Logging Turbo Prop Time

[TransMach]

Pilot Log Books

Avbug,

You have taken this discussion beyond the log book issue to a question of what is the value of a persons posts. Having given it an appropriate amount of thought, it appears that you are beginning (or started a long time ago) to believe that your opinion is regulatory fact simply because you stated it.. That, my friend, is delusional. Here's a couple of examples:

TransMach wrote: "Thanks for your opinion. I do value your point of view. In this case it appears to be yours and, ..."

Avbug wrote: "Mine and the FAA, being factually and regulatorily correct."

Your statements are your opinion, not rule, not rule language contained in the code or the guidance contained in the preamble.

Avbug wrote: I guess that's the point...My comments aren't my opinion, but rather regulation...this is a regulation forum, to discuss the requireents set forth by the administrator.

If your comments aren't your opinion, then what are they, "regulation" as you suggest? The Code of Federal Regulation is the rule, not your opinion about what it means or how it is or should be applied in industry. That's what this forum is for, to discuss how rule is or should be applied for those who choose to participate in the discourse.

Avbug wrote: My opinion is that the regulations are important, and should be followed. Accordingly, I have quoted the regulations, and expounded on them...not my opinion.

When you expound on the rule language (text) of a regulation, you are offering your opinion, nothing more ... that is unless you are the Chief Counsel and in which case you would express your opinion in the form of an interpretation, in written form such as The Whitlow Letter and others. But you're not. You are a contributing member of a discussion forum.


Unless you are quoting the rule, in rule language (I might add that if you quote the whole rule, not just the part that you are attempting to subvert to your way of thinking things might work better) you are expressing your opinion and each reader does have a choice to make.

That choice is to adopt or not adopt the writer's thoughts and opinion.

To suggest that you do not express opinion, but rather rule leads me to believe that you have started believe your own B.S.


Now let's be civil, recognize that neither of us (nor anyone on this board) are the "Oracle" of rule making and go on about helping others understand the rules, as we do by expressing our opinions ... which is all we as individuals have to offer here.

TransMach

P.S. -- Knowing from past history that you will retort, no matter what ... go ahead. It's your right in our free country -- the reader will still understand his choice.

 

[Ghetto Sled]

I think I'll just say, "screw it," and keep a clean logbook. I can forgo the 50 or so hours and be safe in the knowledge that I never have to trip over my own tongue explaining anything. Thanks for all the food for thought.

 

[TransMach]

Pilot Log Books

Ghetto Sled,

My point, exeactly. You have a choice to make, make it from an informed position.

Congratulations,

TransMach

 

[A Squared]

I'm going to have to side with Avbug on this one. I will say that he sees it as a clear line, where I see it as a shade of grey. Difference in our personalities, I suppose, but having said that, it's getting to be a pretty dark shade of grey for my tastes. Here's why:

Sure you it is your logbook, you can log irrelevancies such as trips to the supermarket in your pickup truck, if you want, but.......

Trans Mach wrote:

I'd list that time as what ever it was (MEL, IFR, XC, etc.) but I would also make an extra column called (BE-200 FAR 91 SIC) and list it there.

Which appears to me to be treading dangerously close to the edge. You're putting time in columns which *do* exist and which *are* used to determine your eligibility for a certificate, time which you really don't have a legitimate claim to, for in the eyes of the regulations, if you don't have your hands on the yoke, you're a passenger. So (if I'm following Trans Mach's words correctly) you're adding pilot time to some of your totals which in reality is not legal pilot time for you, as a part91 SIC.

The FAA has held, (and the NTSB has concurred on appeal) that if it *could* be used to meet the requirements for a rating or certificate, it *must* be accurate, or it is falsification. So, if you're putting time in the IFR or XC columns, which are requirements for the ATP.

THe defense that you had enough time in those categories that you didn't need the questionable time doesn't work either. Again, the FAA has held, and the NTSB concurred, that all the XC time has gotta be correct, not just the 500 hours you need for the ATP.

So to recap: If you've got a Part 91 SIC column, and you enter the time *only* in this column, you're probably on pretty safe ground, it's like logging mowing the lawn in a seperate lawn mowing column.

However, If you also put that time in Instrument, night, X-C, etc columns, you're getting very close to doing something which could be considered falsification.

 

[transpac]

I'm going to have to side with Avbug on this one.

Concur! Avbug can be a PITA, but he generally does his homework before posting.

 

[lawfly]

Once you get the insurance and FAA required training, you will be able to act as PIC versus just logging it.

How many pilots in that cockpit will then be "acting" as PIC at that point? I am not going to get into "logging" vs. "acting", but I will suggest that only one of the 2 pilots in the situation described can "act" as PIC at any given time, and I doubt that the designated Captain will be relinquishing (or be relieved of) that role.

 

[some_dude]

Only one person can ever BE the PIC, but there are plenty of situations where both pilots can LOG the time as PIC. The FAA is quite clear about this.

How many pilots in that cockpit will then be "acting" as PIC at that point? I am not going to get into "logging" vs. "acting", but I will suggest that only one of the 2 pilots in the situation described can "act" as PIC at any given time, and I doubt that the designated Captain will be relinquishing (or be relieved of) that role.

 

[lawfly]

My post was expressly in response to a comment about "acting" as PIC, without regard to "logging".

 

[HangerRat]

Avbug is right...That is clear. . . That is in the regs. . .

Why are so many of you dummies looking for ways to not log your time?