SO how does this work... ?

[Vastly Underemp]

Midlife.....

An FAA Designated Examiner is conducting a practical test for a rating which the student completes successfully. Who is the PIC, and who logs the time?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Ok, I'm confused (and not about the difference between acting as PIC and logging it). If you say you don't have a problem treating this as dual, then wouldn't that make him an authorized instructor which would allow him to log PIC?

If you look back, you'll see that I was answering two different questions. It was suggested by someone that the CFI should simply go up with someone, =not= treat it as dual, and log it as PIC anyway.

I was only saying:

1. =If= the pilot is =not= acting as CFI, there is nothing in 61.51 that permitted him to log the time a PIC.

2. I saw no reason why the pilot should not treat it as instruction.

Quite clearly, if it is dual, it's PIC for the instructor.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Midlife.....

An FAA Designated Examiner is conducting a practical test for a rating which the student completes successfully. Who is the PIC, and who logs the time?

Student is PIC unless the Examiner specifically agrees to act in that capacity. A reg specifically says to do it.

Student also logs the time as PIC. There are plenty of explanations why, but bottom line is that this is the one time that convention trumps 61.51. There really isn't any 61.51 category that covers the student pilot =logging= PIC during the checkride.

Sounds like a lot more hijacking that we started with.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

Prior to hijacking........CFI logs PIC time, as older gent doesn't have a medical, pilot's discretion for logging dual, agreed?

Post hijacking.......BOTH examiner and pilot may log PIC time (successful exam). 61.51 doesn't cover everything. My test for PIC time has always been who is the FAA going to hang if there's an incident or accident.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Prior to hijacking.... CFI logs PIC time regardless of older gent's medical and regardless of who is actually PIC. Older gent logs dual because that's what its is (and the regs say that a CFI must endorse all training time) and PIC because he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft he's rated for.

Post hijacking... Your test is fine for you. I'd rather use the FAA's and avoid the potential for certificate revocation for logbook falsification.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

Prior....no pilot may exercise the priveleges of his Airman Certificate unless accompanied by a VALID medical certificate, therefore, the elder gent may NOT log the time as anything but dual received

Post..... The only time you'll ever get your certs pulled for logbook falsification is if you don't fly enough for currency purposes (is that your case?) and that's what your falsifying. All that is required to be logged is currency and qualifications. Everything else is your own.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Prior....no pilot may exercise the priveleges of his Airman Certificate unless accompanied by a VALID medical certificate, therefore, the elder gent may NOT log the time as anything but dual received

Writing things in a on a piece of paper while sitting at a desk with a beer in hand is not one of the privileges of any pilot certificate I know of. Acting as a pilot or required crewmember is.

You seem have a basic and common misunderstanding of the long-standing and multiple-times interpreted rules of FAA logging under 61.51, which come down to that the rules of exercising privileges of a pilot certificate and the rules of logging are quite different and sometimes exactly opposite each other.

Just as an educational exercise, you can start with the logging FAQ on my web site. http://www.midlifeflight.com/faq/faq.php?s=2#3 Not that it's anything special or authoritative - it's just the easiest way for me to point out what the rules are. All of the "Rules" scenarios have pretty solid sources in FAA Legal opinions, and with a little searching you can find them discussed ad nauseum online.

I've given up arguing about them a long time ago. The argument never gets much beyond "I don't (like)(believe)(accept) it" on the one hand and "Well, that's what the rules and the FAA say" on the other.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

Have a nice day

 

[nosehair]

Have a nice day

Vastly, I have been in this game over 40 years, and, like you, (I think) I was schooled in the concept that logging PIC meant you were actually the PIC and had to have all the paperwork to back that up when logging PIC.
Even when I read 61.51, my mind sub-conciously "assumed" this in the background, and 61.51 was laying out some specific rules about that acting PIC. I still continued to resist the idea that you could log PIC when you were not. It does not make sense, and I am against it as a practice.

However, I have come to read 61.51 in the pure black-and-white that it is, and no where does it say you have to BE the PIC.

If you are sole manipulator of the controls (and they even accept turning on the auto pilot as "sole manipulator"), and the rating is on your certificate, as in ASEL or AMEL or what ever - never mind the required endoresements, medicals currency, etc. because you are not BEING the PIC - he's sitting in the airplane next to you - you can log this "sole manipulator" time as PIC. Says it right there in 61.51. Doesn't say you have to be acting as PIC - just that you are sole manipulator.
And the guy who is the PIC cannot log it unless he is an instructor and is giving dual. Or he is required to be there as in FAR required safety pilot or co-pilot.

Stupid, isn't it. I agree with your concept. I think it has destroyed the meaning of logging PIC. These days, almost all the logged PIC is as an FO, a safety pilot, dual instruction (as a student), etc. Now the interviewers have to dissect the applicant's PIC time.

 

[MauleSkinner]

by the way...if you're logging it as "Dual Given", don't forget about

61.189, Flight instructor records.
(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.

Fly safe!

David

 

[philo beddoe]

The older gent may log it as cat/class, dual received, and PIC.
He may not act, as PIC, but he may log PIC. If he is receiving dual, he does not need a medical. He may log PIC however. Call any fed and ask them. Logging and acting are two different things.

 

[A Squared]

It would be a real shame if HE damaged HIS airplane, the Feds came after YOUR certificate

Folks, let's think about what we're doing here. Of course the FAA will come after your certificate. WHy wouldn't they? You were the PIC. That's *Pilot In Command*, the person responsible for the safe conduct of the flight. If you knowingly go out flying with a guy with no medical, for the purpose of making the flight legal, you have assumed the responsibility for the sucessful outcome of the flight. Being PIC isn't just some arbitrary and meaningless distinction. It means you are accepting the responsibility for answering for whatevber happens on that flight. If you aren't approching this situation with that mindset, you'd better think twice about doing it. I guarantee you the FAA is viewing it with that mindset,

.......and HIS insurance company came after YOU to pay for the damage.

