Good or bad career move??

[Lead Sled]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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