Pinnacle PIC Time

[mnalpha]

well heres the deal,
PN has helped me commute for some time now. They are great just like mesa (gasp), (not comparing the 2 so chill out on each side. Anywhoo the most un-stable person I know got a jobby with PN as a street cap after flying with great lakes. So be it, you get what you pay for, and thats what will allways draw the line. Thanks Mesa, I just overdrafted. dorks..... (nice new jets, new paint soon? again? /snort)

 

[dondk]

What your forgetting here is that this has nothing to do with the FAA. 250 hours PIC is a COMPANY REQUIREMENT (coincidentaly it is the same as standard ATP mins). This is no different from the company requiring 3500 hours total time for upgrade when the FAA only requires 1500.

The FAA does not have a dog in this fight and all the POI's in the country cannot overturn what the company mandates its pilots to have before they are eligible for upgrade. Thats why I said that this B.S. about the company pleading for a favorable interpretation from the FAA is crap. This has nothing to do with the FAA....it never did.

I second DoinTime on this one... The letter to the general counsel is just a dog and pony show to semi-satisfy those bitchin'. To think the company will bow down if and when the general counsel rules on this is just ludicrous.

Even if the rules would change, the company could change ANY of the other requirements (legally) and leave the same people up in arms in the same position. IF (the key word here) the company wanted to upgrade these guys they already would have. The company has known about this problem since '02 (the 1st GIA class was in early '02), so.. why wait 3 years to send a letter to the FAA? Why wait 3 years to change the 250 PIC rule? answer those questions first...

 

[Carl_Spackler]

We all have to learn sometime but it shouldn't be when you become an airline captain.

I would love to meet the airline captain who didn't learn anything after he upgraded. It could be argued that the worst captains are the ones that "know it all"

 

[Lear70]

How quickly some are to jump on the bandwagon and bash the 'Streamers.

For the record, I fu*king hate PFT. I think it sucks and wish it didn't exist in this industry. That said, there are plenty of people here at PCL who DID go the PFT route, either because they were too young/inexperienced in the airline industry to know any better or simply didn't care. Either way, when it comes to upgrade, I don't give a d*mn where you got your time; I care about:

1. Did you pay attention for the 3,000+ hours in the right seat of the CRJ and learn the skills required to be a Captain or did you just kick back and draw the paycheck?

2. Can you exercise good judgment and common sense once you upgrade? (something that should become apparent in the upgrade process).

3. Can you pass the required exams, O.E., and Line Checks to be the PIC and continue to learn as you go? (For the information of those on this board who don't work for PCL, the washout rate during upgrade training these days is north of 25% - the upgrade has gotten a LOT harder since 3701, and rightfully so).

I fly every day with 'Streamers; for some reason my seniority seems to pair me with those guys since they hired so many during the last two years. I can say that more of them than not are good sticks and, quite frankly, I wouldn't have a problem putting my family in the back of an airplane with SOME of them when they upgrade.

Further, I think it's assinine for the company to require them to go out and rent a 152 for 50-70 more hours WHEN THEY ALREADY HAVE 3,000+ HOURS IN THE CRJ !!! What the h*ll else are they going to learn in 50 hours in a 152 thay they haven't already figured out in 3,000 hours in the aircraft?

No offense, but several regional airlines have been doing this for over a decade, it's not just a "new" problem that is exclusive to PCL. I'd prefer them to have more PIC time, but since the company prohibits a pilot from doing ANY other commercial flying, flight instructing included (it's in the FOM), the only option they have is to rent an airplane which, again, is total B.S. from an "experience" standpoint.

p.s. Don't expect anything exciting from the General Counsel (they're in D.C. by the way, not in OKC. OKC is only for General Aviation, the G.C. for the airline world is in Washington). I have sent three letters requesting interpretations of 121.471 to them over the last year, certified mail, never heard ANYTHING back. PCL's legal counsel is too close to the FAA G.C. to get anything positive accomplished.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Hahahahaha!!! If any of them want to rent from my flight school, we have a "PFT Whore" surcharge of $50 per hour.

Trainees impersonating real professional pilots. Sad.

I hope it costs them their entire first month's pay.


While I think it is stupid beyond belief that they will have to rent a piper for 50-100 hours or whatever, they fact that it is SO uneccessary makes it all the more enjoyable.

But hey- they were willing to pay the first time, so why not again?
The injustice of it all just makes it sweeter.

Enjoy your pay-for-pic time, suckers!

 

[Godvek]

I hope it costs them their entire first month's pay.

That would be about $3,600 before taxes.

 

[jackbo]

I would love to meet the airline captain who didn't learn anything after he upgraded. It could be argued that the worst captains are the ones that "know it all"

I never said the learning STOPS. But some things you experience as a PIC shouldn't happen for the FIRST TIME when you are an airline captain. Huge difference.

It seems to me only Pinnacle people are defending this. Everyone else thinks this is pretty dumb.

