Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
FOs logging PIC
- Thread starter flyf15
- Start date
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
indianboy7
I'm Scerrrrd!
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2004
- Posts
- 536
I clicked on this thread thinking it would be some kind of joke, but come to find that people are actually seriously discussing this. How can such a topic go on for so many pages? Even if it was started as flamebait (and I don't think it was), there are still others on here truly arguing that it's ok! Who the hell is teaching you guys this crap?
capt. megadeth
Metal Momma!
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 2,898
skydiverdriver2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Posts
- 74
I think you are all correct. You can log some pic time, but it might not be a good idea, so, why would you want to? One thing though, what seat you are sitting in has no affect on what position you are flying. If the designated captain goes back and sits in a passenger seat, he is still the PIC. And, a check airman sitting in the right seat can log sic, if the left seat occupant is qualified. If he is not, the check airman in the right seat is pic. Also, you can log pic time in the jumpseat, with two fully qualified pilots flying, if you are a designated check airman. So, no more jokes about logging pic time in the jumpseat!
ColKurtz
Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Posts
- 20
I don't usally post, but thought this was worthtwile.
I've conducted interviews and been part of the interview board at an airline we all know and I feel obligated to tell you this.
I would tube your packet in a nanosecond for doing what your doing. It's not Kosher young man.
Be patient, take the first available upgrade, fly safe and play by the rules. Your oppurtunity will come in due time.
By the way, I did'nt read all the previuos posts. Sorry if I've repeated others.
Col Kurtz
I've conducted interviews and been part of the interview board at an airline we all know and I feel obligated to tell you this.
I would tube your packet in a nanosecond for doing what your doing. It's not Kosher young man.
Be patient, take the first available upgrade, fly safe and play by the rules. Your oppurtunity will come in due time.
By the way, I did'nt read all the previuos posts. Sorry if I've repeated others.
Col Kurtz
embdrvr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2002
- Posts
- 430
I'd pay $100 to be in the room when some sh:t for brains that logged any PIC time as an FO is interviewing for a job at a major.
It's real simple fella's.
The PIC is the guy designated by the company on the release as captain.
The PIC is the guy who has passed upgrade training which at many companies culminates with a line check performed by an FAA Inspector.
The PIC holds an ATP with the appropriate type rating.
The PIC is the one who will answer to the company in the event anything out of the ordinary occurs on the flight.
There is only one PIC on any flight.
You can carry on all you want about being the sole manipulator of the controls but you will be sent home from an interview the moment you try to fraudulently pass off your FO time as anything other than SIC.
I'm really starting to miss the days when you needed more than a 1000 hours and a pulse to get hired as an FO. I can't believe this thread exists. Is anyone really stupid enough to think that you can log PIC in the Part 121 environment without being the captain?
It's real simple fella's.
The PIC is the guy designated by the company on the release as captain.
The PIC is the guy who has passed upgrade training which at many companies culminates with a line check performed by an FAA Inspector.
The PIC holds an ATP with the appropriate type rating.
The PIC is the one who will answer to the company in the event anything out of the ordinary occurs on the flight.
There is only one PIC on any flight.
You can carry on all you want about being the sole manipulator of the controls but you will be sent home from an interview the moment you try to fraudulently pass off your FO time as anything other than SIC.
I'm really starting to miss the days when you needed more than a 1000 hours and a pulse to get hired as an FO. I can't believe this thread exists. Is anyone really stupid enough to think that you can log PIC in the Part 121 environment without being the captain?
embdrvr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2002
- Posts
- 430
Seems like she could have saved a lot of button pushing by just turning to the pages containing your IOE entries.
fartknocker
Pitot Heat Operator
- Joined
- May 23, 2004
- Posts
- 203
embdrvr said:
These are good responses. Don't log PIC time when you are clearly the SIC in a two pilot airplane. Sole manipulator of the controls doesn't apply when you are the SIC. There is only one PIC, and you aren't it.
Private Pilot - getting their complex endorsement in a Cessna 172RG. During the training can they log PIC?
