"Skidder" wrote in :

Very well put Tom and I would have to say I fully agree with 90% of it.
I'm just not certain a court would agree with it, but hey, I'm just
guessing on this part too. I think we got lost on trying to find a label
for the second pilot.

I think the second pilot is still a pilot. What most of us are
struggling with is who is PIC, and perhaps who logs the time. It seems
clear to me that both pilots are clearly there for currency, and would
have to hold themselves jointly accountable in case of an incident. What
else could they possible argue. The know that neither of them can claim
to be the others passenger, so joint accountability seem implied and
assured.

Next, both should be fully capible of executing their currency
requirements without incident or assistance, or there is something wrong
with the currency FARs to begin with. So the safety of the flight is
assures, to the best of the FARs ability to control it. And certainly as
well as it is if each pilot when up solo.

Finally, the overall fight is safer, because you have a fully qualified
back-up for it's entire duration.

The only thing left is how to log the time. To keep it simple, pilot A
should maitain all control from the time the prop starts until the end
of his third landing, and log only the time it took. Pilot B should then
take the controls until the prop stops, and record the balance.

How could a reasonable person argue against this? What would the
arguement be? If it is safe for each pilot to go up solo to record their
currency. How could you argue that both going together would not be more
prudent?

To me the only down side is if your friend bends the airplane during his
watch. Cause then you are in the soup with him.

What if Pilot A hasn't flown in 10 years? Would you still feel this is
safer than if Pilot A didn't fly with an instructor in the right seat
instead of his buddy, Pilot B who hasn't flown in 15 years?