Why should they have to get 250 PIC when they have 3000 in the CRJ? Because the FAA has minimums. Why don't we just eliminate them all and say "upgrade when your company lets you... no matter how much time you have!"

Minimums don't guarantee experience. But they do guarantee you were at least in the seat doing the job whether or not you actually learned anything.

I'm sure the passengers would love to hear, "Hi, folks. Welcome aboard this is your captain speaking. I don't have much time in this seat, probably under 200 hours, but I've been an FO for 3000 hours. Plus the guy next to me has 500 hours and... nevermind."

When we fail to learn from history we are doomed to repeat it.

 

[CLECA]

Yes, dumbass. Everything you said we have all noted already.

Even flying under 121, you can log PIC for 61 purposes (i.e. getting the requirements for an ATP) when you are typed and acting as sole manipulator. It was already noted that this can't be counted for an interview.

Getting an ATP comes under 61, not 121. There is only one PIC for each 121 flight, but LOGGING PIC is a different deal. You might not like it, you might not agree with it, but that is the fact, Jack.

So re-read everything, pop a couple of Ritalin, and f***ing relax.

Is this really necessary? I wasn't trying to piss you off. I am aware that I am reiterating everything everyone else said and the was kinda the point toolbox. I am offering some insight as to how thats gonna look to an interviewer. If you are going to log PIC when you are not thte PIC be my guest, I am just telling you what I'm gonna do when I see it in the interview room. I will stop the interview immediately and show you the door go into the waiting rooom and ask if anybody else did what this dumbass just did. Unless you want to make a career of Pinnacle, which is where you are saying that this is happening because of upgrade time at Pinnacle, you better be prepared to upgrade at Pinnacle and that be it. Or take it out of the logbook after you upgrade.

To everyone else who is seeing the bigger picture here, do not log PIC unless you are THE PIC. If you are flying a part 121 airplane with revenue (PIC = the captain on the release) If you want to log PIC because you were the sole manipulator, go fly a GA airplane because that's part 61 and that's where that time belongs.

It is very cut and dry.

Towelie - If you can't handle the airline answer go instruct. Obviously, you are one of the ones doing this. You complaining because you don't like the answer is proof.

 

[787]

In the words of a good Monte Python film..."Run away."

 

[Towelie]

It is very cut and dry.

Towelie - If you can't handle the airline answer go instruct. Obviously, you are one of the ones doing this. You complaining because you don't like the answer is proof.

I agree -- it is cut and dry, but you don't get it.

First of all, I can handle the answer. You're the one flipping out saying never do it (even though it is legal). I'm not, nor have I done this. But guess what? You can if you want to.

It is NOT the same as 121 captain time. It is used only for obtaining an ATP. You are the one that keeps crying about that. I never said use it to build turbine multi. I said it's a legal way to get PIC time for the ATP.

And guess what? I think it is a stupid rule but it's legal.

So once again, READ before you go off the handle. No one is advocating using this and then going with it to an airline interview. That is just you.

If you can't handle Part 61 regs (which this is), then maybe you are the one who needs to go back to instructing.

 

[CLECA]

If you can't handle Part 61 regs (which this is

Dude, reference 121.385 (c) The minimum pilot crew is two pilots and the certificate holder shall designate one pilot as pilot in command and the other second in command.

 

[DoinTime]

It is NOT the same as 121 captain time. It is used only for obtaining an ATP. You are the one that keeps crying about that. I never said use it to build turbine multi. I said it's a legal way to get PIC time for the ATP.

FAR 61.159 does not allow an SIC to log PIC time. The purpose of this subsection is allow SIC time to be substituted for PIC time for the purpose of meeting the minimum time requirements for an ATP. An unrated SIC can never log PIC time for any purpose.

 

[CLECA]

An unrated SIC can never log PIC time for any purpose.

Thank you !!!!!!! And that was my point exactly. Someone who gets it. But this guy overreacts calling me a dumbass. WTFO!?!

 

[PCL_128]

I second DoinTime on this one... The letter to the general counsel is just a dog and pony show to semi-satisfy those bitchin'. To think the company will bow down if and when the general counsel rules on this is just ludicrous.

Even if the rules would change, the company could change ANY of the other requirements (legally) and leave the same people up in arms in the same position. IF (the key word here) the company wanted to upgrade these guys they already would have. The company has known about this problem since '02 (the 1st GIA class was in early '02), so.. why wait 3 years to send a letter to the FAA? Why wait 3 years to change the 250 PIC rule? answer those questions first...

Don, your understanding of the situation is simply not accurate. This is not a company requirement. This is something the POI is trying to enforce. Call the DTW FO rep. He's the guy handling most of this. He can bring you up to speed on the real facts of this situation.

 

[Towelie]

Originally Posted by DoinTime
An unrated SIC can never log PIC time for any purpose.

Thank you !!!!!!! And that was my point exactly. Someone who gets it. But this guy overreacts calling me a dumbass. WTFO!?!

