Logging IMC time

[avbug]

In virtually every case when I have an emergency on board, if I have someone as a student or a junior, I have them fly the airplane. Experience like that can't be bought, and it's a valueable lesson. I would be highly remiss as an instructor and a senior in depriving that person of the experience. It's a matter of managing the event and providing proper oversight and instruction such that the outcome is favorable. There is no reason why the student can't fly the airplane.

I teach a student to do an emergency landing over and over. A person will NEVER fly with me without experiencing multiple engine failures, and very seldom will these occur near a runway. Frequently I take the student to the ground, often to the flare in a pasture or over a country road. If it's permissible with the aircraft owner, I'll land them there, too. Therefore, I should have no beef with a student being prepared to handle the real thing, because I've taken them there so many times it's second nature. An instructor who fails to instill this in a student has failed the student...and I see it a lot today.

As far as I am concerned, if an instructor is afraid to let the student handle an emergency, the instructor has already failed the student. Certainly some oversight and supervision is in order, but for most all but primary students, I make it clear that in the event of an emergency, I want the student to treat the flight as though he or she is pilot in command. In many cases, the student IS the pilot in command.

Many instructors feel that they will be blamed because they have an instructor certificate, or more hours. More hours means nothing. An instructor certificate is not a higher certificate; it's not even a pilot certificate. It's a teachers certificate. In many cases, instructors fly in aircraft when they are not able to act as pilot in command (such as instructors who cannot hold a medical certificate). The FAA does not expect the instructor to be PIC, and nowhere is this required by the regulation, except in circumstances in which the other pilot (student) is not able to act as PIC.

If I instruct an owner in his or her aircraft, I do not presume to tell the owner I am in charge. If I am instructing for a club or school which has a policy about the instructor being pilot in command, this has already been agreed and determined, and is only verified by a briefing before the flight begins. So be it. However, there is no need to be the PIC in every case.

If an instructor shows negligence and allows an accident to happen which has been preventable, then the instructor is liable. If the instructor shows poor judgement in his or her capacity, then the instructor is liable. One might suggest that any time an ATP is on board, his or her greater experience should make him or her liable. Cases have been recorded when others on board have been held liable. It's certainly possible. However, the pilot in command is ultimately responsible for the safe outcome of the flight.

In 1967, a court case (Newberger v. Pokrass) determined that a passenger may be held liable in part for negligence on the part of the pilot in command. In that particular case, both the passenger and the PIC fell asleep. A crash resulted. The passenger sued the pilot's estate, citing neglegence and claiming damages and injury. The jury decided that the PIC (Pokrass) was 85% responsible, but that the passenger (Newberger) was 15% responsible. The jury felt that had the passenger been awake, he may have been able to prevent the incident from occuring.

Quite obviously the passenger is not automatically the PIC. Neither is an instructor. Liability may be had in many ways, but don't fall into the trap of thinking because you hold a teaching certificate it is grounds for ultimate liability, or responsibility. It isn't. You must do your job on all counts, and you must take reasonable precautions to see, within the limits of your responsibility in the airplane, that the flight is conducted safely. However, that ultimate responsibility rests with the PIC, even if that PIC happens to be your student.

 

[172driver]

Agreed again. However, the reason you don't see it as often is probably because the CFI's out there have had their authority chopped.

I landed on some rural roads and in fields as a private student. We even pulled the mixture and pitched up to see when the prop would stop windmilling and how it would affect the glide. (Over an airport with an extremely experienced CFI). Thus, I couldn't believe it when I came to this school and was told to recover from simulated engine failure at 500' AGL. Often, the student doesn't know if they would've made the landing site or not and they come away from the experience feeling very simulated. i.e. they have a tendency to not take it as seriously if they know their engine comes miraculously back to life at 500'.

I agree 100% that this is an enormous disservice to the student.

I also agree that the student should fly the emergency as I provide oversight and instruction, just like the rest of the flight. However, I am the acting PIC, and will take over if the student can't provide a safe outcome with my help. Ever seen em just lock up and start squealing? It happens a lot when mom and dad are paying for their training and they really don't even like flying, just the idea of a career as a pilot. Welcome to my world...perpetuated by all the glossy ads. But that's another thread altogether.

Thanks for rapping with me again avbug.

 

[avbug]

"Ever seen em just lock up and start squealing? It happens.."

Yes. That's why God invented door handles Open door, push student out. Return pale and starey eyed, claiming student panic'd and jumped...

I had a student do that really only once in a serious way (Not jumped). He was a teenager, who flew the airplane well except during an emergency landing. I resorted to several practice sessions of the same thing over and over, pulling the engine abeam the numbers as nothing more than an exercise in not freezing up, and in completing the maneuver to a landing.

The student didn't panic, but he froze, focusing on the runway, scared to turn in too soon, too far out, whatever. Even spacing it off. His airspeed would bleed off, and like clockwork, I would have to correct. Same place, every time. Out of exhasterpation, I let him do it one day to the point of a stall, and as the airplane began to buffet a bit, I buried the stick in the panel and we nosed over quite steeply. As the ground filled up the windscreen, his eyes got very big, and he tried to say something, but nothing came out.

