What is "total time"?

[PropsForward]

But in some cases, as in mine, you have an instructor riding along with you, instructing you. You have to log it PIC for your MEI requirements but I also logged it dual recieved because I was recieving dual.

If you are rated in the aircraft, and operating the controls, then you are PIC even if you are receiving instruction. You would count the flight as PIC and Dual.

 

[PropsForward]

I saw it on flightinfo.com so it MUST be true!!!!!!!!!

Now thats a motto to live by! Hope you don't mind, but I'm gonna add it to my signature line!

 

[Pickle]

HEY!! You can use it, but you have to give me credit!!

 

[TonyC]

Wait a minute!. If the airliner is only half full, can the ratio be by the number of passengers instead of number of seats?

Just trying to get some time a little quicker...

AbsoLUTEly not. The FAA put considerable thought in regulating this nuance, as I'll now demonstrate. Imagine the stunts pilots might pull if the ratio were based on passengers. He would be motivated to do anything he could to persuade passengers NOT to fly. He might tape little signs over the DEPARTURES monitors stating "Flight 453 CANCELLED" so passengers would try to find another flight. He might put "POLICE LINE - DO NOT CROSS" tape across the concourse to keep passengers from reaching the gate. He might even get a friend to cause a disturbance at the screening area to keep people from gaining access to the flight. There's really no limit to the shenanigans a motivated pilot might pull just to improve his logging ratio.

No, the ratio is based strictly on the number of seats on the airplane. The FAA DID, however, allow us to count the number of seats configured, rather than the max number certificated. This detail works in the pilot's favor at times, and it's assumed he won't go so far as to be unbolting seats before departure.

 

[TonyC]

Maintain your logbook the 14 CFR 61.51 way and you will never be wrong.

Pssssst... [whisper] Bobby. If they were interested in the legal, FAA-sanctioned way, they wouldn't be asking here ! [/whipser]








.

 

[PropsForward]

AbsoLUTEly not. The FAA put considerable thought in regulating this nuance.

LOL. Dern! Them FAA folks thought of eveything.

_________________
I saw it on flightinfo.com so it MUST be true!!!!!!!!! (Copyright 2004 by Pickle, All Rights Reserved. Used with permission)

 

[FracCapt]

This detail works in the pilot's favor at times, and it's assumed he won't go so far as to be unbolting seats before departure.

Well, not anymore! They won't let us take tools through security!

 

[Pickle]

propsforward said: "I saw it on flightinfo.com so it MUST be true!!!!!!!!! (Copyright 2004 by Pickle, All Rights Reserved. Used with permission)"

OUTSTANDING!!!

Anything to get my name out there!!

 

[minitour]

Pssssst... [whisper] Bobby. If they were interested in the legal, FAA-sanctioned way, they wouldn't be asking here ! [/whipser]








.

I'm curious as to why interview boards want to see time shown a certain way when 61.51 clearly shows that "their way" is ... uh ... wrong.

-mini

 

[bobbysamd]

Airline app flight time grids

I'm curious as to why interview boards want to see time shown a certain way when 61.51 clearly shows that "their way" is ... uh ... wrong.

One would think that if it's good enough for the guvment is should be good enough for anyone. However, each airline has its own idea about how it views flight time. In addition, the miliary counts flight time differently than civilian.

Military flight records do not reflect taxi time, which is contrary to civilian practice, in which all ground motion of the aircraft is counted as part of the flight. So, military pilots are often in a quandry as to how much time should be added for their time to reflect civilian time. Many military pilots keep separate civilian logbooks and count each flight the civilian way.

A pro-military pilot bias can be discerned from airline application flight time grids (at least the ones I prepared). The best example are columns for multi-engine centerline thrust time. Clearly, those columns are there because so many military aircraft have centerline thrust. I suppose that pilots with Cessna Skymaster time would have to fill out the columns as well.

The point is you have to prepare each flight time grid according to its instructions, even if it runs contrary to the FAA method of counting flight time and/or you think it's stupid. Yes, it's a lot of work going through your logbook to prepare these grids, but it's all part of the game.

 

[TonyC]

Let's put things in perspective.


First, there's no requirement to maintain a logbook of any sort. You must be able to document experience, and in some cases recency of experience, in order to accomplish certain things. You could present a stack of receipts from your FBO, or a piece of notebook paper with your instructor's sign-off in Sharpie, or a collection of dinner napkins with grease-pencil writing. While I would suggest none of the above, they would all serve to document that you have accumulated the prerequisite flight experience to apply for the rating you desire. The types of activities you decide to track are entirely up to you.

Second, the military doesn't care about FAA ratings, so they can define a flight hour any way they please. They don't charge by the Hobbs meter or the Tach, either, so it really isn't relevent.

Third, the potential employer (airline) can ask you any question they want to ask, so long as they don't violate a law. If they want to ask you how many hours you've accumulated while flying barefoot, they can ask. If they want to know how many hours you've accumulated on autopilot, they can ask. If they want to ask how many landings you've accomplished from the left seat during crosswinds of greater than 15 knots, they can ask. If their definition of PIC time differs in some respect from somebody else's, including the FAA's, they can ask. Feel free to refuse to answer any of the requests, or to complain about any of them.

Finally - - this thread is a joke - - why are we expending energy on serious responses?

 

[TonyC]

A pro-military pilot bias can be discerned from airline application flight time grids (at least the ones I prepared). The best example are columns for multi-engine centerline thrust time. Clearly, those columns are there because so many military aircraft have centerline thrust.

Or is it an anti-military bias? One might view that as a way of segregating multi-engine centerline thrust experience from "real" multi-engine experience. One of the certificates I held along the way was AMEL Centerline Thrust Only. At that point, the only multi I could have flown was the Skymaster. As far as most employers were concerned, the vast multi experience I had at that point was pretty much worthless. Logging 1500 hrs T-37 and 10 hours of KC-135 times as 1510 hours Multi turbine paints a far different picture than breaking the same hours out with a centerline thrust column. 10 hrs T-37 and 1500 hrs KC-135 looks exactly the same using the former method, quite different using the latter.

 

[bobbysamd]

[T]his thread is a joke - - why are we expending energy on serious responses?

The initial post sounded like a legitimate question.

 

[TonyC]

The initial post sounded like a legitimate question.

Standing alone, I would agree. Scroll back to the original post, click on his name, click on View Profile, then click on Find all threads started by UnAnswerd, and browse through the list. Notice the "Please help, girl just dumped me" thread. Once you put him in perspective, you might be reminded of the little boy who cried wolf. I could be wrong, but that's my perspective.

 

[Daveman]

Standing alone, I would agree. Scroll back to the original post, click on his name, click on View Profile, then click on Find all threads started by UnAnswerd, and browse through the list. Notice the "Please help, girl just dumped me" thread. Once you put him in perspective, you might be reminded of the little boy who cried wolf. I could be wrong, but that's my perspective.

You're not alone.

 

[Ball Turret]

Thanks Bobby,

I just wanted to get some more opinions on the subject. However, I have actually talked to some feds that interpret the regulations otherwise. Thanks for the input.

 

[bobbysamd]

Legitimate thread

Standing alone, I would agree. Scroll back to the original post, click on his name, click on View Profile, then click on Find all threads started by UnAnswerd, and browse through the list. Notice the "Please help, girl just dumped me" thread. Once you put him in perspective, you might be reminded of the little boy who cried wolf. I could be wrong, but that's my perspective.

I had not seen that thread. I had seen his other posts, which raised legitimate questions.

 

[bobbysamd]

FAR interpretation

I just wanted to get some more opinions on the subject. However, I have actually talked to some feds that interpret the regulations otherwise. Thanks for the input.

Sure. But feds are not to be relied upon for regs interpretation. The generally accepted authority for regs interpretations are FAA General Counsel opinions.

Your approach question is a great example because I encountered it years before. When I was instructing at FSI twelve years ago, our Chief Pilot tried to foist upon us instructors the same regulatory interpretation crap about counting approaches that you raised, that an instructor can count his/her students' approaches as his/her own for currency. He said that an ASI from our governing FSDO in Orlando told him that. None of us instructors bought it for a moment - and I'm talking about instructors with diverse backgrounds, from being FSI-trained to those who were hired from the outside with years of experience.

In this instance, 14 CFR 61.51 and 14 CFR 61.57 say what they say. It does not take a pilot, flight instructor, lawyer, paralegal or other form of rocket scientist to interpret their meaning.

 

[Jmmccutc]

TT= age*365*24...

 

[Vik]

Oh I will one of these days

Seriously, guy comes on asking such a simple question, and he's got people quoting the regs to him and telling him to call Larry H. Parker for a legal opinion. If I was working on my private and that happened to me, I mighta quit!

Hey dude, with a kick-a$$ response like that, you should be flying that avitar!

 

[Ball Turret]

bobby,

thanks again for responding. i will take that advice, and more importantly, i will try to just read the regs for what they say instead of trying to interpret them in a way that will benefit the flight instructor. i am just doing my best to get a hold of each reg to the best of my ability to stay legal and save my ass. thanks again, talk to you later.

bt

 

[freightdogfred]

Total Time is based on a complex formula.

Each minute of flight time is an addend in this formula.

Time in the left seat is credited at a 1:1 ratio.

Time in the right seat is credited at a 1:2 ratio.

Time in the back seat is credited at a 1:5 ratio.

Time as a passenger in a commercial airliner is credited based on a ratio of 1:number of seats on the airliner. (If you are a member of the airline's frequent flyer program, you can contact their flight time representative and receive bonus hour credits on qualifying flights.)

Double credit is awarded for familiarization flights up to a limit of 2 hours (doubled for 4).

The sum of all the addends is the Total Time.



(PFT hours do not count at all.)

Do I get to log the time I spent here reading the ridiculous posts and replys???

 

[TonyC]

Do I get to log the time I spent here reading the ridiculous posts and replys???

Only if you hacked a clock when you started.

 

[FN FAL]

Do I get to log the time I spent here reading the ridiculous posts and replys???

This morning I told my wife the "total time" joke I inserted in this thread on about the first or second page...she almost passed total out her nose.