• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

Logging IMC time

dana172

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2002
Posts
7
Total Time
2200
Can I log actual if flying in IMC conditions while working on my instrument rating?

Who's name should be on the flight plan if we are doing instrument training on an IFR flight plan?

Totaly different senario. In a 2 pilot aircraft does the SIC log actual (when flying in IMC conditions) when the PIC is flying?

I have had a few discussions with my instructor about thes questions. I have been unable to find any refrence in the AIM or FAR's to document these questions.

Thank you for your help.

Dana
 

maverick_fp00

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Posts
247
Total Time
.4K
You can log actual if you are with a CFII.

When I go on an IFR flight plane with my instructor I put his name down.

As far as the SIC goes, I haven't got a clue.
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
Dana,

You may log conditions of flight, regardless of what they may be. If you are in given conditions, then log them that way. While working toward your instrument rating, if you are in instrument conditions, then log instrument conditions. 14 CFR 61.51(b)(3) specifies that the conditions of flight should be logged for every entry, and these include day or night, actual instrument, or simulated instrument.

It makes no difference if you are receiving instruction, acting as SIC, acting as PIC, etc. Conditions of flight have nothing to do with the type of pilot time. A PIC in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions. A SIC in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions. A Student pilot in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions, as is a private pilot without an instrument rating.

If you are not able to legally act as pilot-in-command in instrument conditions or under IFR, then you should provide the name of the pilot in command, or the person who acted as pilot in command, in the remarks section of your logged entry. If this person is a flight instructor, then you should have the instructor endorse the logbook. If the pilot in command is not a flight instructor, then you should still identify that person.

The name entered on the flight plan should be that of the pilot in command, or the person responsible for the outcome of the flight. If you will be flying under IFR, this should be the name of your instructor, or the PIC, as you are not yet instrument rated, and cannot act as PIC under IFR. (You can log PIC under IFR, but cannot act as PIC, under IFR).
 

dana172

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2002
Posts
7
Total Time
2200
avbug,

I knew you would have the references that I wanted. You da' the man.

Thank you very much.


Dana
 

bayoubandit

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Posts
272
Total Time
5000+
.
Totaly different senario. In a 2 pilot aircraft does the SIC log actual (when flying in IMC conditions) when the PIC is flying?
I have to disagree with Avbug about SIC for aircraft requiring 2 pilots. The only time a SIC can log actual instrument time is when he/she is at the controls. The PIC can log all actual IMC flight time. So, to sum it up, if the PIC is at the controls and in IMC, the SIC cannot log that as IMC time. If the SIC is at the controls in IMC, they both may log the actual IMC flight time.
61.51(g) is the source.
 
Last edited:

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
Bayoubandit,

That is a common misunderstanding of the regulation, and is easily forgiven. The regulation to which you refer, 14 CFR 61(g)(1), states that "A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft soley by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument conditions."

Some mistakenly believe that this indicates only the pilot-in-command may log instrument time, but this is clearly not the case due to the wording of that paragraph. Others mistakenly believe that this indicates only the pilot manipulating the controls may log the time as instrument time; this is also clearly not the case. Note that 61.51(g) does not make mention of pilot authority (PIC vs. SIC), nor is it worded to reflect anything regarding sole manipulator.

In an aircraft requiring two crew members, the aircraft may not be operated without both crew members. The conditions under which one crewmember might be in actual instrument conditions and not the other, are rare, indeed. The only time when one crewmember in a two-or-more crew cockpit would log instrument time when the other would not, would be simulated instrument flight in visual conditions.

The SIC may log instrument time, regardless of weather he or she manipulates the controls.

Another common question arises about logging landings and approaches. Some mistakenly believe that the PIC should log all the approaches and landings, regardless of who makes the approach, or the landing. Logging of landings is assigned according to sole manipulator, and the individual logging the approaches must have performed them, in accordance with 61.57(c)(1).

