Good or bad career move??

aviator1978

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
93
Total Time
3500+
OK, I need some help here. I'm currently a CFI and have recently been offered a co-pilot position. The plane I would be co-piloting is a King Air 350 operated under part 91. The chief pilot is typed in the aircraft and I am not. The chief pilot is not a CFI. The plane and chief pilot are single pilot certified, but the owner wants two pilots at all times.

So here are my questions:

How will I ever log time in this aircraft? Asking around I have gotten various answers, and the only one that made sense, was to log the time as "Additional Crew". This time wouldn't count towards my total time and couldn't be used for currency. I would simply log it to show future employers my experience.

Is there anyway I can log this time towards total, multi, and for currency?

What would the airlines/charters/fracs think of this experience? If I have 800 total time, and 800 "additional time", would I be laughed out of an interview?

Thanks for any comments
 

CloudyIFR

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Posts
40
Total Time
4200+
61.51
(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A 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;
 

minitour

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Posts
3,249
If the owner wants two pilots, doesn't he want two type rated pilots?

What good is a second pilot if he/she knows nothing about the type. I'd ask for at least an initial type and possibly recurrent training every 6-12 months.

If you can get the type, no worries...without it, what good does the second person do anyway?

Plus, I'd think the insurance would go down with two typed pilots too.

JMHO

-mini
 

CloudyIFR

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Posts
40
Total Time
4200+
Well I think it's a good move for a company to have two typed pilots. However, I've also seen companies that have a second pilot with low time be equally capable with in house training. Low time pilots are very fresh out of school and have good habits and are very trainable. A second set of eyes during approaches, someone to read a checklist etc.... This is why many Part 121 folks have 500 hour guys flying right seat.

I've checked out a lot of folks with 3000 hours or more who are an embarrassment. They are very sloppy, lazy and have lost that edge they had when they started.

Now from the point of view from aviator1978, it's a great opportunity if they should choose to hire him/her. They get a chance to learn more complex systems, learn what to do upon icing encounters and get quite familiar with DP's and STAR's. Also how to deal with their clients.

It's a no brainer, if they are willing to hire then off I'd go!

Curtis
4300 hours
 

Skyline

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Posts
230
Total Time
6400
Flight time

You can log yout flight time as whatever you wish. You just can't use it for currancy or a rating. Let the next employer decide how they wish to value your time there. I would just log it as SIC and leave it at that. Perhaps you could get an MEI then you could log it all as duel given.

Skyline
 

pilotyip

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
13,629
Total Time
14000
isn't the 350 a two pilot airplane, requiring an SIC?
 

Lead Sled

Sitt'n on the throne...
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
2,066
Total Time
> enuf
This is actually one of the more interesting quandaries posed around here for a while. A low-time CFI with an opportunity to continue CFIing or take a job where the time he logs is basically unlogable. [Hummmmm, he said as he stroked his beard.]

I was actually in a somewhat comparable situation. It was almost 40 years ago, back when I just had my PPL and nothing else. I had the opportunity to ride shotgun in an Aztec. The owner was new to the airplane and he was just looking for someone to sit in the right seat and help out with things like the radio. Over a period of a couple of years I got around a hundred hours. A couple of years later I was given the opportunity to get my multi in that same airplane - they were getting ready to trade up and it would be mine to use for the cost of gas "IF" I could get insurance on it while I did my training. I had an aircraft insurance salesman friend who went to bat for me. He contacted the underwriter and told them of my "experience" in the Aztec. The underwrite had me make a notation in my logbook stating what I had done and that the time had not been counted towards my total time, etc. After that I was good to go.

There is obviously some value to be had in flying shotgun in a KA350. If nothing else, it puts you in a situation where you have your feet in the door should an advancement opportunity arise. However, you've got to remember that the FAA really has very little to say with who gets to fly what in today's world - it's actually those pesky insurance companies. Those pesky insurance companies get a little particular who they let fly multi-million $$$ airplanes. I'd hate to see a low-time guy like yourself get in a position where they quit building "useable" time - to be competitive in today's job market you've got to have an ATP and you've got to have a few thousand hours. Remember that.

I can think of several reasons not to do it - basically, it only gets you sidetracked and will, at best, give you some limited advantages. I honestly don't have a recommendation. Hopefully, they'll give you an opportunity upgrade and get typed in the NEAR future. Otherwise, I think I'd say thanks, but no thanks. How's that for dancing around the topic?

'Sled
 
Last edited:

bigD

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2002
Posts
2,020
Total Time
4.9e17
I think the crux here is that 800TT and 800 "additional time" isn't going to help you in the eyes of the insurance companies. If you're not insurable, then anything else is a moot point.

Sounds to me like you're not considering the regionals. If that's true, then you need to keep working on your loggable time. I'm not sure that I'd give up a CFI job logging real time to gain non-loggable right seat time in a 350. Certainly the experience in the 350 is valuable, but at the end of the day you're going to need more total time.

As a data point, my first non-instructing job was as a contract pilot on a Cessna 340. The insurance company wouldn't even look at me until I had at least a thousand hours and a few hundred multi. I'd keep instructing.
 

MauleSkinner

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Posts
638
Total Time
10,000
pilotyip said:
isn't the 350 a two pilot airplane, requiring an SIC?

Depends on whether the captain has a single-pilot type rating, or one that says "SIC required" (or something like that)

Fly safe!

David
 

heph224

Active member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Posts
44
Total Time
Some
he probobly wants 2 pilots for insurance purposes. You can also have two PIC's at the same time. Let's say the Captain is under the hood in VFR conditions, you are a safety pilot therefore you are a required crew member so you can log PIC and the captain can log PIC. However one pilot will be assume PIC responsibilities if something should happen, and that would be the captain.
 

Lead Sled

Sitt'n on the throne...
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
2,066
Total Time
> enuf
heph224 said:
he probobly wants 2 pilots for insurance purposes. You can also have two PIC's at the same time. Let's say the Captain is under the hood in VFR conditions, you are a safety pilot therefore you are a required crew member so you can log PIC and the captain can log PIC. However one pilot will be assume PIC responsibilities if something should happen, and that would be the captain.
How could he be PIC in a KA350 without a type?

'Sled
 

wheelsup

Non-Registered User
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Posts
737
Total Time
>1
CloudyIFR said:
61.51
(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A 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;

I was under the impression that the 350 required a type rating to be PIC. If so, this FAR wouldn't apply.

~wheelsup
 

minitour

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Posts
3,249
wheelsup said:
I was under the impression that the 350 required a type rating to be PIC. If so, this FAR wouldn't apply.

~wheelsup

I also was under the impression that rated meant "Category, class and type if required".

The 300/350 type would be required in this instance, no?

-mini
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
You can also have two PIC's at the same time.

Only one pilot may be pilot in command at any given time. You cannot have two PIC's acting as PIC in the aircraft at the same time. Two people may log PIC under 14 CFR 61.51(e), but only one may be the acting PIC. Logging time and acting as PIC is not the same thing.

Let's say the Captain is under the hood in VFR conditions, you are a safety pilot therefore you are a required crew member so you can log PIC and the captain can log PIC.

Being safety pilot or a required crewmember does not entitle one to log PIC. At best in this case, it entitles one to log SIC. In order to avail one's self of the opportunity to log PIC as safety pilot, one must be capable of and must be acting as the Pilot in Command. In order to do so, one must be capable and qualified, which in this case includes a type rating. In such a case, if one is rated in the airplane (meaning category, class, and type), one is logging PIC under the auspices of 61.51(e)(1)(iii): acting as PIC of an aircraft for which more than one crewmember is required by type certification or the regulations under which the flight is operated...91.109(b).

Your assertion, therefore, is incorrect.

As to the question of the value of the time, there is no such thing as "crewmember time." You might as well log passenger time, or time spent watching aircraft. How much experience do you have, son? Well, I spend a lot of time sitting on the airport fence watching aircraft land. I can spot a bad landing a mile away. And then I ride in them when I can beg a seat. I can tell when the pilot has screwed one up. It's one of my best things. Sometimes I ride up front and then I log it as crewmember time. I know there's no such classification or regulation authorizing or requiring it, but it looks cool, and...

Not what you want to say in an interview.

Is a SIC required because the aircraft is operating 135? No. It's the owner that requires the SIC. As the type certificate doesn't require a SIC, and the pilot is single pilot qualified, that leaves you in the cold with respect to logging the time. Even if the PIC were an instructor, trying to justify hours and hours of instruction in type would look ridiculous in your logbook.

The position really isn't upgradable for you, because no matter how long you sit there, you still can't log the time or show yourself advancing with recorded experience. Much better to find a job advancing with PIC experience in something you're qualified and prepared to operate, like a small piston twin. You need to walk before you run, get the necessary qualifications, and then move up.

Several posters asked why the owner doesn't type. I don't know the owner, and can only speak in generalities...a type rating is expensive. The SIC in this case isn't a required SIC but by the whim of the owner or operator. A type doesn't make someone safer, only legal to act as PIC. One can gain perfectly good training to act in the limited capacity as unnecessary SIC without the expense of adding a type. Owing to the lack of experience, if the position isn't upgradable, then the type would likely be a waste of money for the operator.

Conversely, if you can get the operator to type you, then by all means do so. Not only would the type enable you to start logging some of that experience, but it would also be of significant value in that it enhances your overall qualification.

Good luck!
 

aviator1978

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
93
Total Time
3500+
Thanks for all your comments. Here is what I have come to (as of today) regarding this decision. The owner is willing to pay a per-diem, of which time I might or might-not log (more on this later). This also dances around any sort of contract that a salary might bring. Basically, if I think it is a good opportunity after some flights, I'll keep at it (maybe meet some good contacts). Otherwise, I just say a polite thank you and move on.

Outside of this, I'll keep slugging it out instructing.

Now then for the logging ability. One thing I failed to mention was that the chief pilot was an ATP. I first thought that this didn't matter, but was referred to 61.167 b1 (ATP privileges). Under this part:

an airline transport pilot may instruct other pilots in air transportation service in aircraft of the category, class, and type, as applicable, for which the airline transport pilot is rated and endorse the logbook or other training record of the person to whom training has been given.

So is this a loophole in the logging ability?

Thanks again
 

Donsa320

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Posts
521
Total Time
32,000
aviator1978 said:
Thanks for all your comments. Here is what I have come to (as of today) regarding this decision. The owner is willing to pay a per-diem, of which time I might or might-not log (more on this later). This also dances around any sort of contract that a salary might bring. Basically, if I think it is a good opportunity after some flights, I'll keep at it (maybe meet some good contacts). Otherwise, I just say a polite thank you and move on.

Outside of this, I'll keep slugging it out instructing.

Now then for the logging ability. One thing I failed to mention was that the chief pilot was an ATP. I first thought that this didn't matter, but was referred to 61.167 b1 (ATP privileges). Under this part:


an airline transport pilot may instruct other pilots in air transportation service in aircraft of the category, class, and type, as applicable, for which the airline transport pilot is rated and endorse the logbook or other training record of the person to whom training has been given.

So is this a loophole in the logging ability?

Thanks again

I'll stick my neck out and say...no. You said you are going to be under Part 91....but that is not in air transportation service. That would have be 121 or 135 I believe.
DC
 

minitour

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2004
Posts
3,249
Donsa320 said:
I'll stick my neck out and say...no. You said you are going to be under Part 91....but that is not in air transportation service. That would have be 121 or 135 I believe.
DC

Yep...you believe correctly.

-mini
 

MTpilot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Posts
291
Total Time
2000
If they won't give you a type, it's worthless time, don't bother. Dual given in a 150 is worth a lot more than "additional crew" time. Demand a type. Good luck.
 

501261

Consigliere
Joined
May 27, 2002
Posts
829
Total Time
-
aviator1978 said:
Now then for the logging ability. One thing I failed to mention was that the chief pilot was an ATP. I first thought that this didn't matter, but was referred to 61.167 b1 (ATP privileges). Under this part:


an airline transport pilot may instruct other pilots in air transportation service in aircraft of the category, class, and type, as applicable, for which the airline transport pilot is rated and endorse the logbook or other training record of the person to whom training has been given.

So is this a loophole in the logging ability?

Thanks again
Are you flying under 135 or 121? Is he an "authorized instructor" for that certificate and are you training under that certificate's training program?

Unfortunately you're probably out of luck. Get a ride in the 350 when you have a day off otherwise, have him type you or get another "real" job.
 

Lead Sled

Sitt'n on the throne...
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
2,066
Total Time
> enuf
501261 said:
Are you flying under 135 or 121? Is he an "authorized instructor" for that certificate and are you training under that certificate's training program?

Unfortunately you're probably out of luck. Get a ride in the 350 when you have a day off otherwise, have him type you or get another "real" job.
You hit the nail square on the head. A ride or two will give him everything benefit he'll ever get out of that opportunity - unless, of course they give him a type. However, please don't fall for it if they put a "carrot" out in front of you - "Come to work for us now and we'll send you to school sometime..." Yeah right, like Dr. Laura says, you need a ring and a date.

'Sled
 
Last edited:
Top