king air f/o 30k

[jws717]

i just saw a post on planejobs for a corprate king air F/O adevertising 30k as start pay? Can this pilot eaven log SIC under a part 91 opp? If not why the highpay for someone who is not a required crew memeber? NOT that i have a problem with a company that respects safety and employees

 

[Flying Illini]

what kind of King Air? The 300 models on up require 2 pilots.

 

[billy2331]

I'm not positive but I thought even the 300 series were single pilot certified. My understanding is that under part 91 the only way a second-pilot could log time is when he/she was rated and current and the sole manipulator of the controls and then log PIC. Can't get away with any SIC under 91.

 

[Stearmandriver]

<< If not why the highpay...>>

30k is high pay? For 91, not 135?
Yikes!

Joe

 

[I Hate Freight]

You can log SIC time if the insurance policy requires an SIC.

 

[7B2]

FAR 61.51(f) allows the second-in-command to log flight time as second in command (SIC) as follows:

(f) Logging second-in-command flight time. A person may log second-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person:

(1) Is qualified in accordance with the second-in-command requirements of § 61.55 of this part, and occupies a crewmember station in an aircraft that requires more than one pilot by the aircraft's type certificate; or

(2) Holds the appropriate category, class, and instrument rating (if an instrument rating is required for the flight) for the aircraft being flown, and more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted.

In order to log second-in-command flight time, the SIC must be a required flight crewmember by regulation or type certification. Required by the company, insurance carrier, customer, PIC, etc. does not count

 

[CL60]

required crewmember

Flying Illini is correct. The 300 series and up are over 12,500#'s.

If its a smaller K/A he can probably get away with logging PIC, (if he's rated in type). SIC is not required under type and therefore cannot be logged.

As for the money...

 

[Kingairrick]

The 300 and 350 do not require an SIC. The weight has nothing to do with it. Even though they are "Large Transport Catagory" Aircraft, they are certified as single pilot aircraft. I'm reasonably sure even the 1900s can be operated part 91 single pilot. Almost all 300/350 (same type rating) pilots take the check ride single pilot. I'm sure there are a few who have "sic required" on their certificates, but I've never seen one.

Insurance has nothing to do with logging SIC time. The FARs don't say anything about insurance requirements. In fact, insurance is not required to legally fly an aircraft.

As for $30K, most operators in our area use FOs in their King Airs, even the 90s. Most use day contract pilots and pay around $200 per day. I know a couple of guys who fly 15-20 days a month at that rate. I always use the same person and we average 13-14 days per month which would be low $30Ks for my FO.

 

[FracCapt]

Even though they are "Large Transport Catagory" Aircraft, they are certified as single pilot aircraft. I'm reasonably sure even the 1900s can be operated part 91 single pilot. Almost all 300/350 (same type rating) pilots take the check ride single pilot. I'm sure there are a few who have "sic required" on their certificates, but I've never seen one.

Yes, the Beech 1900 can be operated single pilot. I flew one for a 135 freight operator and we operated them single pilot. In any case, you must have less than 10 passenger seats(or maybe it's 10 or less, I don't recall which). Most Beech 1900 type ratings are issued with the "SIC Required" limitation due to the fact that most pilots with a 1900 type rating are(or were) flying them 121 which required an SIC(due to the number of seats).

Same with the 300/350....but I don't think they have ever put enough seats in those to require an SIC.

 

[Kingairrick]

Here's where it gets a little strange...
The 300 is certified under SFAR 41. The 350 is certified under part 23 "commuter aircraft." Why? Because they didn't have part 23 when they built the 300's. Now, the regs (91.531) say that you can operate a SFAR 41 aircraft single pilot if it certified that way. Mine has 2 pilot seats and 10 passenger seats when the seats are installed in the baggage area. The same section says that you can operate a part 23 aircraft single pilot is it is certified that way, and it has 9 or less passenger seats.

So, I can fly my 300 single pilot with 10 seats in the back, but not a 350. Here's the question: The 1900D is a part 23 aircraft. What is the 1900C? If it is sfar41, Can you fly it with 10 seats? FracCapt? Anyone? Bueler?

Perfect example of crazy regs.

 

[flx757]

You can log SIC time if the insurance policy requires an SIC.

NEGATIVE...For about the 1,000,000,000th time. Man.....oh well, what's the point........