Attention CLECA and DoinTime:

I NEVER, and I repeat NEVER, said you could do it without the type rating. However, you CAN with a type rating. I have said that all along and that has not changed. It is not 121 PIC time, it is 61 PIC time.

Serving as PIC does NOT equal logging PIC time. Period.

Still don't believe me? Maybe this legal opinion from the FAA will change your mind.



June 5, 1992


Dear Mr. Butler:


Thank you for your letter of March 14, 1992, in which you ask questions about logging pilot in command (PIC) and second in command (SIC) time when operating under Part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR).

Your letter presents the following scenario: under a Part 121 operation, the air carrier has designated a pilot and a co-pilot. The pilot is the authorized PIC and the co-pilot is the authorized SIC. During the course of the flight, the SIC is the sole manipulator of the controls for one or more legs.

You ask two questions. The first asks whether the pilot designated as PIC by the employer, as required by FAR 121.385, can log PIC time while the SIC is actually flying the airplane. The answer is yes.

FAR 1.1 defines pilot in command:

(1) Pilot in command means the pilot responsible for the operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time.

FAR 91.3 describes the pilot in command:

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. Part 61 deals with logging flight time, and it is important to note that section 61.51, Pilot logbooks, only regulates the recording of:

(a) The aeronautical training and experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating, or the recent flight experience requirements of this part.

Your second question asks if the SIC is flying the airplane, can he log PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) because he is appropriately rated and current, and is the sole manipulator of the controls. Additionally, he has passed the competency checks required for Part 121 operations, at least as SIC. The answer is yes.

FAR 61.51(c) addresses logging of pilot time:

(2) Pilot in command flight time.

(i) A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot in command time only that flight time during which that pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or when the pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or, except for a recreational pilot, when acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification or the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

(ii) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot in command time all of the flight time during which he acts as pilot in command.

(iii) Second in command flight time. A pilot may log as second in command time all flight time during which he acts as second in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft, or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

As you can see, there are two ways to log pilot in command flight time that are pertinent to both your questions. The first is as the pilot responsible for the safety and operation of an aircraft during flight time. If a pilot is designated as PIC for a flight by the certificate holder, as required by FAR 121.385, that person is pilot in command for the entire flight, no matter who is actually manipulating the controls of the aircraft, because that pilot is responsible for the safety and operation of the aircraft.

The second way to log PIC flight time that is pertinent to your question is to be the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, as you mention in your letter. Thus, under a 121 operation you can have both pilots logging time as pilot in command when the appropriately rated second in command is manipulating the controls.

We stress, however, that here we are discussing logging of flight time for purposes of FAR 61.51, where you are keeping a record to show recent flight experience or to show that you meet the requirements for a higher rating. Your question does not say if the second pilot in your example is fully qualified as a PIC, or only as an SIC. This is important, because even though an SIC can log PIC time, that pilot may not be qualified to serve as PIC under Part 121.

An example of this difference is FAR 121.652(a), which raises IFR landing minimums for pilots in command of airplanes flown under Part 121 who have not served at least 100 hours as PIC in that type of airplane. Served and logged are not the same in this context, and no matter how the SIC logs his time, he has not served as a PIC until he has completed the training and check rides necessary for certification as a Part 121 PIC.

We hope this satisfactorily answers your questions.



Sincerely,
Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel

 

[IamGumbyDammit]

Boy, this is GREAT!!!!! - Flounder.

 

[CLECA]

Dude, you seriously need to get a life. If you asked this question before this whole thread then you go right ahead and log it. Because you obviously have it in your head that this is ethical and nothing I say here is going to change that.


If you wrote to that guy after this thread started, then you are seriously lamer than I could ever have predicted. Good Luck in all that you do.

And IMHO I still disagree. My point was more about the ethics of it and how others will perceive it.

On a side note I can't believe this freaking thing went 6 pages.

 

[Checks]

That would be about $3,600 before taxes

THAT IS ALL A CRJ captain makes? Sad, really, really sad. How they got you suckers to work there in the first place is beyond me.

Then again you guys might be thinking "WOW, I will make 40K this year!"

 

[PCL_128]

That would be about $3,600 before taxes

THAT IS ALL A CRJ captain makes? Sad, really, really sad. How they got you suckers to work there in the first place is beyond me.

Then again you guys might be thinking "WOW, I will make 40K this year!"

No, of course not. I'll be upgrading in a couple of months at Pinnacle at 4th year pay. That will be roughly $61/hr. We have a 75 hour guarantee, but most lines are in the 85-95 hour range. So, say I get a 90 hour line: 90 hours * $61 = $5,490 before taxes. Even at guarantee I would get $4,575. I don't know where the $3600 figure comes from. I could make that as an FO if I picked up some open-time. The pay certainly is below what it should be, but it's nowhere near 40k a year.

 

[Detroitpilot22]

$$$

does anyone know when Pinnacle's contract is up, and if the pay scale will go up a little when they ratify it?