3 questions that made me go hmmm :P

[midlifeflyer]

avbug wrote:
*After posting, I note that Midlifeflyer was composing a reply at the same time. After reading his post, and noting the comment about instructors having issues with logging time, it's worth noting that these issues aren't that complex. It's more a case of lazy flight instructors who won't take the time to study or learn the material they're paid to know. Logging and regulation issues are not rocket science, nor are they difficult. A basic lack of understanding of the regulation on the part of an instructor, or any pilot, speaks to lack if professionalism, rather than to the complexity of the regulation.

I'm a little kinder than you (but not much). I understand the initial difficulty in using a concept (PIC) in one way when talking about duties and responsibilities when flying and in another when talking about putting numbers in a book.

But you're right. It's not rocket science and once someone disconnects "acting as PIC" from "logging PIC" and is willing to accept them as two completely different concepts, it's not difficult at all to follow them. Even the regulation itself is in surprisingly understandable language.

Where I start taking issue is with CFIs who, told the rules, shown the rules, etc, don't care and insist that they are right no matter what. I don't think they're lazy though. More like stubborn.

 

[U-I pilot]

one last thing

Ok... thanks for the responses...they clear most all ambiguity i saw in this issue. One last question however, in my personal case, I am in a 141 school working on my commercial certificate. I was previously ASEL, IR. For commercial training we fly a piper arrow (complex). Because this is a commercial training course can I "log" these initial few flights in the arrow as PIC since i was the sole manipulator of controls?
(i now have my endorsement and it doesnt really matter for those few hours but just curious)
-Thanks again for the thorough replys

 

[midlifeflyer]

U-I pilot asked:
One last question however, in my personal case, I am in a 141 school working on my commercial certificate. I was previously ASEL, IR. For commercial training we fly a piper arrow (complex). Because this is a commercial training course can I "log" these initial few flights in the arrow as PIC since i was the sole manipulator of controls?

Here's 4 questions you can ask yourself. If the answer to all four is "yes", you may log the time in the PIC column.

1. Did you have at least a recreational pilot certificate?
2. Did your certificate it say "airplane single engine land" on the back?
3. Was the aircraft an "airplane, single engine, land"?
4. Were you the sole manipulator of the controls?


AFAIK, Part 141 doesn't have or authorize a separate set of logging rules from Part 61.

 

[U-I pilot]

ok...thanks....
that solves that

 

[U-I pilot]

wait a second....

asked MY instructor to bring more fuel to the fire:

by the logic presented before me here, I could log PIC in a bonanza, PC-12, meridian TBM-700 or any single engine land. This dont seem right...
Now after asking another instructor here, the answer is its ok. Who knows for sure, AOPA? FSDO? cause these gray FAR's sure dont.

I guess you can do this but do people that log this time have questions asked later on? problems or snags? whats the catch with this "logged but not acting" PIC

 

[dapilot]

two things for two people...

avbug:

*After posting, I note that Midlifeflyer was composing a reply at the same time. After reading his post, and noting the comment about instructors having issues with logging time, it's worth noting that these issues aren't that complex. It's more a case of lazy flight instructors who won't take the time to study or learn the material they're paid to know. Logging and regulation issues are not rocket science, nor are they difficult. A basic lack of understanding of the regulation on the part of an instructor, or any pilot, speaks to lack if professionalism, rather than to the complexity of the regulation.
^^^^^^^

I'm a flight instructor and a paragraph like that makes people with questions about any confusions about regulations or such, like myself reluctant to ask or follow up on the topic (adding fuel to the fire you can say). This is an aviation message board and we can freely discuss anything aviation related here without worrying about "who's" reading what you write (because almost all pilots have an ego and a pride they worry about so they don't bring up topics like these in front of other flight instructors or students), and it's clear that "you know your stuff" - but alot of us aren't as well-versed or comprehensive about the regulations as you are. I don't want to start anything but I just wanted to say that just because someone asked some questions, you calling flight instructors who don't know these confusing acting/logging PIC rules are lazy and saying they don't take the time to study or learn the material is just wrong. Lots of well qualified, professional, flight instructors and advanced students for that matter understand various topics - each have their own strengths and weaknesses.

I am not afraid to admit I don't know all the regulations by heart and call me a bad pilot if you may but I tell my students if I don't know something, I tell them I will find out for them or tell them where to look to find the answer...


ps - I didn't mean to sound defensive in this post, but i was just standing up for all the flight instructors who feel the way I do

U-I pilot:

I don't know if anyone is going to respond to your last message - if you did read all the other previous posts, you would clearly see the answer to your question. After reading all the posts, the answer seems pretty clear to me, and you as a Commercial Pilot applicant should see the answer as well...

 

[midlifeflyer]

Re: wait a second....

Originally posted by U-I pilot
asked MY instructor to bring more fuel to the fire:

by the logic presented before me here, I could log PIC in a bonanza, PC-12, meridian TBM-700 or any single engine land. This don't seem right...

But it is (unless one of those airplanes requires a type rating).

Now after asking another instructor here, the answer is its ok. Who knows for sure, AOPA? FSDO? cause these gray FAR's sure don't.

Problem is that it's =not= gray. It's been absolutely crystal clear official FAA policy for over 20 years.

As I said before, people have a lot of trouble with it because they just mentally can't or won't accept it.

I guess you can do this but do people that log this time have questions asked later on? problems or snags? whats the catch with this "logged but not acting" PIC

There's no catch for the person who properly logs flight time in accordance with FAA requirements.

Actually, there is a catch. I'm not sure how the FAA would find out, but let's say we go back to the scenario where you're flying a Bonanza with your non-CFI friend who has the proper endorsements. You are a lowly private pilot with no endorsements. You do all the flying but decide you don't feel comfortable with logging the time as PIC. Your friend logs the time as PIC.

No problem for you, but your friend just violated the regs.

 

[avbug]

dapilot,

I'm not criticising those who ask questions. One hallmark of an honest instructor is being willing to admit not knowing something, and then taking the time to find out the answer.

I meet a lot of instructors who don't realize that they're just as green as the primary students they're teaching. I hear instructors babble this or that about regulations or theories of flight, when it's perfectly obvious they haven't a clue what they're talking about.

On a number of web boards, and in hangars everywhere, a common comment is "my instructor said..." followed by a host of misinformation.

The subject of logging is very straightforward. One need only read the regulation. However, if instructors are arriving at a refresher course and still asking these questions, one must wonder what these people have been doing for the past two years (at least) while they plied their trade.

More offensive are the posts that ask questions such as "what are the requirements to be a ground instructor?" This is simple: look it up. But so often I field or deal with questions of that nature...people take no thought but to ask, rather than soiling their fingers in the pages of the books they should already know and understand. That's where my bone of contention takes shape.

You should feel free to throw anything out for discussion. A question on logging time is a valid question, as is anything you feel worthy of throwing out there. If you're going to ask "what makes an airplane fly?", then that may cause some grumbling...you see my point. But a valid question bears no shame.

I hear folks say all the time, "there's no such thing as a stupid question." Well, I'm here to say that's just not true. There are stupid questions. I hear them a lot. Perhaps that's better said as there are unprepared questions that wreak of emptiness of forethought...but it's still just about as offensive, either way it's put.

I don't think anybody here will decry any question of comment you have to throw out there. That's the purpose of these boards: discussion and sharing. Or for some of us (me), it's simply because if we weren't doing this, we'd have to get off my cantankerous rump and do something meaningful...

 

[JediNein]

Many times displaced thresholds are there because the airport community allowed homes to be built next to the runway. Folks move in and immediately start complaining about the noise. So the airport authorities move the runway down. At BFL, the runway has already moved 3,000 feet, and the third runway now has buildings on it.

We're going to see big changes at BFL soon as the first development on the downwind has successfully caused flight restrictions and the second development is right next to the "new" terminal. Hello people, houses= noise complaints=restricted flying... GRRR!

Anyways, ask the tower if the displaced threshold is available for landing. Sometimes you get lucky and a shortened taxi, sometimes they might allow an opposite direction landing or another runway....

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[dapilot]

roger that...

avbug, i understand what you are saying now... and i agree that things that are easily looked up should be looked up, and the gray areas are well meant to be posted...

JediNein...that makes sense as well... thanks for your input on the issue.