I think maybe this board has run it's time of useful consciousness. I may lurk about, and check back in from time to time, but this has got to be a sign it's time for me to join some of the other long timers who have moved on.

C y'all..

 

[NJA Capt]

Here's where it gets a little strange...
The 300 is certified under SFAR 41. The 350 is certified under part 23 "commuter aircraft." Why? Because they didn't have part 23 when they built the 300's.

Huh? FAR 23 was 1965.
The KA300 was built on a waiver from FAR 23.

From the Type Certificate Data Sheet:
Model 300/300LW
1. Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 41C, effective September 13, 1982 see NOTE 8; part 23 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) effective February 1, 1965


Model B300
1. FAR Part 23 effective February 1, 1965, as amended by Amendments 23-1 through 23-34;

A24CE, Rev. 86 Page 30 of 39
VIII - Model B300, Super King Air 350 (Commuter Category), Approved December 12, 1989
Minimum Crew One pilot

A24CE, Rev. 86 Page 22 of 39
VI - Model 1900, Model 1900C (cont’d)
Minimum Crew One pilot

A24CE, Rev. 86 Page 37 of 39
IX - Model 1900D (cont’d) Minimum Crew One pilot

A24CE, Rev. 86 Page 24 of 39
Data Pertinent to Models 1900 and 1900C (cont’d) Certification Basis (cont’d) (Model 1900 Series) 23.1583(c)(3), 23.1583(c)(4), 23.1587(a)(1), 23.1587(a)(3), 23.1587(a)(4), 23.1587(a)(6), 23.1587(a)(7), 23.1587(a)(8), 23.1587(d) - Part 36 through Amendment 36-20.

http://www.raytheonaircraft.com/beechcraft/king_air_40th/timeline.pdf
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/

 

[Flying Illini]

NEGATIVE...For about the 1,000,000,000th time. Man.....oh well, what's the point........

I think maybe this board has run it's time of useful consciousness. I may lurk about, and check back in from time to time, but this has got to be a sign it's time for me to join some of the other long timers who have moved on.

C y'all..

You can LOG whatever you want, however you want. The problem comes when you take your logbook in for that interview. It's not legally acceptable time so you'd better not act surprised when it is discredited. Personally I think the regs should be re-written to include a section that authorizes an SIC if the company/PIC/insurance/passengers require one. It blows chunks to be a required crew member in the eyes of everyone but the regs. It's nice that most of the captains I fly with let me do all the flying so I can log it but I do have several hours of 91 SIC time that won't count when I go for my ATP. Oh well.

For you 300/350 drivers, can the SIC (i didn't know that it was single pilot certified) log PIC since the aircraft is over 12,5 when the sole manipulator?

 

[Timebuilder]

You can log SIC time if the insurance policy requires an SIC.

You can log anything you want.

However, I would stick to the regs if angling for an airline job, or anticipate an "interview" situation at some point.

Then I would not log SIC for insurance requirements. I would log it only if the aircraft type requires an SIC or if the regulations under which the operation is being conducted requires an SIC.

 

[Kingairrick]

For you 300/350 drivers, can the SIC (i didn't know that it was single pilot certified) log PIC since the aircraft is over 12,5 when the sole manipulator?

Only if he/she has a BE-30 type rating.

Huh? FAR 23 was 1965.

I guess I got bad info. Anyone know why the SFAR 41C then?


You CAN log anything you want. You can create a separate collum for "B767 lav time" and log it. Just don't try to use it as time for a certificate or rating. I suggest to my Fos that they keep a separate collum of King Air SIC time to show experience for prosective emloyers, but to be able to tell any interviewer that they know the time can't be used for legal purposes. Not even for 90 day currency.

This subject has been covered pretty extensively in other threads...

 

[USC***]

If you get a pay check to fly a plane, who cares?

You can put it in your logbook, and then on future interviews explain how it was 91 and you weren't required, except the company wanted 2 pilots.

If you stay there long enough, there may be a chance to move to the left seat where there is no question on if you can log it or not.

 

[Bandit60]

The 300 series kingair are single pilot type certified but that does not mean that the pilot is single pilot typed. You can get a type rating that requires a sic, therefore a 91 operator who is using a pilot that does not have a single pilot type waiver must have a sic. The sic does not have to be type rated.