PIC on a flight plan

[RedGuy]

There's a really simple solution to this. Don't file your flight plans so far in advance.

 

[gulfstream2345]

Just cancel your flight plan that you have filed. Easy enough. However, if the company or the other pilot decide to use your flight plan with your name on it I would review USC Title 18 sec. 1001.

For those that don't know what that is......"Any person who makes a false statement, verbally or in writing, to any Federal official is subject to 5 years in jail or a $25,000 fine or both". That should answer the question.

 

[bizjet800]

Just cancel your flight plan that you have filed. Easy enough. However, if the company or the other pilot decide to use your flight plan with your name on it I would review USC Title 18 sec. 1001.

For those that don't know what that is......"Any person who makes a false statement, verbally or in writing, to any Federal official is subject to 5 years in jail or a $25,000 fine or both". That should answer the question.

I think this is the same warning that is on my mattress, and, oh yeah, the one that appears before I watch a movie!

 

[AC560]

The PIC of the flight is whoever the company you work for says it is. What is filed on the flight plan makes no difference. Why is this such a difficult concept?

Actually it matters according to 91.153(a)(3).

 

[stupidpilot]

Actually it matters according to 91.153(a)(3).

Not if you are operating part 135.

 

[AC560]

Not if you are operating part 135.

My knowledge of 121/135 reg's isn't the best so could you be so kind to point me to the section of 135 which details the different requirements in filing a flight plan.

 

[stupidpilot]

If you are operating part 135 then your company's opspecs outline who has operational control to dispatch a flight. Therefore whoever dispatched the flight assigned the PIC. Regardless of what the flight plan says the PIC assigned by the company is the ONLY one with the final authority and command over the aircraft.

 

[AC560]

Regardless of what the flight plan says the PIC assigned by the company is the ONLY one with the final authority and command over the aircraft.

Under 135.109 that is my understanding of a requirement. I don't think though that alleviates the need for that designated person to match the PIC on the flight plan. When the flight plan is filed who is designated needs to also be on that flight plan. What am I missing?

 

[stupidpilot]

You are right that it should. But if the designated PIC did not ensure that he was the name on the flight plan it would probably result in another slap on the wrist or an additional fine. But if something happens, and the flight plan was filed incorrectly, the FAA doesn't care whose name is on the flt plan. They care about who was assigned by the company as the PIC. He is the one who has the authority for the safe conduct of the flight.

 

[AC560]

They care about who was assigned by the company as the PIC. He is the one who has the authority for the safe conduct of the flight.

That I don't disagree with.

 

[mvedepo]

So to be safe from a violation, when I file a flight plan I should just file a different PIC and I can't be violated?

Your comment sounds like it lacks logic(which wouldn't be a stretch for the FAA).

Any crewmember, PIC or not can be violated by the FAA.

PIC would be the person ultimately responsible for the flight. Doesn't matter who is at the controls.

 

[mvedepo]

I do not think its your responsibility to cancel or amend the flight plan.

It would be his responsibility to ensure hes filed properly since he is the one that would be operating the aircraft on an illegal flight plan.

 

[stupidpilot]

Is it technically illegal? An improper PIC would be listed, but does the rest of it conform to the regs? And a PIC was properly assigned by the person who had OPCON. I guess you could say it is, but I still say the FAA would be more worried about who was actually the assigned PIC rather than what the flt plan says.

 

[mvedepo]

I had a boss that would file flight plans under different names. His idea was that it would allow him to go over his flight time if he needed to. Because of this I seriously think that the FAA would take it pretty serious if they found out that people were taking flights with inaccurate flight plans.

 

[stupidpilot]

I'd have to agree with you if the primary purpose of filing the false name was to hide something. But being too lazy to put the right name in, I'm not sure it would be more than a slap on the hand.

 

[avbug]

I would think it is illegal. If your name is on the paperwork you are the "pilot in command" of the aircraft. If another pilot actually flies the trip and the paperwork is not changed then i guess technically there is not a legal flight plan on file. i would even go furthur to say your company would open themselves up to the almighty "command and control" bag of worms....................................

The flight plan is not "the paperwork." In fact, when ATC sees that flight plan, they don't have a clue abou the PIC, alternates, anything else. Of course, you're talking about a situation in which the FAA takes a closer look...in which case it still comes back to who the certificate holder has designated as the PIC.

What exactly is the almighty command and control bag of worms?

So far as a legal flight plan on file; the company may use any means designated and approved by their POI for flight tracking...which isn't necessarily an FAA flight plan.

Certainly in considering a case in which the PIC of a given fligh isn't clear, the FAA will look at the flight plan to help clarify who was acting as PIC. However, in the case of a flight plan in which the company changed PIC's and the listed person isn't even aboard the airplane...clearly that person isn't the PIC, and it's a non-issue.

The pilot designated for the flight should file his own flight plan or ammend the existing one, but this isn't a show-stopper, nor a crucial issue.

"The paperwork" will be any company generated paperwork regarding the flight, and may include manifests, aircraft logs, dispatch sheets, and other records as appropriate to that operator.

I had a boss that would file flight plans under different names. His idea was that it would allow him to go over his flight time if he needed to.

That is an intentional act and fraudulent misrepresentation. It also is a stupid act, and doesn't save the offending boss, because the flight plan isn't evidence that he did or didn't make the flight. It is evidence, however, when combined with other evidence that he's committing fraud and falsification. The FAA takes a very dim view of that.

Because of this I seriously think that the FAA would take it pretty serious if they found out that people were taking flights with inaccurate flight plans.

Non-sequitor.

 

[stupidpilot]

Good post.