A pilot should only log the landings which he or she has done, regardless of position in the aircraft or assignment by the certificate holder. The same is true for instructors, who often mistakenly believe they should log a student's landings or approaches.

A pilot should always log the conditions of flight. One might just as well state that the non-flying SIC cannot log night time when the flight is conducted at night; this is obviously wrong. The SIC may log night time when acting as a required crewmember. He or she may show it as total night time in the logbook, or divide it into PIC/SIC night if so inclined. The FAR does not differentiate.

The same applies to instrument conditions, as specified in 61.51(b)(3)(ii)&(iii). Weather acting as PIC or SIC, and regardless of who is flying, if the flight is conducted in instrument conditions, all parties entitled to log time should log the conditions under which the flight is conducted.
 

bayoubandit

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Posts
272
Total Time
5000+
Is there a defintion of what a person is? A person could mean the person flying (sole manipulator) or a person on the flight deck.
Is there a reason it doesn't say "person(s)". I'm asking in all seriousness. Everyone you ask has a different interpretation of the rule. How did you come to yours? It's like talking to a FSDO, call 3 different FSDO's, get 3 different answers. Most guys in the airlines only log the time they fly.

As far as 61.57. That just states what is needed for currency to act as PIC. You must make the landings as sole manipulator to remain current. It doesn't say who may/may not log landings otherwise. Now I agree with you though, whoever lands the plane logs the landing. I haven't instructed in years and most of this goes out the window. Thanks for the challenge!
 
Last edited:

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
If you are referring to 61.51(g)(1), which states in part, "A person may log instrument ime only for that flight time when the person operatoes the aircraft...", then the answer to your question is clear. Unless two people share a logbook, the wording must be in the singular.

The regulation is referring to the logging of flight time, not to the operation of aircraft. Clearly an aircraft requiring two crewmembers to operate, is operated by two crewmembers. However, each crewmember logs that time separately. Therefore, as the regulation speaks to the individual airman, it is written in the singular.

The regulation referring to the requirement for more than one crewmember is legion, and begins with the type certification for the aircraft, includes the operations specifications and airworthiness limitations, and may include other parts of 14 CFR. Unless otherwise approved by the administrator, an aircraft requiring more than one crewmember is operated by each required crewmember.

A SIC in instrument conditions is in them every bit as much as the PIC. The regulation does NOT differentiate between SIC and PIC instrument time. An employer may ask for a breakdown, but legal logging of time in accordance with 14 CFR 61.51 only requires the logging of instrument time. This time may be further broken down, by definition, into actual or simulated instrument time.

A SIC may log the conditions of flight. To do so would be to ignore the fact that the SIC performed the duties of SIC and operated the aircraft as SIC, in instrument conditions, or at night.

One might postulate that because the SIC didn't perform a landing, he or she is not entitled to show arriving at LAX. Instead, only the PIC would be allowed to log the destination. This is obviously ridiculous. Both parties are there, both parties made the flight; both parties identify the location to which they flew, in their logbooks. Likewise, if both parties entered instrument conditions or flew at night, then both parties log the conditions of flight, as dictated in 61.51(b)(3).

Only the pilot performing a landing or an approach logs that landing or approach. Otherwise, both pilots log the conditions of flight.
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
I should add in all fairness that John Lynch, who writes much of FAR 61 and maintains the FAA AFS-640 FAQ web site, takes the opposite stance of the information I have given. In his FAQ on the subject, he states that the PNF should not log instrument time.

The FAQ site is not endorsed by the FAA and is not regulatory, and for the most part, it provides an element of clarity for the regulations. There are areas of general disagreement, and I have disagreed on several points in the past with what is printed there.

Mr. Lynch states that instrument time logged as SIC/PNF is not useable for the purposes of currency (the response was written when 6 hours were still required for currency), and is not valid for the purposes of meeting the instrument time requirements for the ATP certificate. I agree in substance to both these claims, as the purpose of each is to provide actual instrument experience, and speaks to a different purpose in logging.

However, for logging instrument time, the fact remains that one is not logging experience with respect to manipulation of the controls in reference to instruments, but conditions of flight.

Mr. Lynch also states that he personally believes that instrument conditions in legal VFR (dark moonless night over the ocean, with legal separation from clouds, for example) should be listed as simulated instrument flight. I disagree, though by most counts, my view on that subject would be a losing cause. (As far as I am concerned, flight requiring reference to instruments represents instrument conditions, and absent a view limiting device, represents actual instrument conditions, while not necessarily instrument meteorological conditions).

Interestingly, Mr. Lynch also takes a potentially controversial stance that one does not require a safety pilot in conditions mentioned above, as a view limiting device is not used, although he states that such conditions represent simulated, and not actual instrument conditions. To each his own. I don't see his version being particularly defensible, except that it most likely represents the viewpoint at-large for the majority of inspectors.
 

AWACoff

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
1,121
Total Time
3000
I see both sides of the debate. I only log IMC time for when I am flying the aircraft. I do it simply because I believe it shows a certain skill level and experience. Watching somebody fly in IMC is a lot different than actually doing it. Let's agree to disagree so that at least we agree about something, eh?
 

328Pilot

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Posts
9
Total Time
3500
Avbug,

Actually, I believe you are incorrect. Have you taken your ATP written yet? There is a question in the ATP written that asks about logging IMC time while SIC. The correct answer is that the SIC may only log IMC while at the flight controls. I'm afraid that I don't know the reference, but that would be the interpretation from the FAA.

I have never heard that the PIC may log IMC while the SIC is at the controls. Makes me wonder if maybe I'm owed some IMC time.
 

PastMmo

Coffee Serving Ho
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
23
Total Time
5200
Proof?

Hey Avbug,

Any documented statements OR FAA clarification on the reg's that will support what you are saying.

I remember a website devoted to FAR clarification that is/was sanctioned by the FAA, but don't remember where it was.

Also, what is the FAQ website you were referring to?
 

avbug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Posts
7,602
Total Time
n/a
The web site to which you're referring is the AFS-640 FAQ. Both John Lynch and Allen Pinkerton who put the responses on the site are FAA employees, and in fact have written much of FAR 61 (etc.).

The web site is not sanctioned by the FAA, however. There is a disclaimer on the site that provides that the information there is not regulatory. It is in fairness to Mr. Lynch that I provided a response above, stating his opinion.

No legal interpretation has been provided on this topic. As the FAA no longer requires hours for currency, it's most likely of minimal interest from a regulatory point of view. The only regulatory interest touched on by Mr. Lynch in his response, is that of using instrument time to apply for the ATP certificate.

No further guidance is provided in the various FAA orders and handbooks, applicable to this question. However, rendering of other portions of the FAR, as touched on in previous posts here, show that a pilot who is a required crewmember is in fact operating the aircraft (and may be subject to enforcement action in the event of a violation), weather manipulating the controls, or not. Both pilots are required to operate the aircraft, and both pilots may log the conditions of flight.

The FAA does not differentiate between PIC-instrument, and SIC-instrument. Many companies ask about this in the application process, but that's a private issue, and not a logging or regulatory issue.
 

328Pilot

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Posts
9
Total Time
3500
AVbug,

I didn't mean any offense, but it is a question on the ATP written, with the answer being that SIC can only log while in actual. Doesn't make any difference to me how anyone else logs it, but good luck for them explaining to an interviewer in the future if they're wrong.
 

A Squared

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,006
Total Time
11000
328pilot,

This is an interesting question, and I don't claim to know the answer for certain. Given the way the regulation is worded, and given the meaning that the FAA gives "operates", I would tend to side with Avbug. I would make a couple of observations about your comment that it's in the ATP knowledge exam. It is indeed, the question and answers read:

What instrument flight time may be logged by a second in command of an aircraft requiring two pilots?
A. All of the time the second in command is controlling the airplane solely by reference to flight instruments.
B. One-half the time the airplane is in actual IFR conditions.
C. One-half the time the flight is on an IFR flight plan.

