Return of the SIC-logging question, with a twist.

[Snakum]

OK ... I've read the threads here and elsewhere, where-in the logging of SIC time in a C90/200 has been beaten to death. I pretty much understand that unless your Ops Spec (135) specifically requires an SIC for an aircraft that is otherwise certified SP, you simply cannot log the time. I also have read that even if your employer's Ops Spec requires a C90/200 SIC that Express Jet will tell you to "pound sand" in the interview anyway. So here's where I'm concerned:

I've talked to a few guys over the years in various 135 and 91 operations who got their first or second flying gig sitting right seat in a C90 or B200, who eventually moved to the left-hand seat or moved on to turbojet position, and obviously they were logging their FO time, including the Part 91 pilots, and this time was accepted by their next employer as legit. However, going by what I've read here in the last four years ... it's a iffy proposition.

So, considering that I still hold out hopes of eventually getting into the right-hand seat of something burning kerosene (lotsa NASCAR teams flying locally ), and I'd like to progress to the left-hand seat ... in your own experience have you seen right-hand C90/B200 seat time counting toward career progression or have you seen it primarily been wasted time as far as job progression goes (I know NO learning time is really wasted)? What has been your personal experience, or the experience of friends out in the real 91/135 world?

Minh

(At 40 years old, I don't want to quit my real job for the right-hand seat of a C90 with Billy Bob's Flying Service if I'd have been better off flying patterns alone in a C152 ... )

 

[Timebuilder]

Let's say your question applies directly to an employer who has ops specs for the SIC in the airplane. In this case, the time is loggable for your experience (as well as being legally loggable anyway) that eventually lets you take the ride for the left seat job with the same employer. That time in the left seat will be the really important time for the career progression, and will give justification for the time you logged in the right seat as being more than a radio and gear operator.

Your mention of NASCAR reminds me of one of my visits to GSO in a 55, where I waved through my windshield to Richard Petty as he left one of his planes, and got a real friendly, southern-style wave and a smile. We (the captain and I) took the FBO van over to the next town and got some BBQ. I don't recall the name of the restaurant, but it was near a local college. Beautiful countryside.

 

[Snakum]

Yeah, one of the neat things about this area, if you're a NASCAR fan, is getting to see all the 'name' drivers. My ex was friends/coworkers with the Petty's Westwind Captain's wife and I've seen Kyle and Richard both at GSO when they were running the J31s. At EXX I've seen all the Childress drivers, and where I'm at now two of the Wallace brothers fly out. Usually VERY nice folks, especially Mr. Petty, who is a class act. Now that I'm flying again I'm kinda hoping to land in a NASCAR King Air or EMB120 eventually. Among the FOs there's usually a bit of movement, and depending on who you know there often low-timers given a chance at the right-hand seat (Childress hired a 700-hour guy into the B200). That's why I'm trying to work a local flight line ... networking .

About the time thingee ... from talking to local folks I get the impression there's a few Part 91 and Part 135 departments for which there is no Ops Spec requirement for an FO, yet owners/passengers/insurers have requested one and these FOs are moving up the food chain (including Midway when they were at RDU), even though everything I've read would indicate the right seat 90/200 time isn't legit. Just thought I'd get some more feedback.

Thanks TB.

Minh

 

[350DRIVER]

I also have read that even if your employer's Ops Spec requires a C90/200 SIC that Express Jet will tell you to "pound sand" in the interview anyway. So here's where I'm concerned:

I tend to think that most of these guys that are being told to "pound sand" are logging the time as SIC when in fact the ops specs do not require or permit this practice to occur. I am sure that some of the EJ pilots on this board can better answer this question but I would be highly surprised if this is the case.. I would assume (logical reasoning) that if you interviewed with Express Jet and bring to the interview a copy of your company SIC flight check form, and you were able to justify "why" you were logging SIC time per the ops specs then you shouldn't have any problems or concerns, just my take on the issue though. I have been wrong before so take the above for what it is worth....

Airnet pilots have been logging SIC time in Barons, etc, for awhile and I don't think this is questioned by EJ. If you showed up to the interview with "proof" that the SIC time is valid and you are "required" per your company's ops specs then are you going to be excused from being told to pound sand?

I would be interested in hearing what is actually questioned and allowed in the mind of the folks at EJ.

3 5 0

 

[EatSleepFly]

Why is it that SIC time is seen as nothing more than operating gear and flaps? I am SIC in a B100 (under 135), and we split the PF/PNF duties pretty much dead even. Heck, I can hardly even *reach* the gear handle from the right seat.

Seriously though, I can see why some SIC time is crap, but not all of it. It kind of chaps my ass when people say that being a legitimate SIC in an aircraft that is technically single pilot is bogus. Besides, a lot of customers seem to prefer having two pilots.

