Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Southeast Jobs

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
You are legal to log it. If it were me I would because by the FARs you are PIC as sole manipulator of the controls. It is legal, but you may not get credit for it from the employer. You are not gonna get in trouble for logging it so I would. Most of these guys know more about corporate stuff and how it's looked upon than I do though...
 
Legally you can log the time that you were at the controls. Don't log the time that you weren't flying as SIC. It's no good. But go ahead and log your sole manipulator time, it's legal.
*BUT* be sure you know the airplane in case you are asked about it in the future. I don't know why an interviewer would discredit you for legally logging flight time. However, they will most definitely discredit you and your time if after questioning you they find out that you know nothing about the airplane in which you were logging PIC time.
 
Ride High said:
So is this time good for nothing because a lot of other experienced guys are telling me its totally legal to log the time as long as the regs are met and not the insurance. They tell me that the insurance is for job position but that logging the time legally is different. I am not trying to argue but clarify. These guys have lots of corporate experience.

Technically, you are correct. If you've done 3 takeoffs and landings in the King Air, you are "qualified" to act as PIC, provided it's not a BE350 which, if memory serves, requires a type rating.

The point many of us are trying to make is that you're putting a huge red flag in your logbook. Only a handfull of corporate flight departments that I know of actually do a logbook review during an interview. However, submitting a resume of 1000TT, 300 ME and 100 PIC in a King Air will immediately cause the potential employer to question you. It's much like saying you have 1000TT and 500 actual IFR. It may be true and you're being completely honest. But why put that red flag out there that will probably get your resume canned and you'll never even hear from them.

In the end, it's obviously your call as to how you log your time. All we're trying to tell you is to be prudent. By jumping on a board such as this, full of experienced professionals and one of your first statements was your PIC King Air time raised many eyebrows. Don't you think you'll get the same response sending out resumes?

2000Flyer
 
Thanks for the advice. I am not putting it on my resume as turbine PIC or king air PIC. I will leave that until they want to see my log book when talking to them in the future. I just wanted to put some of my quals. out to allow anyone that could help see that I had more than C172 experience. I also have about 15 hrs Part 91 SIC challenger 604 time but I would not dare put that in my log book or bring it up to interviewers. That is just for experience.
 
Ride High said:
Thanks for the advice. I am not putting it on my resume as turbine PIC or king air PIC. I will leave that until they want to see my log book when talking to them in the future. I just wanted to put some of my quals. out to allow anyone that could help see that I had more than C172 experience. I also have about 15 hrs Part 91 SIC challenger 604 time but I would not dare put that in my log book or bring it up to interviewers. That is just for experience.

Ok, now I'm really curious. Please tell me what you did or how they qualified you as SIC on a 604. I'm not trying to be critical and I know it can be done. I know one Fortune 100 company they hired 700 hour pilots as SICs on GV's. I also know they went through a full initial at FSI to do so.

Thanks in advance.

2000Flyer
 
the chief pilot is a good friend and a D.E. I know this all may sound false but I have been very lucky. I was not qualified as SIC in my mind but he told me I could log this as training towards SIC quals. Now I know better then to ever put this in a resume or bring it up to interviewers. In no way would I want this to be questioned unless I was flight safety current in the airplane. The operation is part 91 so legally I guess since he is a current multi instructor, ATP, and DE on the 604 he could check me out but insurance would never go for it and people would never believe me
 
My mind is a little foggy but to qualify as a SIC on a part 91 flight in a turbine a/c by the FAA standards, you would need:

-Some training on the systems of the a/c in use. Usually done in house.

-3 takeoffs and landings.

-A multi-engine and instrument ratings. And a commercial rating if you were going to be paid.

Would an SIC need a High Alt. signoff for flights above FL180?

Your King Air and Cl604 time is good experience, but i can see how it could get you into trouble in an interview situation.

Now, what's not even talk about insurance requirements!

SCT
 
I would have to agree, you have been very lucky. Yours is definitely the exception, not the rule.

According to FAR 61.55..

