Logbook time

[Joab]

I am appying for a regional carrier and was wondering about logging time. I currently am employed as a King Air SIC for a well known charter company. The airplane is certified for single pilot operations, yet company policy requires two. So far I log it as multi-engine, and turboprop time and negate any referance to PIC and SIC. I am have an ATP MEL. Would it be more appropriate to log PIC on the legs I fly and not log the other legs when my certificates entitle me to this, yet my position within the company does not? Or, would it be better to continue to log as multi-engine and turboprop, negating SIC or PIC? I would appreciate it perspectives from an interviewers standpoint.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Good news: If you are the one doing the flying, you may log PIC under Part 61 because you are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft you are rated for [61.51(e)(1)]. Doesn't matter whether you are in fact the acting PIC or SIC or a passenger.

Bad news: If you are not the one doing the flying, you can't log squat for Part 61 purposes. Read 61.51's rules about logging time. You being SIC because "the company wants you there" doesn't make it a flight that requires more than one pilot under the =regulations=. You are not required crew. You are nothing more than a passenger

 

[Snakum]

And yet a few more tidbits from someone who has seen lots of friends go to the airlines with B200 PIC (Sole Manip under 61) and SIC (with FAA 135 SIC Checkride) time. I know folks at the following airlines who's only turbine time, and overhwelming majority of multi time, was right seat B200: Comair (2) ACA (2) Shuttle America (2) Chautauqua (1).

But your mileage may vary, course.


Minhberg

 

[avbug]

I believe the poster said it's a charter company for whom he's acting as SIC in the king air. If this is the case, almost certainly the company legitimately requires him to be there (probably not operating that King Air strictly VFR...See 135.101). He can log the SIC.

However, the poster has been logging cross country time, but not PIC or SIC. You can't have total time or cross country time without it being one of five classifications; solo, pilot in command, second in command, flight or ground training received from an authorized instructor, or training received in a flight simulator from an authorized instructor.

You need to show all that time as one of those classifications. You can't have total time without having a way to classify that time...sort of like having a leg without a foot to stand on.

If you are logging the time under 135 (can't log the SIC without it, from your description), then you should understand that 14 CFR 135.109(b) stipulates that the person designated as Pilot in Command by the certificate holder shall remain PIC for the entire flight.

If you are acting as sole manipulator in an aircraft for which you're rated (King Air 90 and 200 have no particular requirements beyond airplane, multi-engine, land), you can legally log the time in accordance with 61.51(e)(1)(i).

The problem arises in how others will view this time. So far as 135 and 121 operations go, if you're designated SIC, then you're SIC. Logging PIC looks bad, and may merely be discounted by employers who really only want to know who signed for the airplane. If you're not PIC, they'll stipulate, we don't count your flight time as PIC, regardless of what's in your regulation. That's the common application of the regulation. You can log it as PIC, but owing to the fact that you're not the PIC, doing so appears more an effort to pad your logbook than anything.

You have a choice. You can log it all as SIC, or you can log the sole manipulator legs as PIC...so long as you understand the meaning it may have to others, especially accross the interview table.

 

[Joab]

Thanks for all your input. Also, my SIC time only accounts for half of my total multi-engine time which is well above the minimum requirements. Thanks again.

 

[NoPax]

The problem arises in how others will view this time. So far as 135 and 121 operations go, if you're designated SIC, then you're SIC. Logging PIC looks bad, and may merely be discounted by employers who really only want to know who signed for the airplane. If you're not PIC, they'll stipulate, we don't count your flight time as PIC, regardless of what's in your regulation. That's the common application of the regulation. You can log it as PIC, but owing to the fact that you're not the PIC, doing so appears more an effort to pad your logbook than anything.

You have a choice. You can log it all as SIC, or you can log the sole manipulator legs as PIC...so long as you understand the meaning it may have to others, especially accross the interview table.

When I was in training for a 135 company, I logged the training as PIC, Dual Received. When I passed an SIC Checkride, and began flying 135 flights with a PIC, I logged the legs I flew as PIC and in the comments section, I put - Pilot Flying - SIC Duties, or something to that effect for the above reason. The other legs when the PIC was flying, I logged as SIC.

 

[CitationXDriver]

Good friend of mine was flying right seat for a 135 op in a King Air 350, an aircraft that does require a type. The PIC was single pilot certified but insurance requirements dictaded an SIC. He had an opportunity to have lunch with an inspector from the local FSDO and the subject of flying of course came up. After describing the flying he was doing in the King Air, this is how the remainder of the conversation went.

Inspector "Your logging that time right?"

SIC "Uh no, I didnt think I could."

Inspector "Oh no, you log the hell out of that time!"

Soooooo.......of course he logged it all as SIC. Just a little insight, take it as you will. Everyone seems to have 127 ways and methods for logging time. I guess I think the big influence should be if your planning on going airlines or corporate as im guessing the corporate side is a little less concerned about the technical aspects of logging time.

OK, so people want more info, the King Air was being flown 135, NO 135 SIC checkride was taken, which the inspector was aware of, and insurance was the only requirement for an SIC, of which the inspector was NOT aware of.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Good friend of mine was flying right seat for a 135 op in a King Air 350, an aircraft that does require a type. The PIC was single pilot certified but insurance requirements dictaded an SIC. He had an opportunity to have lunch with an inspector from the local FSDO and the subject of flying of course came up. After describing the flying he was doing in the King Air, this is how the remainder of the conversation went.

Inspector "Your logging that time right?"

SIC "Uh no, I didnt think I could."

Inspector "Oh no, you log the hell out of that time!"

Don't you just love FAA inspectors who make up their own rules?

 

[EatSleepFly]

How is that making up his own rules?

As long as the guy took a 135 SIC ride, he can be logging it as SIC.

Why is this so lost on some people?

 

[Yank McCobb]

Yes, he can log it as SIC...IF the regulation that the flight is operated under REQUIRED an SIC ("insurance requirements" is not a regulation) and IF he had completed the training required by 61.55. Neither of which was stated clearly in his post so there was no way of knowing IF the requirements had been met to legally log SIC time. Because the insurance required it, and because the FSDO guy said so, just don't make it so.

Why is THIS lost on some people?