logging right seat in a twin cessna?

[Lil Jon]

could you?/how would you log right seat in a 404 or the like flying part 135? would a regional care at all about it?

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Dont log the time until you have the 135 PIC check in the single pilot aircraft.

People will argue about the "insurance company" and "ops specs require 2 pilots" garbage but I wouldn't want to be at the interview when someone asks you about it (with a funny smirk on their face....)

hokey time. good experience, but hokey time...

 

[j41driver]

I've got some SIC time in twin Cessnas (based on ops specs). As long as you have a Pt135 SIC checkride before you start logging it you'll be just fine. None of my interviewers were the least bit upset about it. I agree that it's not the best time but it's not worthless either.

Gulfstream 200 - If the FAA gave me a checkride as SIC in a C340 (they did) and required me to be there if we were flying passengers for hire(they did)...I don't understand why I shouldn't log the time?

 

[340drvr]

Gotta agree with j41driver, 135 op-specs, SIC checkride with an 8410 included, and it's legit to log SIC time. Also, 135 IFR pax ops without an autopilot would require an SIC, but again, there should be training and checkride. Insurance requirements alone don't cut it, and I can't think of any Part 91 ops where right seat in a single pilot plane would be loggable (other than safety pilot for hood-time or dual given). And, beware of some of the right seat "programs" offered by cheesy PFT operators that want you to pay them for the privilege of compensating for no aileron trim!
As for the job interviews, just be prepared to explain the circumstances and details, I suppose there are companies that wouldn't count that time towards their required "minimums," that's their perogrative, but it doesn't change the legitimacy of your log.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

log whatever you want!!

stand at the end of the runways and write everything that lands in your logbook!!

Some may think SIC time in single pilot planes its OK, but others may think its a bit - lame.

Not a chance I would want to take when I handed over my logbook at the interview....and if I was the one interviewing...I would throw that BS time right out and wonder what else you are padding....or better yet, just look at another candidate who actually FLEW an aircraft to get his/her experience..


Just an opinion - take it as that please.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I've never seen a really reliable answer to the question about whether a =required= SIC in an ops spec for a single-pilot airplane counts as "more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted."

But, if your ops specs simply =permit= the use of an SIC, you cannot log the time for FAA purposes. If it means anything to potential employers (I'll leave that to those with experience in this), you can certainly create a special column for it, like "company required SIC"

 

[A Squared]

I've got some SIC time in twin Cessnas (based on ops specs).

Uhhh-huh right. Ops specs which require a 2 pilots in a single pilot aircraft.
Soooo, tell me exactly which numbered Operations Specification is that?


For those of you who aren't familiar with Ops specs: Operations specification are specific, numbered authorizations for operations which are issued to certificate holders. THe complete list of operations specifications can be found in the Air Transportation Inspector's Handbook, FAA Order 8400.10 There is no ops spec which requires two pilots in a single pilot aircraft. Anyone who tells you "my ops specs require it" is blowing smoke.

 

[minitour]

So if I've got a Navajo (single pilot a/c) on a 135 ticket and I'm using it for IFR, how does 135.101/135.105 play in there?

Single pilot aircraft, but it's under IFR (required SIC under 135.101) and I didn't apply to get the autopilot used in place of an SIC (135.105)?

Seems kinda contradictory?

-mini

 

[midlifeflyer]

So if I've got a Navajo (single pilot a/c) on a 135 ticket and I'm using it for IFR, how does 135.101/135.105 play in there?

Single pilot aircraft, but it's under IFR (required SIC under 135.101) and I didn't apply to get the autopilot used in place of an SIC (135.105)?

Seems kinda contradictory?

Not contradictory. Remember that there is more than one basis for logging SIC time. Same concept as safety pilot for simulated instrument work - the safety pilot may log SIC (or PIC of course, but we're talking SIC here) in that CE-152, not because a 152 requires more than one pilot, but because "more than one pilot is required under ... the regulations under which the flight is being conducted." [61.51(f)(2)]

Same with 135.101. If you fly IFR with passengers, then ""more than one pilot is required under ... the regulations under which the flight is being conducted." So logging SIC is permissible.

The only interesting kicker in the 135.101/135.105 situation is that it has some regulatory wiggle room. Assuming an aircraft with an autopilot, a 135 certificate holder can decide use an SIC =instead= of the autopilot. In that case, the SIC is "required" and may log it. But I'm sure some would wonder about the operator who forgoes the safety and workload reduction afforded by an autopilot just to allow time building.

 

[minitour]

Not contradictory. Remember that there is more than one basis for logging SIC time. Same concept as safety pilot for simulated instrument work - the safety pilot may log SIC (or PIC of course, but we're talking SIC here) in that CE-152, not because a 152 requires more than one pilot, but because "more than one pilot is required under ... the regulations under which the flight is being conducted." [61.51(f)(2)]

Same with 135.101. If you fly IFR with passengers, then ""more than one pilot is required under ... the regulations under which the flight is being conducted." So logging SIC is permissible.

The only interesting kicker in the 135.101/135.105 situation is that it has some regulatory wiggle room. Assuming an aircraft with an autopilot, a 135 certificate holder can decide use an SIC =instead= of the autopilot. In that case, the SIC is "required" and may log it. But I'm sure some would wonder about the operator who forgoes the safety and workload reduction afforded by an autopilot just to allow time building.

ahhhhhh okay...I gotcha now.

Using your last example, lets say the operator doesn't apply for the use of autopilot in place of an SIC, but they have an autopilot anyway.

You can still use the autopilot, just not to replace the SIC, correct? Or would you have to deactivate and INOP the autopilot?

-mini