Oh, and before you flame me, they paid for my training, they pay me, and its a pretty safe bet I'll be in the left seat when I have enough time in type to satisfy the insurance company.

 

[johnpeace]

Can someone refer me to material about 'ops specs' and how these are determined?

I only know what I read here and it sounds sort of arbitrary to me that some companies can have required crew in the same plane that other companies can't.

How does that all work?

 

[Jedi_Cheese]

To put it simply, Op Specs are extra rules that overrule the FARs (or can). An operator of aircraft can apply for specialized rules concerning it's pilots and equipment.

For example, airliners don't do 100 hour or annual inspections, they have A, B, C, or D checks. These checks are less frequent than a 100 hour but can cover more than a 100 hour covers. Or a charter operator could be able to shoot an ILS down to 150 ft AGL in a Cessna 172 BUT is required to have both a PIC and a SIC (SIC is Second In Command). Or an operator could get a waiver to fly an aircraft with a fuel guage out of order (or the hobbs meter broken) but then there will be additional requirements.

[for those of you who know more, I am only giving an example of what it is like, I have no clue if you could actually get the examples above approved]

 

[vetteracer]

Ok, how abouth this,

King air 200, 135 certificate requires an SIC.

But all the pilots are Capt. qualified.

We always fly two capts. And switch seats on every other leg.

One pilot is deamed the capt for the shift, and check weather and files flt plans.

And say you are a current MEI or check airman.


Mark

 

[350DRIVER]

Ok, how abouth this,

King air 200, 135 certificate requires an SIC.

But all the pilots are Capt. qualified.

We always fly two capts. And switch seats on every other leg.

One pilot is deamed the capt for the shift, and check weather and files flt plans.

And say you are a current MEI or check airman.


Mark

I would only assume that since your company ops specs requires a SIC to be onboard then you are legally allowed to log the time as such if you are part 135 SIC "qualified" per the FAR's/company ops specs. I don't think you would get into trouble by doing this since it is required per your ops specs. The time that you are the "acting" PIC then log that portion of the flight as PIC time.

good debate on this topic... I really would like to hear feedback from EJ guys relating to this issue...


3 5 0

 

[avbug]

Part 135 always requires a second in command under IFR. If an aircraft is operated under IFR under Part 135, a company is always authorized to use a SIC...even when the company holds OpSpec authorization to fly single pilot IFR with autopilot, in lieu of a SIC. The fact that the company is authorized to fly with a single pilot in lieu of a SIC does not at any time preclude the company from operating with a SIC instead...it's a requirement under Part 135 and requires no special OpSpec authorization.

Don't get too wrapped up over weather the Opspec requires a SIC, because you're barking up the wrong tree. If the airplane is operated under IFR, the SIC is required, period. All that may be gained from an Opspec authorization is to allow the PIC to fly with the autopilot in lieu of a SIC. The PIC may at any time fly with a SIC instead, without any specific permission required.

The only requirement is that the SIC be trained and qualified as a SIC under Part 135. A pilot trained and qualified as PIC is not necessarily automatically qualified to act as SIC. Specific training and authorization is required for that pilot.

Accordingly, type certification of the aircraft notwithstanding, a SIC acting as SIC under Part 135 may log the flight experience as SIC. That same pilot may log PIC when acting as sole manipulator of the controls but is ill advised to do so in this situation. Additionally, any time so logged will not count toward removing the 100 hour PIC restriction for a high minimums captain.

Ok, how abouth this,

King air 200, 135 certificate requires an SIC.

But all the pilots are Capt. qualified.

We always fly two capts. And switch seats on every other leg.

One pilot is deamed the capt for the shift, and check weather and files flt plans.

And say you are a current MEI or check airman.

Under Part 135, the certificate holder (your employer) designates the PIC. The designated PIC remains the PIC for the entire flight. None of this "co-captain" garbage that's so popular in the corporate and fractional world. There is one PIC, and the PIC remains the PIC. Switching out legs by trading seats, or trading flying duties, doesn't change the fact that one pilot is designated by the certificate holder as PIC, and that pilot remains PIC.

That the pilots are "captain qualified" means nothing. Further, a pilot who is "captain qualified" is not necessarily qualified as a second-in-command under Part 135. Specific training and company qualification is required.

While technically pilots may log flight time in accordance with 14 CFR 61.51, one should only log PIC under Part 135 when one is the designated PIC by the company.

Being a current MEI or check airman means nothing in this scenario.

 

[capt_zman]

135 vs. 91. There is the major question in this whole equation. Avbug is absolutely right regarding SIC's, Op Specs and 135 and there really isn't any question about logging SIC. The big gotcha is 91 and the inability to log SIC under those regulations. It may just happen that you are flying 135 now and logging legitimate SIC, then you get the Nascar job in the right seat of a 200, and that's where you can't log SIC (assuming their ops are under 91).

