LOGGING PIC. That you only logged PIC time for the purposes of a rating/experience requirements. Anyhow, I hope this helps.

727Niteflyer, Read the above again... very carefully.

 

[fr8r]

you guys are lost. when you fly 135 or 91 you also fly under 61 and 91 regs. you never ignore 61 or 91 you have to fullfill the qualifications of them all. so to be a pic under 135 for instance, you have fullfill the qulifications of 61 and those listed in 135.

If you are flying under 135 regs you have to have a line check before you fullfill the qualifications of a pic (its the completion of training). sitting in the right seat of an aircraft without the qualification and saying your pic when your manipulating the controls does not make you pic. therefore you cannot log it.

Thanks for repeating my point. But you still don't know what the purpose of logging PIC is for. It is only for the purposes of a higher rating or to show recency of experience. SERVING and LOGGING are entirely different subjects. I guess finding out that you've been doing it wrong after all these years is hard to swallow. I suspect that this is common since nobody seems to know how to read and comprehend the plain english of the FARs. The terms SERVE & LOG have different meanings... do they not? Both terms are used in the FARs. Look it up.

You are also throwing around the term "QUALIFIED" an awful lot. A type makes you "qualified." A .297 makes you "qualified." A .299 makes you legal to sign for the aircraft.

So, in your argument, if a .299 ONLY, makes you qualified to SERVE as a PIC, what is the point of a .297? If you knew the difference between the 2 checks, you would know that the .299 is only for figuring out where the chips fall. The .299 is for legal purposes... it doesn't have anything to do with the logging of flight time. I have flown with several other pilots who have .299s and some of them have had more experience than me... but I was the signing captain. That made me the one who answered questions. that's it. period.

.293 = Oral
.297 = PIC & Instrument Proficiency (Qualification)
.299 = Signing Captain (Legal command for safety and operation)

 

[brokeflyer]

glad I could answer your question. Hope you understand now.

 

[727Niteflyer]

About all I understand is how ignorant you guys are. Ive been doing this for 20 years as a DO or Chief Pilot. If you think the faa is all that, they call me about items.

If you think that you can log time in a position your not qualified for, more power to you. good luck explaining it if any every questions you.

The initial question was not for the purposes of a rating the initial question was refering to logging of time in the 135 world without a 299 ride.

293 has aircraft and oral requirements
297 has aircraft an oral requirements
299 is for the pic qualification.

goood luck

 

[727Niteflyer]

one more thing, that might help. Many years ago down in miami alot of individuals were going into the faa for their ATP with PIC multiengine time logged in their logbook. One Inspector noticed a tail number that was on a 135 certificate. So when they investigated they found that alot of individuals were logging pic time on an aircraft that was on a 135 certificate. Just plain old piston engine multis. and they busted a bunch of them and started looking at how the time was logged and what aircraft were listed in their logbooks. These guys were logging the dead legs as pic. They got in big trouble.

 

[brokeflyer]

its all a matter of how the reg is interpreted. From what you wrote I can understand that point. I've also seen other inspectors say the exact opposite. You can log PIC on a 135 dead leg if you're rated and current and flying the plane, because it isnt under part 135.

I missed part of that original question about it being a 135 leg.

Ill answer the original question diffrently so that everyone will be happy.

When in doubt, don't log anything.

To LOG PIC on a 135 flight you need a current .299

The only way the right seat guy can LOG PIC time on a 135 flight is to be actully flying the plane AND have a .293, .297 AND a .299.

All solved, moving on.

 

[fr8r]

its all a matter of how the reg is interpreted. From what you wrote I can understand that point. I've also seen other inspectors say the exact opposite. You can log PIC on a 135 dead leg if you're rated and current and flying the plane, because it isnt under part 135.

I missed part of that original question about it being a 135 leg.

Ill answer the original question diffrently so that everyone will be happy.

When in doubt, don't log anything.

To LOG PIC on a 135 flight you need a current .299

The only way the right seat guy can LOG PIC time on a 135 flight is to be actully flying the plane AND have a .293, .297 AND a .299.