If you can get this answer correct then you'll able to get the FO logging PIC answer correct. Everybody is VERY confused about the fact that the regulations specifically differentiate between ACTING as PIC and LOGGING PIC. The fact that you are LOGGING PIC does not, ipso facto, make you PIC.
AAflyer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 1,493
As pilot typed inthe 767, and sitting in hte left seat of a 767 as a FB, I could not log PIC time. My name was not the PIC on the release. Part 121 my friend.
AAflyer
P.S. You can put anything you want in your logbook, however at the interview when it is reviewed you may not ge the job.
RedTailSwinger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2006
- Posts
- 55
If you are appropriately rated you can log your legs as PIC even during part 121 ops. The regs and legal interpretation SPECIFICALLY allow you to log this but it is not industry standard.
Only log what you are comfortable explaining in an interview. Anyone who holds it against you for understanding the regs is incompetent. That being said, life is not fair and it is easiest to conform to industry standards.
If your type rating says you are limited to SIC privileges I wouldn’t log anything as PIC. You might be able to argue it in a court of law, but probably not during an interview.
Only log what you are comfortable explaining in an interview. Anyone who holds it against you for understanding the regs is incompetent. That being said, life is not fair and it is easiest to conform to industry standards.
If your type rating says you are limited to SIC privileges I wouldn’t log anything as PIC. You might be able to argue it in a court of law, but probably not during an interview.
In my humble opinion...
First, I think this thread is total bunk and flamebait.
If it's not, then I think it clearly illustrates the 'sixth' hazardous attitude, what I call the 'Double-Negative Fallacy' Hazardous Attitude: "It DOESN'T say I CAN'T do it, therefore it must be okay to do it." In this case, two negatives absolutely do not make a positive.
What I find interesting about this behavior is that, unlike the other 5 which appear be extensions of one's base personality, the sixth appears to be learned AFTER one's start in aviation. Examples are set by instructors, hangar buddies, and employers.
Read the regs thoroughly to get the big picture and apply a healthy dose of common sense. Anything less, and as someonoe mentioned in a prior post, you're just "looking for a shortcut." Eventually it WILL catch up with you.
My 2 cents.
Jim
******************************************
I suppose if you must shoehorn this into the Five Hazardous Attitudes, I think it's a blend of #1 and #4 (summarized below).
Hazardous Attitudes
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]1. Antiauthority ("Don't tell me!") - Don't like anyone telling him/her what to do. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Resentful of rules & regulations[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1].[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]2. Impulsivity ("Do something - do it now!") - Need to do something, anything, quickly. Don't stop to think about better alternatives.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]3. Invulnerability ("It won't happen to me.") - Accidents happen to other people, not to me. Therefore, I can take chances.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]4. Macho ("I can do it.") - Always trying to prove themselves better than others. Take risks and try to impress others.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]5. Resignation ("What's the use?") - I really can't make a difference. It's going to happen anyway, why bother? Leave actions to others.[/SIZE][/FONT]
First, I think this thread is total bunk and flamebait.
If it's not, then I think it clearly illustrates the 'sixth' hazardous attitude, what I call the 'Double-Negative Fallacy' Hazardous Attitude: "It DOESN'T say I CAN'T do it, therefore it must be okay to do it." In this case, two negatives absolutely do not make a positive.
What I find interesting about this behavior is that, unlike the other 5 which appear be extensions of one's base personality, the sixth appears to be learned AFTER one's start in aviation. Examples are set by instructors, hangar buddies, and employers.
Read the regs thoroughly to get the big picture and apply a healthy dose of common sense. Anything less, and as someonoe mentioned in a prior post, you're just "looking for a shortcut." Eventually it WILL catch up with you.
My 2 cents.
Jim
******************************************
I suppose if you must shoehorn this into the Five Hazardous Attitudes, I think it's a blend of #1 and #4 (summarized below).
Hazardous Attitudes
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]1. Antiauthority ("Don't tell me!") - Don't like anyone telling him/her what to do. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Resentful of rules & regulations[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1].[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]2. Impulsivity ("Do something - do it now!") - Need to do something, anything, quickly. Don't stop to think about better alternatives.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]3. Invulnerability ("It won't happen to me.") - Accidents happen to other people, not to me. Therefore, I can take chances.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]4. Macho ("I can do it.") - Always trying to prove themselves better than others. Take risks and try to impress others.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]5. Resignation ("What's the use?") - I really can't make a difference. It's going to happen anyway, why bother? Leave actions to others.[/SIZE][/FONT]
zawillif
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Posts
- 602
Yet somehow, the thread continues. .
