Logging time in an single contol Otter??

[Northpilot]

How do you log your time in a single control seaplane Otter (1,000 hp) in an American log book? I am working in Canada for the summer and I am a commercial pilot in both countries and seaplane rated in Canada. In a Canadian logbook I log it in the dual column as I have been told to do as they do not have a PIC column. As for the horse power endorsement in Canada there is none and no requirement to get a sign off as I could fly.

Do I just log it in the dual column only in my American logbook as I am not PIC. Last years pilot did over one hundred hours hours, logging it and only had his hands on the controls only in flight for about three hours total. The rest the time, he just sat there and watched but logged this time. This person did get a flying job this year and now fly's a seaplane as PIC on it. My point is that basicly I will be sitting in the aircraft, doing nothing and how do I log it????

 

[jbDC9]

Re: Logging time in an single contol Ott

Do I just log it in the dual column only in my American logbook as I am not PIC. Last years pilot did over one hundred hours hours, logging it and only had his hands on the controls only in flight for about three hours total. The rest the time, he just sat there and watched but logged this time. This person did get a flying job this year and now flies a seaplane as PIC on it. My point is that basicly I will be sitting in the aircraft, doing nothing and how do I log it????

Is this flame bait or are you serious??

You're a passenger, you can't log it. The Otter is a single pilot a/c, no copilot required. If the dude in the left seat has his CFI, he might sign you off as dual received, but that's about the only way to put it in your book. Sounds like last years pilot pencil whipped 100 hours of passenger time as PIC to me...

 

[Jmmccutc]

Re: Re: Logging time in an single contol Ott

...Sounds like last years pilot pencil whipped 100 hours of passenger time as PIC to me...

i second that...don't log it unless you fly it, that way you can't get in any sort of trouble...or have people flame you for asking a stupid question, like "how do i cover up 100 hours of time i logged and didn't fly..."

 

[A Squared]

You ceratinly do not log the time in your "american" log book, and I'm not too familiar with canadian regulations, but I am *extremely* skeptical that you are allowed to log passenger time in canada either.

You're a passenger in a seat which doesn't have any flight controls, how in the world do you rationalize logging time?

 

[skydiverdriver]

I believe he is talking about an aircraft with a throwover wheel, which means he does have flight controls, just not all of them, all the time. Also, there is no regulatory requirement to have controls in front of you in order to log time. Flight Engineers log FE time without flight controls, and you can even log time in the jumpseat as PIC if you are a company check airman. If he is a pilot that is required by the type certificate or the operation he is flying, he can log the time in the right seat.

 

[Jump Pilot]

I flew a turbine Otter that had a throw-over on a couple of trips. Left seat was a CFI so I logged it as dual when it was thrown to my side.

As a great IP one told me: "Log what you want, fly what you can."

 

[mike1mc]

Not sure what you are trying to accomplish, but if this is a commercial operation (FAR Part 135), you are required to have dual controls. Also, the Otter is a single pilot aircraft so there is another issue. You mentioned a "commercial pilot" so I'm not sure what kind of operation you are talking about.

 

[bart]

How are you going to answer when in an interview you are asked about your 100 hours of PIC Seaplane time?

If you tell the truth, it will most likely end the interview right there.

If you aren't in command of the aircraft or manipulating the controls, then logging PIC, in general (for those nit pickers that can find a way to legally instruct from the back), is not LEGALLY recognized according to the FAA.

That being said, do what you will, and practice answering the question of how you logged PIC time as a pax until you can do it without getting embarrassed.

 

[A Squared]

Flight Engineers log FE time without flight controls,

Right, but they don't log pilot time, and if the question was about an FE logging FE time, I'd agree that your comment had some relevance. It isn't, so it doesn't

and you can even log time in the jumpseat as PIC if you are a company check airman.

That may be, I wouldn't argue the point, only ask what would be the point of logging that? There also seems to be a bizzare, but possibley legal rationlization for a CFI logging time from the back seat. That's all very nice, but we aren't talking about a check airman in a jumpseat here.

Perhaps it is a throwover yoke, the original post wasn't clear on that, but if it is, the pilot is entitled to log all that time when the yoke is thrown over in his position and he's the sole manipulator of the controls.

Unless he's got his hands on the controls, flying the airplane, he's a passenger.

If he is a pilot that is required by the type certificate or the operation he is flying, he can log the time in the right seat.

Yeah, but he's not, the Otter is a single pilot airplane, and I'm not too up on canadian regulations, but I doubt that the canadian regs would require a copilot in an air taxi otter

 

[iflyabeech]

Not sure what you are trying to accomplish, but if this is a commercial operation (FAR Part 135), you are required to have dual controls. Also, the Otter is a single pilot aircraft so there is another issue. You mentioned a "commercial pilot" so I'm not sure what kind of operation you are talking about.

I was just wondering where you found this "requirement" to have dual controls in a commercial operation or 135 operation?

(Note: It isn't there)

 

[mike1mc]

I was just wondering where you found this "requirement" to have dual controls in a commercial operation or 135 operation?

(Note: It isn't there)

I am incorrect in this case, but the requirement is listed in 135.147. It wouldn't apply in this case because the aircraft type certification doesn't require two pilots.