It's time for "that" question again

[Flyer1015]

Beaten dead horse, I know, but I just wanna make sure I dont do anything illegal.

To get a FAA ATP one of the requirements is "250 hours of flight time in an airplane as a pilot in command, or as second in command performing the duties of pilot in command."

Now, I'm not saying log PIC time on every leg I fly as FO, as legal PIC time for my logbook. But, too meet the requirements of the ATP certificate, is this doable? Something along the lines of not logging at in the actual "PIC" column, but in the notes, put an asterick and explain as "SIC performing duties of PIC."

It seems some flight schools allow it, like this one: http://www.accessibleaviation.com/index.html

From their Q&A:

If I am a First Officer on a Part 121 carrier, can I log my FO time as PIC towards the ATP license requirements?: Yes, you can log the time for the legs you fly as PIC towards the ATP requirements.

You can use your count your SIC time for the time you are manipulating the controls (your leg) as PIC for the ATP application. You can then get your FAA ATP.

As for their examiners,
Our examiner's are professional pilots. One is a Captain for a Major Airline and the other is a retired military RF-4 and KC-135 pilot who now flies for a major freight airline.

So, the question is, is this doable? I highly doubt any FAA examiner with the authority to issue ATPs would do anything shady or allow illegal flight time. But the way I'm reading this reg, it seems that for the sole purpose purpose of meeting the ATP certificate requirements (and NOT for logging actual PIC), you can use your SIC PF time as performing duties of PIC.



Anyone done it this way before? What was your experience with this?

 

[Flyer1015]

Legal Interpretation # 92-40

June 5, 1992

Dear Mr. Butler:

Thank you for your letter of March 14, 1992, in which you ask
questions about logging pilot-in-command (PIC) and
second-in-command (SIC) time when operating under Part 121 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR).

Your letter presents the following scenario: under a Part 121
operation, the air carrier has designated a pilot and a co-pilot.
The pilot is the authorized PIC and the co-pilot is the
authorized SIC. During the course of the flight, the SIC is the
sole manipulator of the controls for one or more legs.

You ask two questions. The first asks whether the pilot
designated as PIC by the employer, as required by FAR 121.385,
can log PIC time while the SIC is actually flying the airplane.
The answer is yes.

FAR 1.1 defines pilot in command:

(1) Pilot in command means the pilot responsible for the
operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time.

FAR 91.3 describes the pilot in command:

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly
responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the
operation of that aircraft.

There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC
time. Part 61 deals with logging flight time, and it is
important to note that section 61.51, Pilot logbooks, only
regulates the recording of:

(a) The aeronautical training and experience used to meet
the requirements for a certificate or rating, or the recent
flight experience requirements of this part.

Your second question asks if the SIC is flying the airplane, can
he log PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) because he
is appropriately rated and current, and is the sole manipulator
of the controls. Additionally, he has passed the competency
checks required for Part 121 operations, at least as SIC. The
answer is yes.

FAR 61.51(c) addresses logging of pilot time:

(2) Pilot-in-command flight time.

(i) A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may
log pilot-in-command time only that flight time during
which that pilot is the sole manipulator of the
controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated,
or when the pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft,
or, except for a recreational pilot, when acting as
pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one
pilot is required under the type certification or the
aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is
conducted.

(ii) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot in
command time all of the flight time during which he
acts as pilot in command.

(iii) Second-in-command flight time. A pilot may log
as second in command time all flight time during which
he acts as second in command 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.

As you can see, there are two ways to log pilot-in-command flight
time that are pertinent to both your questions. The first is as
the pilot responsible for the safety and operation of an aircraft
during flight time. If a pilot is designated as PIC for a flight
by the certificate holder, as required by FAR 121.385, that
person is pilot in command for the entire flight, no matter who
is actually manipulating the controls of the aircraft, because
that pilot is responsible for the safety and operation of the
aircraft.