So the regs must be written wrong? okay?!?!
Again, a .299 is for specifying who can Legally SERVE as In Command.

A .297 is for who is Qualified as PIC(you have to be qualified before you can SERVE as PIC, that is why you never do a .299 before a .297)

one more thing, that might help. Many years ago down in miami alot of individuals were going into the faa for their ATP with PIC multiengine time logged in their logbook. One Inspector noticed a tail number that was on a 135 certificate. So when they investigated they found that alot of individuals were logging pic time on an aircraft that was on a 135 certificate. Just plain old piston engine multis. and they busted a bunch of them and started looking at how the time was logged and what aircraft were listed in their logbooks. These guys were logging the dead legs as pic. They got in big trouble.

727Niteflyer, Simple. It sounds like they were manipulating the controls of an airplane on a 135 trip when they didn't have a .293 or .297, let alone a .299. They deserved that bust. Also, unless they were company persons, they had no business being on the plane. It's illegal. I would say that it was a good catch by the FAA.

If you read FAR 1.1 it gives you the criteria for SERVING as a PIC. If you read 61.51, it gives you the rules for LOGGING PIC.

Now, if you logged 100 hours of PIC in an airplane but had not served as a PIC yet, would you be restricted as a "High Minimums Captain?" Yes, because you have not SERVED as a PIC. This is getting more and more like beating a dead horse.

 

[avbug]

so you dont need to be qualified as a pic to log it ?

One need not be acting as PIC to log it.

One need only be rated in the aircraft, to log it. Category, Class, and where applicable, type.

You are able to read, are you not?

As you being chief pilot...yipee. Clearly you were a chief pilot who didn't have a clue whence he spoke...and clearly you still don't.

 

[fr8r]

You are able to read, are you not?

As you being chief pilot...yipee. Clearly you were a chief pilot who didn't have a clue whence he spoke...and clearly you still don't.

Nicely stated. Or you might be the kind of CP that people are writing stories about on here.

 

[brokeflyer]

So the regs must be written wrong? okay?!?!
Again, a .299 is for specifying who can Legally SERVE as In Command.

A .297 is for who is Qualified as PIC(you have to be qualified before you can SERVE as PIC, that is why you never do a .299 before a .297)



727Niteflyer, Simple. It sounds like they were manipulating the controls of an airplane on a 135 trip when they didn't have a .293 or .297, let alone a .299. They deserved that bust. Also, unless they were company persons, they had no business being on the plane. It's illegal. I would say that it was a good catch by the FAA.

If you read FAR 1.1 it gives you the criteria for SERVING as a PIC. If you read 61.51, it gives you the rules for LOGGING PIC.

Now, if you logged 100 hours of PIC in an airplane but had not served as a PIC yet, would you be restricted as a "High Minimums Captain?" Yes, because you have not SERVED as a PIC. This is getting more and more like beating a dead horse.

thats what i said before, but the experts got all excited.

There is a diffrence between LOGGING and ACTING as a pic.

If you really want the correct answer then call your local FSDO and talk to the POI assigned to your outfit. FAA inspectors interpret the regs as diffrently as everyone else. You need to know what YOUR poi wants and go with that.

 

[fr8r]

If you really want the correct answer then call your local FSDO and talk to the POI assigned to your outfit. FAA inspectors interpret the regs as diffrently as everyone else. You need to know what YOUR poi wants and go with that.

No thanks. That is not their job.

 

[brokeflyer]

No thanks. That is not their job.

Well it was when I worked there. Anyway, glad I could answer your question. Good luck in your flying career.

 

[fr8r]

Well it was when I worked there. Anyway, glad I could answer your question. Good luck in your flying career.

So you are telling me that I should do everything a POI says... I don't think so. If that's how the aviation world were run, then we would be in big trouble. Let me just give you an example: The challenger crash in TEB. They were doing what one FSDO said was okay, because that is how that FSDO interpreted the regs. The regs are the regs. Some aren't easy to understand, but it doesn't mean that you should just ask your POI, and that's the end of the line. That will get you in a lot of trouble. I am not saying that you shouldn't ask them, but take it for what it's worth. They (Feds) are human too.