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

[uscpilot]

cdog
I see what you are talking about in the applicability section. But that is very vague. It is irrelivant though, part 135 regulates our operation. Im not going to rehash what I have already said. If I am ramp checked and the FAA asks me how I will takeoff with 2400' RVR I will show him my ops specs, not part 97.
Apparently you do care what people log, or you would never have gotten involved in this thread. You tell someone that their time is junk, then when challanged "I dont care what you log"
usc

 

[cdog]

uscpilot:
Your ops specs are written in line with and not superseding the FARs. Ask your C.P.

If by chance; a procedure that is not in line(less restrictive) with a corresponding FAR slips by the FAA and gets approved, you use the company procedure rather than the FAR and get caught, you will lose in court.

If you ever get an airline interview, you will care what you logged, because they are going to see sic in a light sp acft. They have alot of applicants with your qualifications that didn't log sic in a light acft. If you have 3500 or so hrs, delete it. 200 won't make a difference.

Good luck

 

[mike1mc]

Your ops specs are written in line with and not superseding the FARs.

I have to agree with cdog here. The regs usually read in accordance with XXXX or as approved in the operator's Ops Specs. The Ops manual is simply a book of procedures of how your operation will comply with the regs. The Ops Specs, in thier simplest form, tell an operator what they are not approved for.

 

[uscpilot]

cdog
How about supplimental as opposed to supercede?
I am courious how I would loose if the ops specs are approved by the FAA. It seems that the govt would be at fault not me or my company.
I do see what you are saying about removing the hours in question. This is something that I have been pondering ever since I was hired. The last thing I want is to get into an argument with an interview board. I will be wrong no matter how right I think I am.
Fly Safe
usc

 

[bravodude]

i used work for commutair flying a beech 1900d. the airplane was is certified for single pilot ops. in our manual and the fars part 121 we were req. to have two pilots. 1 pic 1 sic. therefore both pilots were able to log flight time. if your ops spec require two pilots and they wewre approved by the feds by all means log it as sic.

 

[mike1mc]

What cdog is saying is that SIC time in anything but the larger twins shouldn't be logged as SIC. I agree that SIC time in a C-172 isn't really that valuable, but even in the BE58, I've learned hands-on about Part 135 Takeoff/Landing mins, CRM, and general 135 operations. I perform most of the navigation in the aircraft hwiel the captain flies and of course babble on the radio, but I feel that my experience as SIC (even in a light tiwn) will give me a tremendous advatnage when it somes time to upgrade to Captain or move into a larger aircraft. I would like to hear how others feel about this.

 

[cdog]

Bravodude:
The 1900 is not certified sp in the U.S. for pax service. 1900 operated 121 or pax 135 is required by the FAR's to be operated with a crew. You could never get SP approval. 1900 is also not considered a light acft.

mike1mc:
There is nothing wrong with flying right seat in a light acft. If you have the chance to ride in the right seat during 135 ops, go. As long as you are enjoying it and learning you get the experience.

Call it operational experience, which it is. Logging it as sic is a different matter.

 

[stingray]

If your company ops specs require an SIC, log it no matter what type of A/C it is, it is leggit and legal SIC time, there is some value in it. granted the value of sic is different in a carvan versus a 1900 or an saab, people will look at the time differently. When you get the chance to move up do it.
If you where going to hire a new SIC into the seat of a CRJ, ERJ, or one of the many types of Business jets out there what type of expierence would you whant them to have. All time is valueable some just has more value!!!!!!

 

[stillaboo]

Look, here's the deal:

If you get an interview for a large 135 or 121 op and you have SIC logged in an airplane that is SP approved by the FARS, you're in some hot water already. Maybe you can pull out your Ops Specs and say that it was approved by the FAA and they'll let it slip, but probably not. Best case scenario, they'll go through the rest of your logbook with a fine toothed comb and find something else you screwed up and nail you there instead. If you somehow logged everything legally, you'll get a very difficult interview.

Why are you logging this SIC time? To impress your buddies in the hanger, or as part of an effort to move on to 121 or large 135 ops? If you're only trying to impress your buddies, log all the SIC you want. If you're trying to move on, then don't log SIC unless it's required by the FARs. Basicly, if you're flying anything smaller than a 1900 (in passenger ops), then you shouldn't have any SIC in your book.

Incidentally, I have never seen an application that has a spot for piston or SE turbine SIC (other than Military fighter SIC, if there is such a thing as a 2 pilot SE military jet), so why are you logging it? There nowhere to put it on the app!

All the good experience you get flying right seat in a Caravan or light twin, yeah, it is good experience. Talk it up at the interview, let it help you in the CRM scenario questions, but don't log it as anything more than TT or MEL or actual instrument.

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Ops Specs

Hi all- Not to rehash the whole ops specs controversy, but I agree with USCpilot. Ops Specs can and sometimes do REPLACE the applicable FAR. One example I can give is an outfit where I used to fly. We had Ops Spec approval for 0/0 takeoffs. That's right, zero ceiling, zero visibility takeoffs. As part of that op spec, we were required to demonstrate the manuever on 6 month checks. With the advent of computerized op specs, the FAA has moved away from granting exemptions like that one, but it's still possible if the operator has a specific need that can be safely met.

 

[stingray]

If your a required crewmember by FAR's LOG IT
If you are a required crew member by OP Specs, which if it is in your ops specs makes it an FAR. LOG IT
If you are a required crew member LOG IT.

When applying for a flying job 135 or 121, you fill out an application with all the pilot jobs you have had, which is also the law. It should also be reflected in your logs

 

[FMR_RGNL_PLT]

As long as its legal, log it! The idea that a guy with "4000hrs is so much better than a guy with 3000hrs" is not always the case, it depends on the kind of flying the guy has been doing.

IMO 3000hrs spent flying short hops where you are spending a larger portion of your time in the t/o or landing modes is more valuable than 4000 hrs where most of it is spent tracking a VOR radial and maintaining altitude!

 

[ArcherB]

This may have been said already but if you have taken a checkride with the FAA or check airman to be a SIC you are probably required. If you have not taken that checkride and are sitting right seat then you probably should not log it.

 

[mike1mc]

If you have not taken that checkride and are sitting right seat then you probably should not log it.

Exactly, If you haven't taken the checkride, you can't log it legally.

 

[uscpilot]

Look it has been established that it is legal to log time as an SIC in a SP aircraft if your companies ops specs allow it. The problem happens when you go to an interview and the guy on the other side is asking you why you have 300 hours of SIC in a baron. The last thing you want to do is get into argument with him like I did with cdog. No matter how right you are the argument is lost. If he thinks that SIC in a light twin is junk then it is and the interview is over.
It is perfictly legal to log however. If we have a two man crew in a light twin they are allowed to log over 8 and up to 10 hours flight in a 24 hour period.
With all this said I am not saying not to log it. By all means do it, I did. Just log it towards your total time but forget the SIC column.
This whole discussion about legality in the eyes of the FAA is absurd. If ops specs (approved by the FAA) say it is legal then it is. I have to carry my ops specs with me with my FAR's. If I am asked by the FAA why I filed an alternate that only has a 400' ceiling and 1 mile forcast, or if I log flight time while as an SIC I will show the FAA inspector my ops specs.
Summarize: SIC in a light twin, log it only as total not SIC.
usc

 

[uscpilot]

Jerry left a couple years ago.
usc