The second way to log PIC flight time that is pertinent to your
question is to be the sole manipulator of the controls of an
aircraft for which the pilot is rated, as you mention in your
letter. Thus, under a 121 operation you can have both pilots
logging time as pilot in command when the appropriately rated
second in command is manipulating the controls.

We stress, however, that here we are discussing logging of flight
time 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. Your question does not say if
the second pilot in your example is fully qualified as a PIC, or
only as an SIC. This is important, because even though an SIC
can log PIC time, that pilot may not be qualified to serve as PIC
under Part 121.

An example of this difference is FAR 121.652(a), which raises IFR
landing minimums for pilots in command of airplanes flown under
Part 121 who have not served at least 100 hours as PIC in that
type of airplane. Served and logged are not the same in this
context, and no matter how the SIC logs his time, he has not
served as a PIC until he has completed the training and check
rides necessary for certification as a Part 121 PIC.

We hope this satisfactorily answers your questions.

Sincerely,

/s/ Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division

 

[higney85]

You get to apply your SIC time towards the requirement. Only thing that happens (if you are in upgrade and meet the posted mins) is while in upgrade they ask your times. If you don't have an actual 250PIC yet you can't go to canada until you have it (ICAO). If you have the 250 already you are good to go.... You still have the 100hrs for high mins (PITA) but that applies to everyone. For some reason the crazy stuff happens while on high mins. I really hope the company starts using "green lines" for new CA's and FO's. Nothing like diverting as a new CA with a brand spanking new FO. Shouldn't have that combo happen IMHO.

 

[Flyer1015]

You get to apply your SIC time towards the requirement. Only thing that happens (if you are in upgrade and meet the posted mins) is while in upgrade they ask your times. If you don't have an actual 250PIC yet you can't go to canada until you have it (ICAO). If you have the 250 already you are good to go.... You still have the 100hrs for high mins (PITA) but that applies to everyone. For some reason the crazy stuff happens while on high mins. I really hope the company starts using "green lines" for new CA's and FO's. Nothing like diverting as a new CA with a brand spanking new FO. Shouldn't have that combo happen IMHO.

This I already know. This is how Pinnacle has been upgrading pilots with less than 250 hrs PIC, with the restriction on the ATP that "holder does not mee the PIC requirements of ICAO." No Canada ops for that situation.

However, my scenario presented above does not apply to that situation, because you are presenting a full 250 hrs as PIC *or* as SIC performing duties of PIC. So, we are talking about a regular ATP certificate with no ICAO restriction. Unlike the Pinnacle upgrade case above, here we are talking about having some PIC time, and using SIC time (while PF) to meet the rest of the requirements of the 250 hrs PIC. I stress again, that this time isn't loggable as legal PIC, rather, loggable towards getting a ATP certificate. That's my interpretation of it.

 

[N813CA]

you don't have 250 hours PIC??? I am not talking turbine PIC but just PIC?

 

[Flyer1015]

you don't have 250 hours PIC??? I am not talking turbine PIC but just PIC?

Correct.

 

[higney85]

re-read what I wrote. If you meet the posted upgrade mins (and use the exemption for PIC) you can upgrade. IF you have less than 250 PIC you won't be able to go to canada until you have 250PIC total in your logbook.

 

[Carl_Spackler]

and you get 50 hrs of IOE too.

 

[Flyer1015]

Thanks, but this is in regards to getting the ATP elsewhere, not upgrading at Pinnacle. I think after looking at the ISL and the crappy Pinnacle fence, those hopes are gone. I know Pinnacle allows upgrading with less than 250 hrs PIC.

I'm wondering about having, for example, 150 hrs actual PIC time, and then using 100 hrs "SIC performing duties of PIC" for the rest of the 100 to meet the 250 PIC requirement, as you would have to under Part 61 at a local FBO.

 

[KickItOut]

Flyer,

Where did you obtain the letter on interpretation? I tried looking on the FAA website and could not pull up that specific letter, although the FAA admits that all letters are not available on the site.

Also. Does the SIC need to have a type rating (not an "SIC" type rating because this letter was written well before SIC types were used) to be "properly rated"?

-Kick it