Seat filler, P-F-T etc. in 135 Cargo

[Sunnfun]

I know this subject has been discussed with no end before, and I have spent the last hour reading through old posts to this subject. But, there is a company that offers the following (and I found no refernce to it in the old Threads):

They operate C-208 in a cargo operation, 135. Since the 208 doesn't require two pilots, they just wrote it in their OP-Spec. All flights conducted under 135 in their operation have to have a SIC, period.

Thus they claim he can legally log SIC. By the way, the SIC receives "Training" and has to pass a SIC-Checkride. They also claim their program is "FAA-approved".

Anybody know if that is true? And under what bases?

So basically I could put a C172 on a 135-Cert., require a SIC and the guy on the right seat can log SIC? Aside from the point that it doesn't make sense, would it be legal ?

Thanks,
Sun'n Fun

 

[mike1mc]

You can do it as long as the company assigns an SIC to the flight, you are operating under regulations that require an SIC, and the SIC has had the required training and taken a checkride.

For example, under Part 135 for passenger carrying ops, you must be under IFR, and the SIC has to have a current 135.293 check as well as instrument currencyl. The regs differ a bit for frieght. Be careful what you're looking at and how the company operates. If the operation always goes VFR, then no dice on logging the SIC time.

 

[Badger]

Opspec SIC for 135

How would you explain C208 SIC time to an employer. You'd have boot marks on your fanny by the time you got out of the building. This is another ridiculous attempt at some scumbag operator trying to demean the industry and grunge money from the desperate.

Junk time. Don't put in in the book if you value your career. No matter what the ops-spec says.

 

[uscpilot]

SIC in single pilot aircraft is common. Here at Airnet we used to hire SIC's (prior to 9/11). It is allowed in our ops specs. I dont know of anyone (including myself) actually logging it as SIC, only as total if they werent manipulating the controlls. The checkride is done as a PIC check ride since we met or would soon meet the VFR min.
I dont think many would consider Airnet a "scum bag operator".

 

[mike1mc]

Re: Opspec SIC for 135

This is another ridiculous attempt at some scumbag operator trying to demean the industry and grunge money from the desperate.

Junk time. Don't put in in the book if you value your career. No matter what the ops-spec says.

That's a pretty bold statement. Look at the regs and what I posted. I was not talking about flying frieght. The time that I log as SIC is legal because the regs state that an SIC is REQUIRED for PASSENGER-CARRYING OPERATIONS under IFR (FAR 135.101). If the operator chooses to use the autopilot authorization in 135.105, then that's a different story, but don't tell me my logobook is full of junk time.

 

[cdog]

SIC time in a single pilot, light (less than 12.5)non turbo jet acft, SEL or MEL, 135 or 91 is a joke.

 

[uscpilot]

I just want to clarify. In your opinonion cdog, is My flight time invalidated due to the twohundred some odd hours I logged while I was an SIC? This was allowed in our ops specs, which are signed off by the FAA.
Now I will admit these arent the kind of hours that you should go around advertising them, but they are legal. What about somebody with a bunch of dual given, is that "junk time", or a "joke"?

 

[flybrowntails]

Logging SIC in a 208 or a 172--hmmm? It might be fun to keep a personal record of what you have done in your career so when your retired and drinking coffee with the guys and telling lies--it might be fun to remember.

As for logging and counting it --not for me. But hey--its not for me to say and you didnt ask me.

Its your logbook.

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
"Duel given" is not sic in a light acft. If you are logging the sic in a light, single pilot acft, you are advertizing. Remember that the FAA isn't who will be scrutinizing your logbook at hiring time. I believe that the FAR's are clear on what you log as a pilot.
An ops manual does not supersed the regs.

 

[uscpilot]

An FAA approved ops manuel supercedes the FARs.
I did not say that I logged the time as SIC time. I logged the time while SIC in the total column (sorry for not clarifying). However if someone asked while on an interview I would not lie. In any case we are only talking about 200 hours of my total 3500. I seriously doubt that it would invalidate the other 3300.

My point about the dual given was meerly to point out that it is also a legal way of two people logging time in a single pilot aircraft. Again would a high amount of dual given hurt someone on an interview. If you want to compare the quality of the time between the dual vs SIC, I think that the SIC would win over the dual. Afterall the SIC is actully manipulating the controlls half of the time. That is a much better ratio than when I was instructing where I manipulated the controlls less that 10 percent of the time.
Fly safe,
usc

 

[Gulfstream 200]

dont EVER give anyone your logbooks to look at if you written down you were an SIC in a single engine cessna.

that would be so pathetic. logging SIC time in a Baron or a King Air is bad enough....yeah yeah I know, your employers "Ops Specs" say you were "needed" (yeah) We know the speech.....but its pretty weak and the weakest candidate does not get the GOOD job.

just dont ever do it.

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
Who told you that an approved ops manual supesedes the FARs?

 

[uscpilot]

cdog,
I suppose that you are implying that I am wrong about an FAA approved ops specs superceding the FARs? Is that what you are implying??
usc

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
Only if it is more restrictive than the corresponding FAR or SFAR. But that's not really superseding anything.

The point is that logging sic in a light acft is a joke.

 

[uscpilot]

If I take off in a twin with visibility below one mile reported am I legal?
Not by part 135, I must have at least one mile vis for an IFR takeoff. However our ops specs allow us to use the lowest landing min for a takeoff min. More restrictive??
Look logging SIC in a light aircraft especially a single is a not right. I dont want to say its a joke since I did it several years ago. However it is benifical. When I reached my 1200 hours and was legal to go by my self I was much more prepared than a CFI with 1200 hours of mostly dual given.
USC

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
Who told you that 135 requires 1 mile vis for departure? That only applies to 135 ops out of a military facility or outside the U.S.

Duel given is better quality than sic in a light acft any day. What was your role when you were an f.o. in the light plane, watch the hobbs?

 

[mike1mc]

I could be wrong here, but I thought 1 mile (or RVR equivilent) is the standard for issued Op Specs, but you can get approval for the Lower than Standard Takeoff Minimums as most operators do, but 1 mile is the standard for 1-2 engine aircraft.

I know where you're getting the foreign and military airfield portion, but the rest of 135.225 states the takeoff mins are as listed in Part 91 or in your Ops Specs. I don't think any 135 operation has approval for 0/0 takeoff.

 

[cdog]

Pt. 97.

 

[uscpilot]

cdog,
Look you are obvously wrong about the takeoff visibility min, mike1mc has the the reg right there, look it up. There is no argument. I am pretty sure your reference to 97 refers to nonstandard takeoff min. The 135 rule of one mile is standard, which because of our ops specs we can deviate from.
Look I am not trying to denigrate instructing the way you are trying to denigrate my experience. All I said was that when I reached my 1200 hours total time I was better prepared for flying the line than someone with a background limited to instructing. Do you think someone who has little or no actual IFR time, no experience with t-storms, icing, and flying on a schedule would be anywhere near as ready as I was? Look if you want to call it glorified IOE time and not count it then fine. Most operators only accept so much saftey pilot, glider, or rotor time towards their total. I have no problem with that.
With regards to my "SIC" duties, you are close. We took turns flying legs. The pilot not flying would operate the radios, transponder, and sometimes the gear. I doubt that there was much if any CRM experience gained here (if there was it has long since left me after 2 years of single pilot flying). The real experience is what I spoke about above.
USC

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
Your ops manual as it is designed, is following the FARs, not superceding them. If wx mins for a particular airport does not meet pt 97 criteria then it is 1 sm. The airports you operate out of meet pt 97.
By the way, I don't care what you log.
Fly safe