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

Type Ratings!!!

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
ipilot:

I would generally agree with the advise given on this thread.

However there is one thing to consider. When you obtain your ATP mins you might want to consider getting your ATP in a Citation for example as opposed to say an Aztec or Baron. This way you will kill two birds with 1 stone.

The Citation is an easy plane to fly and there are schools where you could get the training for a few K.

No disrespect intended but at your experiance level a B-737 Type might be biting of more than you can chew!

BTW. I got my ATP in a Citation in 1979 and it worked out well for me.

Good luck
 
SIC time

There are only a few ways to log SIC, and whether a Part 91 Company has a policy to have two pilots fly does not enter into it whatsoever. The only way(s) to legally log SIC that Iam aware of are:

1) As a SIC in an aircraft whose type certificate requires a SIC, or

2) Under regulations that require a SIC.

For example, under Part 135 or 121, an aircraft in scheduled pax service with more than 9 pax seats requires a SIC. This SIC must have completed a prescribed amount of ground school and flight training for the company, and have taken a 135.293 checkride in the past 12 months.

Under Part 91, since a Safety pilot is a required crewmember when the sole manipulator is under a hood, you could log that time as SIC time if you really had some burning god-awful desire to put something in that SIC cloumn in your logbook, but most people designate the safety pilot as PIC and he logs it that way.

Not to muddy the waters too much, but you may be interested to know that there is actually a difference between ACTING as PIC and SERVING as PIC. That is fodder for another string, but basically, the Regs say that there must be a PIC designated for the flight, that person must meet certain recency of experience qualifications (IFR currency, or 3 takeoffs/ldgs in 90 days, for example) but that person may or may not manipulate the controls. You may have another pilot, actually fly the airplane. If the airplane is a C90 that does not require two pilots, the holder of a multi-engine rating could be PIC, SERVING as the sole manipulator, while the other pilot ACTS as PIC. Most people believe that although this sort of time may be legal, it is not very honest, and most airlines specifically state that all PIC time must be as the "signer for the aircraft" or the person ultimately responsible for the flight.

One more thing- to ACT as PIC of the King Air, you would also need to have a high altitude endorsement too. Technically, if the other pilot was fully current and qualified to ACT as PIC, and you had a multi-engine rating, you could SERVE as a PIC without the endorsement, simply logging it a PIC- sole manipulator, appropriately rated, but, again, most prospective employers will look down on ths type of time.

If it were me, I would simply log the time as "aircraft familiarization" and "aircraft training" and make an effort to learn about the aircraft- its numbers, operating limitations, normal, abnormal and emergency procedures- but I am sure you would do this anyway, as a future professional.

Check out 61.55 and 61.57 for further info, also FAR Part 1, definition, (pilot in command).

Good Luck!
 
SIC Discussion

Ty,

Thanks for clearing up the SIC question. The reason I mentioned "required by the company" is I had a friend flying for a corporation that operated Citation I SPs and BE300s. Two other pilot's where typed in both aircraft and had single pilot endorsements for the Citation. Therefore, no copilot (SIC) was required per certification or regulation (Part 91 flight department). The buddy of mine flew for them for six years and, until typed, logged his time as SIC since he was a hired crewmember on the aircraft. The way I read your post, since it was a part 91 flight department AND per cert/regs no SIC was legally required, he shouldn't have logged his time as SIC? Thats where I thought a "required crewmember as listed in their department manual" could be counted as SIC. I'd sure hate to tell him his logbook is about 2000 hours in error!

Again, thanks for the post as it's a good discussion for those who are up and coming in the aviation profession. To be honest, after interviewing with airlines, fracs and corporate jobs, I sure wish 20 years ago someone...ANYONE...would have been more clear on how to log time. Sure would have made filling out applications SOOOOOOO much easier!!!

Regards,

2000Flyer
 
Well, here I thought I had ONE **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** reg figured out, you have come up with a whole new facet to it that I hadn't even considered. Hmmnnn, I do not know the answer to this one. Maybe some Citation pilot could clarify this for us.

My guess, and it is only a guess, is that the Citation SP's are operated under a waiver, or authorization, to be operated SP, and that a SIC could still be utilized, simply by not using that waiver (or authorization, whichever it is, I don't know for sure).

While we're on the subject, recent accident statistics printed in one of the Industry rags (forget which one, maybe BCA) showed that single pilot t-prop operations and single-pilot jet operations each had a safety record that was 30% worse than two-pilot Ops. That is, you were 30% more likely to get an accident or incident when operating single pilot. Makes you wonder how much more likely you are to get violated, too.

Just food for thought, but in any jet I would be flying, an SIC would be a required crew member, if I had anything to do with it.
 
I have a single pilot type in the CE525. I can fly single pilot all day for my company as long as I am doing part 91 flights. Our 135 ops specs require two pilots, so in that case, we use two pilots who are both typed with single pilot authorization. When the two pilots fly together on part 91 flights, there is a PIC and a "copilot" - no one logs "SIC" time on the part 91 flights. That is reserved for our 135 operations where it is spelled out that two pilots are required for the operations. We could probably log SIC time on the part 91 legs and justify it by operating all part 91 flights under 135 regs, but that's a road I don't want to go down. Me, personally... I want everything in my logbook to be self-explanatory if I ever get the chance to interview with Alaska...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top