You and Redtail hit the nail on the head. It bothers me that so few pilots understand how the regs relate to pilot logbooks. Of course, it is not really their fault because the regulations aren't clear.
If the pilot is the "sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated" then he/she can legally log PIC time. Specifically this PIC time can be logged for purposes of FAR 61.51, where you are keeping a record to show recent flight experience or to show that you meet the requirements for a higher rating.
For example, if an appropriately rated pilot is receiving training they can log PIC even if they aren’t landing current, in IMC without an instrument rating, don't have a complex/high performance/tailwheel sign off in their logbook, or any other similar situation. Even if they aren't allowed to act as PIC under 121 or 135 regs they can still log it as PIC if they are appropriately rated and the sole manipulator of the controls
It is up to each airline, insurance company, employer to determine how they will interpret your logbook. Many competent employers are now stating their expectations clearly in the applications. So read the fine print before you show up for an interview or fill in your flight times. For example, some airlines don’t count any PIC you earned while soloing as a student pilot. But I’m guessing most of you that trained in the late 90s logged it as PIC. On the flip side, most government pilot jobs specifically allow you to include the PIC time that we are currently debating (i.e., earned while acting as SIC).
Like redtail said, log what you are comfortable discussing in an interview. It could make or break you if you don't have a good understanding of the regs. But it could also piss off an interviewer if you start lecturing/correcting them on their understanding of the regs. No one understands them completely and people don't like to be proven wrong.
Mercury
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2003
- Posts
- 233
Flyf15 and CFIse,
I'm ashamed that I am even gonna participate in this thread, but, while you are laying in bed at night all warm and fuzzy over how much bogus PIC time you are logging, here are a few examples of pilot qualifications to consider:
From the FedEx qualifications page: (pilot.fedex.com)
1500 hours total fixed-wing time as pilot-in-command (PIC) or second-in-command in multi-engine turbo-prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof, including a minimum of 1000 hours total fixed-wing pilot-in-command in multi-engine turbo prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof.
Note: PIC for this purpose is defined as Captain/Aircraft Commander of record, not simply the sole manipulator of the controls.
From the Southwest Qualifications Page:
Additionally, a minimum of 1,300 hours in Turbine aircraft as the Pilot in command(3), as defined below is required.
(3)Southwest Airlines defines "Pilot in Command" for the purposes of application for employment as the Pilot ultimately responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight. The Pilot in Command should also be the Pilot who signed for the aircraft and who is the ultimate authority for the operation of that flight. For military personnel, Southwest Airlines will allow flight time logged as "Pilot In Command" (PIC) only if you are the Captain/Aircraft Commander, Evaluator, or Instructor Pilot. Primary time will only be considered PIC on a specific aircraft after an individual upgrades to Aircraft Commander in the appropriate aircraft. Time logged, as "Other Time" will not be considered. When converting taxi time a conversion factor of .3 or eighteen minutes, per leg/sortie should be used. These guidelines are imposed by Southwest Airlines for the purpose of standardizing the calculation of flight time.
FAR Part 1 and 61 aside, You need to quit being so narrow minded and think about the long term impact this could have on your career goals.
I'm ashamed that I am even gonna participate in this thread, but, while you are laying in bed at night all warm and fuzzy over how much bogus PIC time you are logging, here are a few examples of pilot qualifications to consider:
From the FedEx qualifications page: (pilot.fedex.com)
1500 hours total fixed-wing time as pilot-in-command (PIC) or second-in-command in multi-engine turbo-prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof, including a minimum of 1000 hours total fixed-wing pilot-in-command in multi-engine turbo prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof.
Note: PIC for this purpose is defined as Captain/Aircraft Commander of record, not simply the sole manipulator of the controls.
From the Southwest Qualifications Page:
Additionally, a minimum of 1,300 hours in Turbine aircraft as the Pilot in command(3), as defined below is required.
(3)Southwest Airlines defines "Pilot in Command" for the purposes of application for employment as the Pilot ultimately responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight. The Pilot in Command should also be the Pilot who signed for the aircraft and who is the ultimate authority for the operation of that flight. For military personnel, Southwest Airlines will allow flight time logged as "Pilot In Command" (PIC) only if you are the Captain/Aircraft Commander, Evaluator, or Instructor Pilot. Primary time will only be considered PIC on a specific aircraft after an individual upgrades to Aircraft Commander in the appropriate aircraft. Time logged, as "Other Time" will not be considered. When converting taxi time a conversion factor of .3 or eighteen minutes, per leg/sortie should be used. These guidelines are imposed by Southwest Airlines for the purpose of standardizing the calculation of flight time.
FAR Part 1 and 61 aside, You need to quit being so narrow minded and think about the long term impact this could have on your career goals.
Last edited:
BoilerUP
Citation style...
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2003
- Posts
- 5,311
Bears repeating, and thats no small feat...
acaTerry
SAPM
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Posts
- 2,393
This reeks of the "fast track" SJS-having high school mentality of todays new regional pilot. I'm not talking about those of you who were the kid at the airport fence. I'm talking about the ones who got everything handed to them for free, got tired of "working" after high school, and decided that "that airline pilot stuff looks pretty cool" and took out a huge loan, wasted half of it on a pea-nus car, were "happy to fly a jet" at 350 hrs, and are now unsatisfied with being SIC. So what to do? "I KNOW!! I'll log PIC because of a loophole (which is what your life is all about--shortcuts) and pretend that I am the Captain".
It has nothing to do with the Captains ego. It has to do with the low-caliber pilot that make-believes they are PIC and log it. I'd bet may hat and a$$ that the people who are FOs and log PIC are the same ones who are making porn threads on this board...the "I want it NOW" generation who think that honest hard work is for suckers and that finding loopholes and screwing others out of jobs, etc is OK.
It has nothing to do with the Captains ego. It has to do with the low-caliber pilot that make-believes they are PIC and log it. I'd bet may hat and a$$ that the people who are FOs and log PIC are the same ones who are making porn threads on this board...the "I want it NOW" generation who think that honest hard work is for suckers and that finding loopholes and screwing others out of jobs, etc is OK.
Last edited:
No the FAR's allow you to legally log it, the carriers don't accept it for employment considerations which is why they define what they call PIC. There is a difference between acting as PIC and logging PIC.
Again I am not saying it is a smart thing to do if you want to get hired by a carrier, but it isn't a FAR violation.
acaTerry
SAPM
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Posts
- 2,393
It says to the interviewers:
"Hi, my name is ______. I am a loser because I have to pretend to be something I am not. See, I can not accept my role as SIC, and to make myself feel better, I log PIC even though I am not in command of anything whatsoever. I don't believe in the rank-and-file system that has been proven in over 50 years of airline flying. I was able to advance quickly by screwing other airline pilots by flying for an alter-ego carrier, but I can't shortcut the seniority system and screw someone out of their CA seat to get myself a job that I have not yet earned. In fact, I am barely qualified to be SIC on this jet, after all, I only have 500 hours, 350 of it in light pistons with an MTOW of 2370 lbs. I'd also like to point out that I will bring my self-imposed authority into the cockpit of everyone I fly with here at your major airline. And if any of your Captains are older then me, I'll really get indignant. See, I MUST be good. After all, ABC flight academy told me that I am a great pilot and know my FARs. It was in the chief CFIs letter he wrote for me.
One final point I'd like to make is that I am cool. I have this really sweet IPod that has enough memory for me to do a whole month of reserve without ever hearing the same tune twice. Along with that are my sweet pimpin' blue sunglasses, handily worn on my epaullets. Slap the backpack on and CHECK ME OUT!!! I look forward to working with you"
"Hi, my name is ______. I am a loser because I have to pretend to be something I am not. See, I can not accept my role as SIC, and to make myself feel better, I log PIC even though I am not in command of anything whatsoever. I don't believe in the rank-and-file system that has been proven in over 50 years of airline flying. I was able to advance quickly by screwing other airline pilots by flying for an alter-ego carrier, but I can't shortcut the seniority system and screw someone out of their CA seat to get myself a job that I have not yet earned. In fact, I am barely qualified to be SIC on this jet, after all, I only have 500 hours, 350 of it in light pistons with an MTOW of 2370 lbs. I'd also like to point out that I will bring my self-imposed authority into the cockpit of everyone I fly with here at your major airline. And if any of your Captains are older then me, I'll really get indignant. See, I MUST be good. After all, ABC flight academy told me that I am a great pilot and know my FARs. It was in the chief CFIs letter he wrote for me.
One final point I'd like to make is that I am cool. I have this really sweet IPod that has enough memory for me to do a whole month of reserve without ever hearing the same tune twice. Along with that are my sweet pimpin' blue sunglasses, handily worn on my epaullets. Slap the backpack on and CHECK ME OUT!!! I look forward to working with you"
This is the funniest thread I've ever read. I don't know what is making me laugh more:
a) the fact that there are 8 pages worth of replies from riddle nerds, and the like, quoting regs and thinking the OP was serious OR
b) the fact that there are so many people replying, quoting regs, who don't actually understand them.
I love flightinfo. Please, keep it coming guys. Hopefully, I've made a spelling/grammatical error so we can get at least 3 more pages out of this thread.
a) the fact that there are 8 pages worth of replies from riddle nerds, and the like, quoting regs and thinking the OP was serious OR
b) the fact that there are so many people replying, quoting regs, who don't actually understand them.
I love flightinfo. Please, keep it coming guys. Hopefully, I've made a spelling/grammatical error so we can get at least 3 more pages out of this thread.
It's Flame bait guys! Look at the aircraft types flown! Man I wish I was a fisherman or a hunter as you guys take bait hook, line sinker! You all would be stuffed and mounted on the wall over my fireplace!
Name one thing I said that was incorrect in my previous post?
A lot of new pilots look to this forum for accurate information. We should at least be helpful rather than resort to name calling and extreme sarcasm. Some of you imply that someone who wants to follow the regs is somehow lower than you. I disagree.
My personal OPINION, is that people should log what has become industry standard. It is the cleanest and won't cause you any problems. But if a company tells you that you fail to meet the PIC requirements, I wouldnt hesitate to ask if they will count your legally logable PIC time when you were acting as a SIC. Also your resume should differentiate if you are including PIC time while acting as a SIC. Unfortunately some uninformed people will look down on you and not understand why would would do such a thing.
A lot of new pilots look to this forum for accurate information. We should at least be helpful rather than resort to name calling and extreme sarcasm. Some of you imply that someone who wants to follow the regs is somehow lower than you. I disagree.
My personal OPINION, is that people should log what has become industry standard. It is the cleanest and won't cause you any problems. But if a company tells you that you fail to meet the PIC requirements, I wouldnt hesitate to ask if they will count your legally logable PIC time when you were acting as a SIC. Also your resume should differentiate if you are including PIC time while acting as a SIC. Unfortunately some uninformed people will look down on you and not understand why would would do such a thing.
Edge540
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Posts
- 149
Oh dear god. Do you realize what is coming out of your mouth? Logging PIC and SIC, that will be fun to explain.
I have always said people were stupid, but holy sh*t. I expected more from the pilot group than this thread. Regs are never completely black and white, but this one I feel is pretty clear.
YOU CANNOT LOG PIC TIME WHEN YOU ARE A FO!!!! Look on the back of your license, does it say SIC Type Rating??? Do you know what that means? It means that when you are on a repo and the captain is taking a sh*t in the back YOU STILL CAN'T LOG PIC!!!!! Why? because you are not rated for it.
Now lets say you have an actual type in the plane. You are an FO. The only way you could log PIC is if you were on a 91 flight of some sort. Then you would have some options, but not many. Good luck with that.
Share this page
Latest posts
-
FYI Storage and Endurance Testing of the TCW IBBS 3AH battery
- Latest: Cactus Charlie
-
-
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
