Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
stillaboo said:So, I think you guys have hashed out that applicants for an instrument rateing cannot legally act as PIC for the parts of any examination under an IFR flight plan or in IMC
Can applicants log the whole flight as PIC (legally) if they were on a IFR FP or entered actual before 'passing'?
How does a applicant for a ME rateing act as PIC if he/she has not yet recieved the rateing? Can they legally log the flight as PIC if they were not acting as PIC?
Again refer to 61.51(e). You can log PIC time any time you meet the provisions of 61.51(e). Instructors can log PIC time any time they are acting as an authorized instructor, and an ATP may log PIC while acting as PIC IF the operation requires an ATP certificate. You do not get to log PIC just because you're a qualified pilot sitting in the other seat, whether you're acting as PIC or as a passenger with a good view.If you can log PIC w/o acting as PIC, how does this impact the prearrangement flight where 2 appropriately rated pilots fly together, one as PIC to log the PIC (even though they do not manipulate the controls at all, let alone be 'sole manipulator') and the other logs the instrument? Why not just log both PIC and instrument?
Fr8DoggyStyle said:you guys are giving me a headache.
What if the examiner is testing your knowledge of the regs and your ability to act as PIC - in other words the ability to say "no".When i take a checkride, the examiner is always right, no matter (almost) what. So, if you do what the examiner says, and the examiner is smoking crack, and the FAA somehow finds out that you logged 1.2 PIC or flew one flight in IMC during a checkride that shouldnt have been- Do you think they are going to go after you or the examiner?
Nope. While there are areas of the regs open to interpretation, this area is quite clear. Yes, there are lots of opinions, but that doesn't make them right.This is one of those topics that there is 8 different ways to prove right in either direction depending on your opinion.
Normally you would act as PIC, and there's nothing magical about it. 61.47 specifically grants an examiner the ability to exclude himself as PIC unless he agrees to act in that capacity, and it also exempts all parties on board from being treated as passengers. However, that doesn't mean the examiner somehow has the authority to modify other areas of the regs as well, such as requiring the applicant to violate the provisions of 61.3. That would indeed be magical and is beyond the intent of the rule. Doc's comment in his discussion on this issue says it best: "FAR 61.47 is only intended to delineate the lines of authority and responsibility between the applicant and the examiner. If the applicant acts as PIC, he must be qualified in ALL respects to act as PIC - it is as if the examiner is not there with respect to passenger-carrying rules, as stated in FAR 61.47. This allows a student pilot to take the examiner along on the test, without running afoul of FAR 61.87."Examiners have told me on checkrides that i am the PIC (not just that i could log PIC)...It has been my understanding that you do act as PIC...the examiner has the magical power to grant you the license