SIC in a Navjo how?

[some_dude]

As most everyone else has said, if it is 135, IFR, passenger carrying, and the SIC is properly qualified, then they can log it. No question about this.

If it is cargo, then I don't see how they can log it.

Not really sure where to put this. Maybe you guys can help.

How do you log SIC in a Navajo? Was told the company has a letter from the FAA? How does that work.

I did a search but couldn't come up with any real answers. Yes i know it's PFT but I'm trying to figure out how they log this.

It just doesn't make sense.

 

[FN FAL]

Ummm...NO!!

We pay 16K yr(plus full bene's) to have a non 135 qual'd person sit SIC in BE-58's, C-310's and Navajos to build their TT to meet 135 mins. How is that PFT???? Oh you mean the company pays the employee for training...that must be it...

61.51
(f) Logging second-in-command flight time. A person may log second-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person:
(1) Is qualified in accordance with the second-in-command requirements of §61.55 of this part, and occupies a crewmember station in an aircraft that requires more than one pilot by the aircraft's type certificate; or
^Navajo does not require two pilots (of course we all know that)
(2) Holds the appropriate category, class, and instrument rating (if an instrument rating is required for the flight) for the aircraft being flown, and more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted.
^Unless the airplane does not have an approved autopilot, the above does not apply either.
Marinegrunt...you answered your own question by posting the regs...61.51 (2) ...the last part says..."is required under the regulations under which the flight is being conducted." This says that you can't do it under 91, but under 135 you can...I know the regs for 135 SIC requirement were posted above. You must have one in ANY a/c if you carry pax in IFR. The autopilot part is just giving them the ability to "replace" the SIC with an autopilot...this in no way says that you still cannot use the SIC on those flights, it just gives the operator a way out of having to pay for two pilots...however, once that ap gets MEL'd, you must have an SIC on board again. Also, the FAA has given certain companies the option(in the form of a letter) of "assigning" SIC's to flights, and thus making them "required" crew members no matter what the situation. We have one, and we use it often when we hire guys just below the 135 mins.

What's your baggage? I have no idea what you're babbling about. You got 16K a year to right seat non-135 and I got mid thirties, plus dental, medical, vacation and sick leave to do the same thing. Plus, we didn't hire time builders...you had to have at least double 135 pic mins to get hired there.

 

[FN FAL]

Years ago when I was flying small 135 operations, the FAA made us take a 135 sic checkride. They said if the paying customer requests a second pilot to be on the flight, the flight now requires two pilots, therefore you have to have a qualified sic.

I'm not saying it is right or wrong but I am telling you what actually happend to us.

Too bad your operator was too cheap to have a decent aviation attorney on staff to prevent that from happening.

 

[Bandit60]

HEY FN FAL

READ MY WORDS...Everyone in the FSDO district was having to comply with the FSDO not just my company, but I forgot you know better than the FSDO. Maybe I should have hired you to defend our company and the many others in that district

 

[starchkr]

What's your baggage? I have no idea what you're babbling about. You got 16K a year to right seat non-135 and I got mid thirties, plus dental, medical, vacation and sick leave to do the same thing. Plus, we didn't hire time builders...you had to have at least double 135 pic mins to get hired there.

Are you sure you are bright enough to fly there chief, or are you the next 350driver?!

Apparently someone is not capable of reading before speaking...we are 135(DUH) and the pay is better than instructing, plus we offer bene's(same ones you quoted above by the way). I was not a time builder, unless you consider 5 1/2 years here timebuilding...and apparently, you yourself don't even comprehend what we are talking about. You specifically state that your company did not hire with less than double 135 mins(whoopidy doo), but you preceeded that by saying you got hired to do the same thing i did (fly right seat until i met 135 mins)but got 30k+...hmmm...what gives??? Are you confused on what you really did in this lifetime???

I have held my breath on all the posts you have been making on FI so far, but really, this time i just can't. You have to be one of the most tactless, inconsiderate people i know...like i mentioned earlier, i almost think you may be a 350driver twin.

I'm done now...

some_dude...sorry about the rant, but i really just wanted to answer your question and then got side tracked by some moron who knows absolutely nothing. Dangit, there i go again...calm down....

Ok, as far as 135 freight goes, there are a few instances when you are capable of flying and logging SIC time in a small prop... First, when ever we have a jumpseater, the a/c turns into pax carrying. We must follow different guidlines than when we are not flying with riders, and therefore either the SIC or autopilot is required. The second is when the Chief Pilot assigns a second pilot to a certain run/flight...by assigning that pilot to the flight they are required crewmembers which allows the logging of the time. A lot of poeple do not understand that, but we do have proof from the FAA and our local FSDO(columbus) that we can do this and that they know we do it, and that it is all legal.

 

[FN FAL]

Are you sure you are bright enough to fly there chief, or are you the next 350driver?!

that's low dude, really low.

 

[FN FAL]

HEY FN FAL

READ MY WORDS...Everyone in the FSDO district was having to comply with the FSDO not just my company, but I forgot you know better than the FSDO. Maybe I should have hired you to defend our company and the many others in that district

I hear ya bra! Our POI is going GI Joe with the life like hair and the kung fu grip on the local FSDO for screwing with us over type IV deicing fluid and our manual.

Believe me, I know some of our local FSDO guys are great, but when one of them gets a hair and it's wrong somone needs to step up.

That someone needs to be the POI and the operator.

There's no reason why insurance requirements (civil) and FAR requirements (admin) should meet. If the insurance requirement of the passengers says they are happy with a commercial, IFR multi dude or dudess, then who cares if the person is SIC 135 or a another number on the passenger manifest?

I'm not saying you're lying, I'm just thinking that way back when this happened, that Janet Reno was US AG and everybody was affraid to question author-i-tie.