Bull Sh*t Resumes

[minitour]

But if I'm applying for an airline years down the road, you bet my PIC will equal total minus dual received minus SIC (if any)... or however they happen to want it.

...at least the way it's presented to them yes.

Which is why I'm a big supporter of electronic logbooks...in the click of a mouse I can show my times that way or the "legal only" way.

-mini

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

dude....i now have 3000+ woopty doo.......i have like 40 hours SIC, sorry if yoru sitting right seat man, deal with it...

 

[A Squared]

ATLcrashpad,

First, you should know that asking an inspector at a FSDO is a completely useless gesture. The inspector's opinion has no authority, meaning or legal standing. As you found out, they don't necessarily agree, and even if they did agree, it would be meaningless. The source for legal interpretations is FAA legal counsel, they and only they have the authority to interpretath the regulations. There are a number of offices of regional counsel and there is the Chief Counsel. That's where you go for answers.

As for the question, what minitour and others have been telling you is correct, you don't have to be PIC to log PIC. personally, I don't agree with this, I think it's absurd to be logging PIC whne you're not the PIC, but my opinion doesn't mean a thing. The FAA's opinion is that it is ok. Below is an official letter of interpretation from the office of chief counsel. It specifically addresses the question of 2 pilots both logging PIC, but it aslo states the FAA's position on acting and logging PIC. from the letter:

"There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC time."

That's the heart of the matter, and you'll see this repeated in other official legal interpretations, the FAA makes a distinction between *acting* as PIC and *logging* PIC. You don't have to be acting in order to be logging.


October 30, 1992
Mr. David M. Reid

Dear Mr. Reid:
Thank you for your letter of June 12, 1992, concerning the logging of pilot in command (PIC) time under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR).
In your letter you ask four questions. First, you ask whether there are "any circumstances when, during a normal flight, two Private Pilots may simultaneously act as (and therefore log the time as) Pilot In Command?" The answer is two private pilots may not simultaneously act as PIC but they may, under certain circumstances, simultaneously log PIC time.
There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. PIC, as defined in FAR 1.1, means the pilot responsible for the operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time. FAR 61.51 deals with logging PIC flight time, and it provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as PIC time only that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated, or when he is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or when he acts as PIC 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. It is important to note that FAR 61.51 only regulates the recording of PIC time used to meet the requirements toward a higher certificate, higher rating, or for recent flight experience.
Therefore, while it is not possible for two pilots to act as PIC simultaneously, it is possible for two pilots to log PIC flight time simultaneously. PIC flight time may be logged by both the PIC responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time in accordance with FAR 1.1, and by the pilot who acts as the sole manipulator of the controls of the aircraft for which the pilot is rated under FAR 61.51. Enclosed please find two prior FAA interpretations concerning logging of PIC time. We hope that these will be of further assistance to you.
In your second question you ask "how shall two Private Pilots log their flight time when one pilot is under the hood for simulated instrument time and the other pilot acts as safety pilot?" The answer is the pilot who is under the hood may log PIC time for that flight time in which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of the aircraft, provided he is rated for that aircraft. The appropriately rated safety pilot may concurrently log as second in command (SIC) that time during which he is acting as safety pilot.
The two pilots may, however, agree prior to initiating the flight that the safety pilot will be the PIC responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during the flight. If this is done, then the safety pilot may log all the flight time as PIC time in accordance with FAR 1.1 and the pilot under the hood may log, concurrently, all of the flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls as PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i). Enclosed please find a prior FAA interpretation concerning the logging of flight time under simulated instrument flight conditions. We hope that this interpretation will be of further assistance to you.
In your third question you ask "during instrument training, how shall a VFR Private Pilot log the following flight time: Pilot In Command time, Simulated Instrument time, and Actual Instrument time, when that pilot is... A)...under the hood? B)...in actual instrument conditions? C)...under the hood in actual instrument conditions?" The answer is the VFR private pilot may log all of the flight time you described as PIC flight time under FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) if he was the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated. Under FAR 61.51(c)(4) the pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions. Please note that the FARs do not distinguish between "actual" and "simulated" instrument flight time. Enclosed is a prior FAA interpretation concerning the logging of instrument flight time. We hope this interpretation will further assist you.
Finally you ask "does FAR 61.57 affect how the VFR Private Pilot shall log Pilot In Command time during instrument training, either before or after meeting the 6/6/6 requirement, and if so, how?" FAR 61.57 does not affect how a pilot logs PIC time during instrument training; FAR 61.51(c)(2) and (4) govern logging of instrument flight time. FAR 61.57(e) provides currency requirements for acting as PIC under instrument flight rules (IFR) or in weather conditions less than the minimums for visual flight rules (VFR). Enclosed please find a prior FAA interpretation on instrument flight time and FAR 61.57(e). We hope this interpretation will further assist you.
We hope this satisfactorily answers your questions.
Sincerely,

Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations Division

 

[Rick1128]

This thread has really gotten off track. The original poster was discussing resume flight times that didn't seem right. It had nothing to do with legal, it had to do with how aviation employers view them. Plus the point that job seekers need to be aware of how employers view resumes. My previous post pointed out that employers do look and compare the flight times with what the pilot's job experience is and where they have been flying. Each pilot is different. So it behoves you to give more details in the work experience section. Example:


06/00 Captain; Zambonee 3100
to XYZ Airlines; Timbuctoo, Somewhere
Present Part 121 Supplemental Carrier, Worldwide International
operations. Started as a First Officer and worked by way up to
Training Captain.

That is much better than this:

06/00 Captain; XYZ Airlines
to Part 121 Supplemental
Present

Next. FAA Inspectors' opinions count just enough for them to file against you if their opinion is that you are in violation. And they do, do that. However, FAA Legal may or may not continue the process depending on their opinion. Something to keep in mind.

 

[starvingcfi]

websitemaster. please delete this thread due to inappropriate content.

i am offended

 

[schoolio]

It had nothing to do with legal, it had to do with how aviation employers view them.

LAWBREAKERS! :laugh:

 

[siucavflight]

websitemaster. please delete this thread due to inappropriate content.

i am offended

Yes I am offended as well, delete it.

Anyone know what the weather is supposed to be tomorrow.

 

[gkrangers]

Anyone know what the weather is supposed to be tomorrow.

Offensive.

 

[avbug]

I called my local FSDO and asked three different inspectors and got two that agreed and one who didn't. So we are where we are. No real answer.

Again, evidence that you don't understand the regulation or the system, else you wouldn't have done that, and you wouldn't have posted that. The FSDO has no authority to interpret the regulation...what you get from the FSDO is opinion, and it's no more authoritative than yours or mine.

What is authoritative is FAA Chief Counsel legal interpretations, as well as the plain English rendering of the regulation. In this case, the regulation is clear, though several legal interpretations are available to further clarify what should be patently obvious.

Why would you call the FSDO when they can't give you an answer, and you couldn't rely upon it or use it as defense, even if they did? What you get is opinion, and it is NOT defensible.

You are firm in your belief that you understand what should be logged and what should not, what should be appearing on a resume and what should not, and clearly you do not understand. You need to take time to understand the regulation more properly, as well as the administrative process(es) and yes, even the hiring process, before you attempt to instruct others in this matter.

So far, your replied just keep sounding more and more ridiculous. Time for a graham cracker break. Learn your material, then chime back in.

 

[atlcrashpad]

Logging time

Avbug,

Why would you not call the FSDO? What are they there for? I bet they can "violate you" if they wanted, so they should know the reg's. I've got my 121 job, I was just trying to point out some hints to help guys keep their resumes out of a prospective employers garbage can. I've said time and time again, I could be wrong on the "Legal" issue, however that is not going to keep your resume from going in the trash.

This is my Final post on this subject.....

 

[A Squared]

Why would you not call the FSDO? What are they there for? I bet they can "violate you" if they wanted, so they should know the reg's. I've got my 121 job, I was just trying to point out some hints to help guys keep their resumes out of a prospective employers garbage can. I've said time and time again, I could be wrong on the "Legal" issue, however that is not going to keep your resume from going in the trash.

Atlcrashpad,

Actually the FSDO doesn't "violate" you, FAA legal counsel violates you, the inspectors only start the ball rolling. Rick1128 makes a good point in that thier opionons may result in violation proceedings being started against you, and that is true as far as it goes, but it doesn't actually add value to the opinions you might get from the FSDO. If inspector A thinks somehting is legal and inspector B thinks it isn't, inspector B will still attempt to start an enforcement on you ... and if it turns out that FAA legal COunsel agrees with Inspector B, the fact thqat inspector A told you it was legal doesn't get you off the hook. Better to find out what the Chief Counsel's opinon is on the matter than to try to sort out 7 conflicting opinons form people who have no authority on the matter.

 

[Checks]

I've got my 121 job

and that means what? Arent you at the regionals? They arent that hard to get on with. Almost like saying:
I've got my fast food job!

Let's see if that really was your last post.

 

[VNugget]

Thanks for shootting up a good discussion about a valid issue with your stupid dickwaving. What else do you have to share?

 

[501261]

I've got my 121 job

That's got to be the quote of the century!

It's also part of the problem, you've clearly got a lot to learn.