Excellent point, be very sure that you know what the policy does and doesn't cover. Be aware that being listed on the policy as an "approved" pilot, or being listed on the policy, or meeting a minimum experience level listed on the policy probably does *not* protect you. In only means that the insurance company will reimburse the owner if you are PIC when the airplane crashes. In order to be protected from "subrogation" (the insurance company suing you to recover losses) you have to be named as an "additional insured" on the policy, not merely "approved".

Here are two articles which describe it a little more thouroughly:

http://www.avweb.com/news/insure/188814-1.html

http://www.avweb.com/news/insure/190338-1.html

I would encourage anyone flying other people's airplanes to read this to avoid misumderstandings as to whether you are truly protected under someone's insurance policy.

 

[A Squared]

The only time you'll ever get your certs pulled for logbook falsification is if you don't fly enough for currency purposes (is that your case?) and that's what your falsifying. All that is required to be logged is currency and qualifications. Everything else is your own.

Absolutely not true. I can show you NTSB decisions in which pilots had thier certificates revokes for logging time which was *not* required for currency or qualificatins. I can think of at least 2 cases in which that happened. In fact, the FAA has stated, and the NTSB officially concurred, that *everything* in your logbook must be true, regardelss of whether you are using it or intend to use it for currency or qualification.

 

[A Squared]

Vastly,

Rather than getting snippy at Midlife, you should instead be reading what he says carefully, and making more of an effort to understand why you are wrong. Because you are wrong.

The FAA defines PIC time as "sole manipulator" or "the pilot most responsible for the safe conduct of the flight."

No, not correct, being the pilot most responsible for the safe conduct of the flight does not necessarily entitle you to log PIC time. Being PIC and Logging PIC time are two diffent things, one is not necessarily the other.

My test for PIC time has always been who is the FAA going to hang if there's an incident or accident.

That's the test for who *is* PIC, not a valid test for who gets to *log* PIC. These are two different concepts.

Look, like nosehair, I understand why you are having dfficulty with this. I really do. In a world which made sense, you would be able to log PIC any time you are the PIC. If I were writing the regulations, that would be the way it was.

However, that is not the case. Just like midlife says, the fact that you *are* the PIC, does not allow you to *log* PIC, unless you meet other requirements. This is very solidly grounded in both the words of the regulations and official interpretations of those regulations.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

OK, let's put this thread to rest. The original quandry was what to log as a safety pilot/CFI for a guy with no medical. I think we can all agree he should log PIC and can log dual given if he likes.


I'd be happy to debate the PIC issue with either of you, but perhaps it's better accomplished on another thread. And perhaps, A Squared, you might read my post more carefully, as I never said that acting PIC and logging PIC were the same thing. I only intimated that 61.51 doesn't cover it all, and there are many instances where you can log PIC that aren't covered by that reg.

Now let's all play nice.

 

[Say Again Over]

OK, for the slow learners, the last part from A Squared brought most everything together, now if I as a non CFI, I volunteer to fly with a pilot / owner without a medical, although I am technically the PIC, I will not log this flight as PIC since I am not manipulating the controls. OK, so if I understand this right, no one can log this flight per FAR's .

 

[midlifeflyer]

No, the pilot =without= the medical can log it as PIC - Sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot has a pilot certificate with the appropriate category and class ratings printed on the back. Strangely enough, in the world of the FAA, that is =all= that is needed to write time in the PIC column of a logbook. No medical, no currency, no endorsements, no ability, no skill. Nothing. Just a certificate with category and class.

The key to get from A Squared's post is that these two things:

1. being the pilot in command and having responsibility for the flight

and

2. writing down times in the PIC column of a logbook for the purpose of showing qualification for FAA certificates, ratings, privileges and currency

have different meanings, different purposes, and very, very different rules.

As far as I've been able to tell, looking back to the CAR in the 1940's, the US aviation agencies have always made this separation. The problem is that, under the FAR, they made the unfortunate decision to use the same term, "PIC, for these very different concepts. (The CAR used "solo" for "sole manipulator" which probably caused its own problems)

 

[Say Again Over]

Got it, thanks!

 

[mattpilot]

BACK ON TOPIC:

here's a new twist...

i know the CFI is required to sign all dual given in the students logbook. But what if the student 'refuses' to let you sign his logbook? Or what if the student doesn't have a logbook (yet)? Can you still log Dual given?


Situation A: Old man from first post - he has 1500 hours logged and stopped logging after it was apperent he would never get his medical back ... not even a waiver. So if he doesnt' bring his logbook with him, and you dont' get the opportunity to sign it, can i still log it as Dual given and not get in 'trouble' (i know the odds are against it being discovered, but its just a question....).

Situation B: Student without a logbook. Say its a students first flight (intro flight), and he isn't sure yet if he wants to be a pilot. You, as the CFI, still give him 'instruction', but he has no logbook for you to sign. Further, the student never returns for more lessons. Can i still log that as Dual given and stay out of 'trouble' by not signing his non-existant logbook?


thanks guys...

 

[Vastly Underemp]

My humble understanding is that you may log dual given in your logbook in both scenarios. The only reason you'd need to log it in both of their logbooks would be for their currency or future rating, and if they chose to not get "credit" for your dual time that's their choice. It doesn't effect the legality of your logbook.