Z-

 

[Snakum]

you get the Nascar job in the right seat of a 200, and that's where you can't log SIC

I think this is probably a bigger question in my mind. I've spoken to Pt91 King Air SICs (including one newly minted 45-year-old C90 FO, which gave me hope ) and they say the guys doing it before them logged it and moved up (regionals, frac, corp), but just about everyone I talked to who wasn't one of the aforementioned Part 91 C90 FOs says "Uh uh ... no way!".

I'm so confused.

Minh
(Not that I'll need to worry about this stuff for a couple years still ... but ya never know )

 

[avbug]

Confused? Why? It's cut and dried, and very clear, and you've already been given every shred of data you need to understand the subject.

What the king air Part 91 f/o's stipulated is irrelevant.

 

[Snakum]

Yes ... still confused, but I usually am anyway .

So, I understand that a Part 91 C90 SIC CANNOT log the time as SIC/Turbine/Blah blah because there is no Ops Spec? Correct?

Minh

 

[skyking1976]

Yes ... still confused, but I usually am anyway .

So, I understand that a Part 91 C90 SIC CANNOT log the time as SIC/Turbine/Blah blah because there is no Ops Spec? Correct?

Minh

Correct!

 

[Tripower455]

So, I understand that a Part 91 C90 SIC CANNOT log the time as SIC/Turbine/Blah blah because there is no Ops Spec? Correct?

Under Part 91, the regs are all you have guiding you. If the aircraft certificate specifies single pilot, then you can't log SIC time, any moreso than you can in a 172. I believe that some aircraft can be either way (one of the smaller Citations, the "Munson Burner", IIRC, can be flown single pilot), but that might be a restriction on the type rating of the Capt. I am sure someone else will know.

FWIW, I went through this early on in my career. The first job I got was as a VFR (less than 1200 hours TT) Chieftan Capt. for a small airline/charter company on Long Island. Some of the casino charter contracts required 2 pilots, so I would sit right seat on those flights. I could not log SIC time on those legs, since the Op Specs didn't require an SIC for that plane. We would swap seats, and I was able to log PIC time on the VFR legs. We both got paid anyway, so it wasn't that big a deal.

Good luck!

 

[Snakum]

About now I'm wondering how it would look if I logged C90 PIC (empty legs, flying sole manipulator) with only 500 hours TT (which was the TT of the one person I know who was hired as a C90FO part 91).

I'm think'n ... that won't look too spiffy.



Minh

 

[Kingairrick]

About now I'm wondering how it would look if I logged C90 PIC (empty legs, flying sole manipulator) with only 500 hours TT

I definately would. Here's why: How else are you going to build flight time for your ATP? I would log all the time you spend as sole manipulator as PIC as per the letter of the regs. In other words, log the dead legs in th 90 if you fly them. Some airlines might say that you were not "responsible" for the aircraft, or didn't "sign" for it, but the regs don't make that distinction, and neither should you. If you are lucky enough to be hired into the right seat, and you probably will be, you will be the next guy in line for the left seat. However, you have to meet minimum flight time standards for that seat, so log the time that is legal.

This is my opinion, but in this case, I'm basing it upon whom I would hire into my next left seat opening. It will definately be the right seat in that airplane. However, that person will have to meet minimums, like say, an ATP. For an ATP, or any rating, the regs for logging flight time are all that matters, not who "signed" for the airplane.

Bottom line: If you are rated in the airplane, and are sole manipulator, log the PIC.

 

[Timebuilder]

About now I'm wondering how it would look if I logged C90 PIC (empty legs, flying sole manipulator) with only 500 hours TT (which was the TT of the one person I know who was hired as a C90FO part 91).

I'm think'n ... that won't look too spiffy.



Minh

The above observation suggests to me that you may want to track your part 61 sole manipulator time in a separate column than the PIC time that you have as the "responsible" person flying the mighty C 172. Certainly, learn all that you can about the C90, all of the systems and limitations, so that when you have to answer for the logging of part 91/61 sole manipulator PIC time, you can back it up with the appropriate level of knowlege about the airplane. No ops specs or regs that allow for an SIC in the airplane? No SIC time, then. Make the most of the PIC opportunities that can legally be logged, and know the aircraft cold for your own good now and in the future.

 

[mike1mc]

About now I'm wondering how it would look if I logged C90 PIC (empty legs, flying sole manipulator) with only 500 hours TT (which was the TT of the one person I know who was hired as a C90FO part 91).

I'm think'n ... that won't look too spiffy.



Minh

I'm doing it with not much more than 400TT. I've been to SimuFlite, have the documentation, and fly 135 legs from the right seat. If I am the Pilot Flying its logged as PIC, if I'm not, then SIC. I usually fly all 91 legs as well. Just be sure you can prove you "know" the aircraft (i.e. systems, airspeeds, limitations, etc).