He turned to look at me for direction, and I said, "You and I are going to die together in this airplane, because you insist on stalling it instead of flying it. How do you feel about that?" He didn't feel good about it, or so he seemed to say. I released the stick and told him to take it, and land.

After that he did just fine. Unusual measure, but it worked, and I have little doubt that he remembers it to this day.

as an aside...

I never had the guts to do it, but I always wanted to solo a student from the downwind...step out the door and pull a ripcord and let the student land. I recall being terrified and thrilled when my instructor stepped to the side of the runway and let me go around. I can only imagine what a student would think if his instructor stepped out the door on the downwind. Perhaps a little sadistic, but it would sure break up the monotony, wouldn't it?

Anybody ever hear of an instructor doing that? (intentionally?). It's got to have happened, somewhere.

 

[172driver]

Never heard of it but I like it

 

[TIS]

avbug, please allow me to clarify

When I brought up the issue of it being up to a POI here's what I meant. The POI is responsible for approving the forms and paperwork a company uses, no? They have been at every place I've ever worked. At least one of the forms that they must approve deals with record keeping, in particular, those records necessary to show pilot qualification.

This issue HAS come up at three different certificate holders for whom I have worked and in the final analysis it WAS indeed the POI who had the final word. The final determination of what was right surrounded forms and their proper use. Say what you likw about a POI having no say other than opinion but the fact is that a POI can hold up the whole show if they like and in my experience they frequently do.

The score: PNF cannnot log IMC - 2 ..... PNF can log IMC - 1

My personal belief: Two pilots are required to operate the plane. The plane flies in the clouds. BOTH pilots get to log what the airplane does because they BOTH have to be there.

Also, while I agree that once an enforcement action has been initiated it is out of he inspector's hands, the inspector has some pretty wide latitude before he puts his findings in an envelope and mails them off to the regional counsel. Getting something that far can involve a lot of factors that have nothing to do with the law at all. THIS is where I manintain that an inspector's opinion is indeed quite operative.

Anyway, I'm not writing this to be argumentative, especially since I'm so late on the draw. I've been working. It's a fine discussion based on the experience of those who've seen different and various things in their careers. Just my perspective.

TIS

 

[Timebuilder]

Thanks, TIS. That's question one for my new Chief Pilot.

 

[A Squared]

TIS,

I would agree that the POI has a lot of say in what happens with company recordkeeping, and that often a POI will run things like his own fiefdom, regardless of what the regulations actually are. With one of these types, managemant must chose thier battles, and just roll their eyes at the more inconsequential annoyances. My company used to have a POI like this. I think that the point that avbug was trying to make was that the POI's jusisdiction does not extend through my front door to the shelf where I keep my logbook. The POI may dictate that instrument time may only be logged when the moon is full and Venus is ascending, and that is what is going to get put on the company paperwork. In my own personal logbook, though, I will log what I am legally entitled to log, the alignment of the planets be dammned.

For the record, I take a conservative approach and log the instrument time when I am PF. I believe that I am entitled to legally log all instrument time whether pf or pnf.

Regards

 

[avbug]

TIS,

Agreed...I've seen POI's dictate what records the company keeps, and the requirements have varied with the POI. This is correct. It doesn't have anything to do with what the pilot can log, but it does affect how the company records what the pilot does.

My current employer is required to track a pilots instrument time, but does not differentiate between PIC/SIC instrument; both pilots log the time.

It's good to see you back on the board. Where have you been?

 

[TIS]

Something's clear to me now!

We've been talking past each other and I now understand why. I've been talking about the records a certificate holder will have on you. You've been talking about what will wind up in your logbook. Where I was stuck is that I have a personal policy of keeping those two things pretty much the same. I don't ever want to have a situation arise in which my personal records prove something essential that company records do not.

If there's one thing I've learned in this business it's that trouble can come from all directions including some that that don't exist in this universe until some space warp thingamajig comes along and drops it at your doorstep. To that end, it seems to me that I oughtta keep the same records my employers keep.

As to where I've been - Let's just say that at my company the pilot shortage is very definitely real. Couple that with two kids taking up more and more of whatever time I have leftover and the fact thaat I have just bought a new remodeling project (that I also have to live in), and I think it's probably clear that I'm spread pretty thin.

Anyway, I'm around and looking for things to talk about. I have some new material on weather radar that's about to be completed. I might throw that up here soon. I will warn you however that it's so long that it will probably have to be divided into several parts.

TIS

 

[A Squared]

TIS,

Your point about your personal records matching company records is a good one. I initially took that approach, until I realizd that the captains at my company are pretty casual about what they put in the IMC column. Some put in a standard half hour, regardless of what really happened, some put in a standard percentage, regardless of what really happened, some underestimate badly, one offered to put down whatever I thought I "needed". I now log my estimate of the true IMC time. I think that my logbook is a more accurate indication of the time I spent with my hands on the yoke, flying the airplane only by reference to instruments. Yeah, it doesn't neccesarily match the company records. Might it look fishy if the two were compared? possibly? Should I shortchange my logbook because I fly with lazy captains? I dunno, what is the lesser of two evils?

regards