Now that might seem to imply that an SIC may only log that time which he is sole manipulator of the controls, however look at it a differnt way;

Regardless of whether an SIC may log all time in imc, or only the time he is sole manipulator, answer A is correct. If you look closely, answer A does not restrict the time to OLNY the time the SIC is sole manipulator.


If it is true that the SIC may ONLY log the time he is manipulator of the controls, than answer A is obviously correct.

If it is true that the SIC may log all the time the aircraft is in IMC, then answer A is still true, as it doesn't say ONLY the time he is flying. He may log all of the time he is "controlling the airplane solely by reference to flight instruments" (answer A) PLUS he may log the rest of the time the airplane is operated solely by reference to the instruments

See what I'm saying? My point is that the test question doesn't answer the question. Remember the correct answer is the MOST correct answer, not the complete correct answer. The complete correct answer may not be listed.

From a sheer logical standpoint, if answer A is correct if "X" is true, and answer A is true if "Y" is true, then the fact that answer A is correct cannot be used to determine which is true, "X" or "Y"

Note that answer A uses the term "controlling" while the regulation uses the term "operating" these are not the same.


This is one of the pitfalls of learning by studying the test, the test questions may tend to lead one to incorrect conclustions.

Regards
 
Last edited:

328Pilot

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Posts
9
Total Time
3500
A Squared, (and AvBug)

I can't say that you're wrong. I do see your point. However, I would also add that the most conservative thing to do would be to only log the time that you are the person physically in control of the aircraft. The fact that we have this disagreement is evidence enough that there is not a clear-cut answer. I would rather not have to deal with the question in the interview than have someone catch on that I didn't do the landing or the approach on a number of legs, yet I was able to log instrument time. Would they? Maybe not, some of these places seem to go over your logbook carefully and others do not.

Although if the interviewer was of the mind that the FAA intended only for the person physically in control of the aircraft to log the time, then it leads to questions that didn't need to be asked. Is it a deal-breaker? I don't know, but I sure don't want to find out that not knowing the regs (in that interviewers mind) or arguing about it was what killed my chances at the job. Especially when there were ten other guys who didn't log it that way and the question never came up for them.

I'm probably exagerating, but I think the point is still valid. You should still get enough instrument time that it wouldn't make a difference in the interview if your skills were up to par. I've started it the other way, I still think it's the most conservative, but I also can't tell either of you that you are wrong.

Fly safe.
 

A Squared

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
3,006
Total Time
11000
>>>>>>However, I would also add that the most conservative thing to do would be to only log the time that you are the person physically in control of the aircraft.

328Pilot, I agree. As a matter of fact, I fly in a 2 pilot cockpit and I only log instrument time when I am PF. I beleve that I should be logging all time in clouds, but because the question is so controversial, I chose the most conservative approach. I don't need the time for any certificates, and I log more than 10 % of my flight time in IMC anyway (there's a lot of bad Wx where I fly)

So, I disagree with you on the legality, but agree with you on what practial approach should be taken.

Regards,
 

BTapsco

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2002
Posts
5
Total Time
9500
Logging IMC Time

You don't have be with a CFII to log instrument time while training; you can go with an instrument rated pilot as your safety pilot (if you can find one you trust and who is willing to put his name on the flight plan) and fly in IMC and log it as such
 

flydog

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
542
Total Time
2500+
I have an easy answer. If someone looks in your logbook and asks tell them you were PF and you logged that IMC time only. IMC time is not required for any certificates or ratings after the ATP or for any type of currency except maybe that required in an airline SOP. It should be a non issue except for airline interviews.

If the FAA ever asks to see your logbook tell them you dont own one or your dog ate it :)
 
Top