Sec. 61.55 - Second-in-command qualifications.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may serve as a second in command of an aircraft type certificated for more than one required pilot flight crewmember or in operations requiring a second in command unless that person holds:

(1) At least a current private pilot certificate with the appropriate category and class rating; and

(2) An instrument rating that applies to the aircraft being flown if the flight is under IFR.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may serve as a second in command of an aircraft type certificated for more than one required pilot flight crewmember or in operations requiring a second in command unless that person has within the previous 12 calendar months:

(1) Become familiar with the following information for the specific type aircraft for which second-in-command privileges are requested --

(i) Operational procedures applicable to the powerplant, equipment, and systems.

(ii) Performance specifications and limitations.

(iii) Normal, abnormal, and emergency operating procedures.

(iv) Flight manual.

(v) Placards and markings.


(2) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, performed and logged pilot time in the type of aircraft or in a flight simulator that represents the type of aircraft for which second-in-command privileges are requested, which includes --

(i) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop as the sole manipulator of the flight controls;

(ii) Engine-out procedures and maneuvering with an engine out while executing the duties of pilot in command; and

Note: this is not being PIC, but executing duties OF PIC

(iii) Crew resource management training.


My questions to you are: were your 3 TO/LDG done on the first flight? Have you complied with the above criteria (OEI, CRM, etc.)?

If you flew a leg and landed, the next day flew a leg and landed, and the same on day 3, you were in no way compliant with 61.55 and therefore in violation as was the PIC/company with whom you were flying.

An aircraft that requires two pilot's, both MUST be qualified and current in order for that aircraft to fly. There are a few exceptions but in a very gray area of the FARs. I highly doubt the FAA would "sign off" on the dual given argument if it's done during a normal company flight with passengers on board!

I'm not questioning your training but I am trying to point out the slippery slope you're on.

2000Flyer
 
Last edited:
I have not been to King Air school and I am insured under part-135 as pic.So it is possible to get insured without sim school.

Dangerkitty said:
You are not the PIC. You are being supervised by the Chief Pilot. You haven't even been to school for the aircraft for Christ sake.

If you have not been to any approved training program on the King Air through FSI, Simuflite or the like NO INSURANCE COMPANY WOULD INSURE YOU TO FLY THAT AIRCRAFT. How can you be a PIC on an aircraft that an Insurance Company wouldn't insure you in? I have about 8 times the amount of flight time that you do and I have to go to school at FlightSafety every 6 months. NO EXCEPTIONS.

If I was interviewing prospects for a pilot job and you walked in with 100 hours of King Air "PIC" listed on your Resume I wouldn't hire you because you are lying about your experience.

Until you have been to school on the King Air and can satisfy the insurance requirements to be listed on the policy you cannot act as PIC on this aircraft.

Just to be sure ask your Chief Pilot if you can take the next trip by yourself with no other pilot on board. Or at the very least a pilot with less experience than you. When he says no you will have your answer.
 
2000 thanks for the advice. I just want it to be known that I am not trying to pull a fast one. However I have learned a lot from my king air experience and plan to use that knowledge to further my career. the challenger time is just "another feather in the hat" maybe one day some one will send me to school on an airplane of that caliber
 
kilroy said:
I have not been to King Air school and I am insured under part-135 as pic.So it is possible to get insured without sim school.

But...you were trained by your company (aka in-house) and passed a P135 checkride. Lets keep things apples to apples here.

2000Flyer
 
Ride High said:
2000 thanks for the advice. I just want it to be known that I am not trying to pull a fast one. However I have learned a lot from my king air experience and plan to use that knowledge to further my career. the challenger time is just "another feather in the hat" maybe one day some one will send me to school on an airplane of that caliber

Ride, I don't think anyone was trying to accuse you of pulling a fast one. We're all just sharing some hard earned advice ;)

2000Flyer
 
kilroy said:
I have not been to King Air school and I am insured under part-135 as pic.So it is possible to get insured without sim school.

Part 135 and Part 91 are completely different animals. You have a POI and are required to have an approved training program developed by your company and approved by the FAA. Since you must complete a Part 135 checkride it is possible to be the PIC without going to an approved school.

We are not talking about the same situation in regards to Ride High.
 
All this talk about logging. I don't need to look at the regs to see if I can log the time. If you flew the plane, were rated for that catergory and class and didn't need a type LOG IT. Isn't the golden rule "fly what you can, log what you need".
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom