Clutch_Cargo said:You won't even look up the 121 reg you say governs this matter!
Actually, I did quote a reg 121.385 (c) in a previous post. If you re-read my previous post. It states: 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.
Clutch_Cargo said:The fact is acting as, serving as, and logging PIC are all different things. Now, since this is legal, how is it unethical?
How can anyone log time as a PIC when not serving as one.
Clutch_Cargo said:It only becomes unethical if he tries to pass it off as something it is not.
reference previous statement
Clutch_Cargo said:If asked why my logbook doesn't match my application I would tell the interviewers that my logbook contains times as defined by 61.51 and I broke them out to meet your definition of PIC when filling out the app.
This I can respect, but if it is found in a logbook review and was not pointed out any interviewer would have a field day.
Clutch_Cargo said:All that said, you are entitled to your opinion
I absolutely respect your opinion and his. My initial post was just my opinion yet he didn't hestitate to call me a dumbass so I guess there's some hypocrisy here. I never wrote anything that should have been interpreted as aggressive, yet he took it that way. Sorry, downfall of a written forum.
P.S. re-read my posts, at no time did I ever say it is illegal to use this time. What I said was there is an ethics issue. Also 61.159 as someone said in a previous post, says you can use SIC time to meet the qualification requirement for the ATP. I don't remember seeing it written anywhere that if you're short on PIC that you as an FO can just log it as PIC because you were flying. It is still SIC time.
Everybody needs to relax, this has occupied way too much of everybodys time.
Last edited: