Definition of PIC

[JRSLim]

Looking for opinions on this:
There's two MEIs. MEI 1 works for an FBO with a twin that MEI2 wants to get checked out in - the checkout requirement is 10 hours.

The logging PIC issue has been beat to death, however in this case...MEI 2 will be sole manipulator of the controls and is rated for the aircraft, so can log PIC. MEI 1 is acting as a required instructor, so can log PIC. However since MEI 2 isn' t receiving any true instruction it seems that actually logging dual given would sort of break the rules in that direction. 61.57 states that an instructor can log all time as pic while acting as a required instructor, but only states in (h) Logging training time that only that training recieived needs to be logged.

In other words would you say this is a case of the instructor acting as PIC as per the 61.57 and FAR 1 definition, yet not endorsing MEI 2's logbook due to no real instruction given?

 

[minitour]

Why not just simplify things and have the logbook signed?

-mini

 

[midlifeflyer]

Oh dear. Shaun, you're overanalyzing. For all intents and purposes a pilot who is meeting a 10 hour checkout requirement is receiving instruction and the CFI is giving training.

At least I =hope= the CFI in that situation isn't curling up in the back seat and going to sleep instead of evaluating the pilot, providing feedback, and doing his job.

 

[TDTURBO]

It's the dude with his hands on the "equipment", pissing in the commode, hence PIC.

 

[Fly_Chick]

I agree with MidLife, perhaps there is a bit of overanalyzing.

Hypothetically: A student wants and instructor along because he has not flown VFR in a year. The student is current, all of his flying is IFR flight plans, and wants to make sure before he goes at it alone VFR that he has the radio calls correct and the requests to "transition the airspace" correctly.

Ground work is done to make sure he is familiar with airspace and radio calls.

In flight, he does everything by the book, talks to the various towers before entering their airspace, takes-off, flies, lands without any problems. The CFI does not have to intervene.

Since the instructor was observing the entire time, and ready and available to assist or teach with any deficient areas, I would interpret that to be the CFI can log dual given.

 

[Ralgha]

Looking for opinions on this:
There's two MEIs. MEI 1 works for an FBO with a twin that MEI2 wants to get checked out in - the checkout requirement is 10 hours.

The logging PIC issue has been beat to death, however in this case...MEI 2 will be sole manipulator of the controls and is rated for the aircraft, so can log PIC. MEI 1 is acting as a required instructor, so can log PIC. However since MEI 2 isn' t receiving any true instruction it seems that actually logging dual given would sort of break the rules in that direction. 61.57 states that an instructor can log all time as pic while acting as a required instructor, but only states in (h) Logging training time that only that training recieived needs to be logged.

In other words would you say this is a case of the instructor acting as PIC as per the 61.57 and FAR 1 definition, yet not endorsing MEI 2's logbook due to no real instruction given?

If MEI 1 assumes that MEI 2 knows how to fly the airplane based solely on the fact that MEI 2 is an MEI, then MEI 1 should be stripped of his/her pilot certificates and never allowed to look sideways at an airplane again.

Because of paragraph 1, MEI 1 better give real instruction to MEI 2 during that 10 hour checkout, otherwise the consequences in paragraph 1 should again be applied. If MEI 1 doesn't know how to give real instruction to another MEI, then the consequences of paragraph 1 should be followed.

Because of paragraph 2, MEI 1 better sign the logbook of MEI 2, otherwise, if the insurance company ever sees fit to question the checkout of MEI 2, and looks at the logbook, and finds that MEI 1 didn't sign it, then both MEI 1 and MEI 2 are screwed, refer to paragraph 1 for the proper consequences.

Because of paragraph 3, both can log PIC, though only MEI 1 is logging "part 1 PIC".

 

[Ralgha]

Additional note, if MEI 1 assumes that MEI 2 can fly the airplane just because MEI 2 is an MEI, then MEI 1 is forgetting the number one rule of CFIs:

1) The student is always trying to kill you.

 

[lowlycfi]

It's the dude with his hands on the "equipment", pissing in the comode, hence PIC.

I respectfully disagree. Part 1 says nothing about hands on the controls or even being in the cockpit for that matter. From 1.1:
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;

(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and

(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.

I've had this situation come up during flight reviews, IPCs, checkouts, or when the pilot just wants an instructor along for someone to look over their shoulder. I always sit down with the other pilot before the flight and we decide who is going to be PIC during the flight as paragraph 1 and 2 above defines. Logging is another issue altogether covered in 61.51.

 

[TDTURBO]

I respectfully disagree. Part 1 says nothing about hands on the controls or even being in the cockpit for that matter. From 1.1:
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;

(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and

(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.

I've had this situation come up during flight reviews, IPCs, checkouts, or when the pilot just wants an instructor along for someone to look over their shoulder. I always sit down with the other pilot before the flight and we decide who is going to be PIC during the flight as paragraph 1 and 2 above defines. Logging is another issue altogether covered in 61.51.

You're kidding right?

You mean all this time I thought pissing in the commode while holding your "equipment" meant PIC?

 

[lowlycfi]

You're kidding right?

You mean all this time I thought pissing in the comode while holding your "equipment" meant PIC?

I think there's another word for that. Just remember, if you shake it more than once you're playing with it.

 

[JRSLim]

If MEI 1 assumes that MEI 2 knows how to fly the airplane based solely on the fact that MEI 2 is an MEI, then MEI 1 should be stripped of his/her pilot certificates and never allowed to look sideways at an airplane again.

Because of paragraph 1, MEI 1 better give real instruction to MEI 2 during that 10 hour checkout, otherwise the consequences in paragraph 1 should again be applied. If MEI 1 doesn't know how to give real instruction to another MEI, then the consequences of paragraph 1 should be followed.

Because of paragraph 2, MEI 1 better sign the logbook of MEI 2, otherwise, if the insurance company ever sees fit to question the checkout of MEI 2, and looks at the logbook, and finds that MEI 1 didn't sign it, then both MEI 1 and MEI 2 are screwed, refer to paragraph 1 for the proper consequences.

Because of paragraph 3, both can log PIC, though only MEI 1 is logging "part 1 PIC".

Groovy, I KNEW there was a simple answer.

Thanks for all the replies

 

[midlifeflyer]

You're kidding right?

You mean all this time I thought pissing in the comode while holding your "equipment" meant PIC?

Some folks have no sense of humor. But I'm trying to figure out whose sense of humor is worse: the maker of the bad pun or the one who responds seriously to it.

Pissing In the Commmode, indeed!

 

[lowlycfi]

Some folks have no sense of humor. But I'm trying to figure out whose sense of humor is worse: the maker of the bad pun or the one who responds seriously to it.

Pissing In the Commmode, indeed!

Yah, I got it the first time...and it was funny. Lighten up Francis.

 

[troy]

dork.

 

[TDTURBO]

And she gets SIC time for holding it for me, I don't want to hurt my back ya know. That does qualify as a required crew member in my book.

 

[lowlycfi]

And she gets SIC time for holding it for me, I don't want to hurt my back ya know. That does qualify as a required crew member in my book.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Good one!

 

[Doc Holiday]

DOC (just a coincidence) has an FAR forum and an entire link about the logging of flight time that talks you through several situations all with references to the FARS.

Hope this helps.

 

[crzepilot]

You are already rated in the aircraft you can log PIC and Dual

 

[TDTURBO]

You are already rated in the aircraft you can log PIC and Dual

Even from the bathroom?

 

[JRSLim]

Even from the bathroom?

..Of course, if you aren't in command there, then you're really SOL!

I'm beginning to feel sorry I asked....

 

[midlifeflyer]

I'm beginning to feel sorry I asked....

Why? This is probably the most informative PIC discussion I've seen in years!

 

[Tram]

Just know that PIC "Manipulation of the controls" may be good for some airlines but some of the majors don't count it.. You have to be "Pilot IN command or Aircraft commander" not simply manipulating the controls..

 

[Doc Holiday]

The logging PIC issue has been beat to death, however in this case...MEI 2 will be sole manipulator of the controls and is rated for the aircraft, so can log PIC. MEI 1 is acting as a required instructor, so can log PIC. However since MEI 2 isn' t receiving any true instruction it seems that actually logging dual given would sort of break the rules in that direction. 61.57 states that an instructor can log all time as pic while acting as a required instructor, but only states in (h) Logging training time that only that training recieived needs to be logged.

I'm not at all trying to be a jerk. That being said, you may have read over the regs a little too quickly. 61.57 deals with Recent Flight Experience. 61.51 addresses Pilot Logbooks, or the logging of flight time.

So MEI 2 needs 10 hours for insurance requirements. 61.51(e)(1)(i) states that a person can log PIC if they are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the person is rated. So if the person is an MEI, he is multi rated. If he is manipulating the controls he can log PIC time (assuming no type ratings are required).

MEI 1 is the instructor. 61.51(e)(3) says that an authorized flight instructor may log PIC while acting as a flight instructor. So the instructor too could log PIC.

I do not see any language in the regs that says a person can log only training time that is "required". The only time that must be logged by 61.51(a) is training time that is required to meet the requirements of a certificate, rating, or flight review or the recency requirements (landings to carry pax/IFR). Everything else above and beyond those requirements you could never log. A lot of people do log that time anyway for insurance or to prove to a future employer that they have the necessary experience.

One other thing to consider when two people are logging PIC time in a small aircraft (such as the case above) is how to explain the time to a future employer. It may be worth your while if you are the one getting checked out to make a note regarding the PIC time you logged in your logbook. If they ask about it you could point to the specific flights you logged as PIC and say, "here, here, and here I logged PIC to meet the insurance requirements, but another instructor was with me because of the insurance." IMO that shows maturity and a future employer will respect that.

 

[JRSLim]

I'm not at all trying to be a jerk. That being said, ...........with me because of the insurance." IMO that shows maturity and a future employer will respect that.

Not a jerk at all, in fact thats basically where I was coming from. As Midlife said, probably over analysing it but....
While I definately agree with the position stated that MEI 2, while being the checking instructor on board has an obligation as an iunstructor not to let his guard down, it seems that after the first few flights, assuming MEI 1 is competent and safe, MEI 2 isn't doing much actual 'instructing'. However, as you quoted, he is alowed to log PIC by being the authorised instructor, but that doesnt necissarily mean he has to sign the logbook of the other MEI as dual given since he's really not giving any dual and its not for any requirement other than insurance. Good idea on the memo part.

Thanks for all the replies.

 

[Ralgha]

While I definately agree with the position stated that MEI 2, while being the checking instructor on board has an obligation as an iunstructor not to let his guard down, it seems that after the first few flights, assuming MEI 1 is competent and safe, MEI 2 isn't doing much actual 'instructing'.

A good instructor would find something to give actual instruction on.

but that doesnt necissarily mean he has to sign the logbook of the other MEI as dual given since he's really not giving any dual and its not for any requirement other than insurance.

Doesn't have to, but the insurance company is going to laugh all the way to the bank if MEI 2 cracks up and a claim is filed. Without record of the insurance requirements being met, the insurance isn't going to pay a dime.

What's with CFIs being allergic to logging dual received anyway?

 

[midlifeflyer]

What's with CFIs being allergic to logging dual received anyway?

I've been trying to figure out that part of the thread myself.

 

[Koslen]

PIC = PAIN IN the CRAINIUM!

Not sure on the spelling here. Sorry