Logging Right Seat Time

I'm a Captain in all the planes but move to the right seat often. When
I'm in the right seat what can I log?

IMHO, If you are the Pilot In Command, you log PIC time, no matter what
(physical) seat you sit in. (Some planes don't even have a left seat!).
If you are =metaphorically= "sitting in the right seat" (i.e. you are
just along for the ride while somebody else takes responsibility for the
flight) then you don't log anything, no matter what physical seat you
occupy.

That is, you can log anything you want, but you can't use that
particular time towards ratings and currency.

My strict reading of 61.51(e) says that if you are not the "sole
manipulator", then even if you =are= the PIC, then so long as anybody
else is handling the controls, you can't log PIC time, but if you hand
over the controls to the autopilot and take a nap, you can log it
yourself. However, I would maintain that if somebody else is handling
the controls for you, under your direction, then you are merely using an
organic autopilot.

I don't see the essential difference between the two, especially with
the sophistication of some modern autopilots. The FAA may disagree, I'd
like to hear their reasoning (and the reasoning of anyone else who
disagrees)

Jose
--
I used to make money in the stock market, now I make money in the basement.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
I'm a Captain in all the planes but move to the right seat often. When
I'm in the right seat what can I log?


IMHO, If you are the Pilot In Command, you log PIC time, no matter what
(physical) seat you sit in.

Where you sit is not important. However, the rules don't say "LOG PIC
TIME WHEN YOU ARE PIC." In order to do that there are additional
qualifications. The most commonly used one is that the regulations
(lets say Part 135) require more than one pilot.

My strict reading of 61.51(e) says that if you are not the "sole
manipulator", then even if you =are= the PIC, then so long as anybody
else is handling the controls, you can't log PIC time,Y

You better read 61.51 again. There are three more clauses than the
one you're reading.

My strict reading of 61.51(e) says that if you are not the "sole manipulator", then even if you =are= the PIC, then so long as anybody else is handling the controls, you can't log PIC time,Y

You better read 61.51 again. There are three more clauses than the
one you're reading.

I didn't think they were relevant to the discussion.

Rec, private, or comm pilot may log PIC if...
sole manipulator (& rated) ... or sole occupant ... or (not except for
rec pilots) =is= PIC when two pilots are required.

The other clauses pertain to ATPs, authorized instructors, and student
pilots. So I was focusing on the first set.

We were discussing a situation where only one pilot is required, and
there is another occupant of the aircraft. In this case, I believe that
as I wrote above, a strict reading says that even if you =are= the
actual Pilot In Command (perhaps by dint of being the only pilot aboard,
perhaps by another dint), then if anybody else is handling the controls,
you can't log PIC time. However, if an FAA approved robot is handling
the controls, then you can.

Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control. You can program the FMS to do the takeoff, cruise,
and landing, take a nap, and set an alarm for when your wheels touch the
ground again, and log the whole thing as PIC. You can do this with a
non-FAA approved robot too, if you are flying an experimental class
aircraft. (At least I think that's true - how much does the FAA get
involved in certification of instrumentation and such for
experimentals?) It's unclear as to whether you can let a monkey operate
the controls and still log it as PIC (which may be a problem for those
that employ the cat-dog-duck method of IFR flight), but if you let a
human act as your autopilot, a strict reading of the rules says nix on
the logbook.

So, you (a regular private pilot) go up in a 172 with a friend who is
not a pilot, you let him take the controls while you very carefully
supervise her, and you can't log the time PIC. The next day you fly a
Cirrus by programming the CID (Cirrus Autoflight Device) and pushing the
GO button, essentially become a passenger while the glass cockpit does
the work, and all that time goes in your book as PIC.

Doesn't make sense to me. This is why I mention the organic autopilot.

Jose
--
I used to make money in the stock market, now I make money in the basement.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
news
My strict reading of 61.51(e) says that if you are not the "sole
manipulator", then even if you =are= the PIC, then so long as anybody
else is handling the controls, you can't log PIC time,Y

You better read 61.51 again. There are three more clauses than the
one you're reading.

I didn't think they were relevant to the discussion.

Rec, private, or comm pilot may log PIC if...
sole manipulator (& rated) ... or sole occupant ... or (not except for rec
pilots) =is= PIC when two pilots are required.

The other clauses pertain to ATPs, authorized instructors, and student
pilots. So I was focusing on the first set.

We were discussing a situation where only one pilot is required, and there
is another occupant of the aircraft. In this case, I believe that as I
wrote above, a strict reading says that even if you =are= the actual Pilot
In Command (perhaps by dint of being the only pilot aboard, perhaps by
another dint), then if anybody else is handling the controls, you can't
log PIC time. However, if an FAA approved robot is handling the controls,
then you can.

Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control. You can program the FMS to do the takeoff, cruise,
and landing, take a nap, and set an alarm for when your wheels touch the
ground again, and log the whole thing as PIC. You can do this with a
non-FAA approved robot too, if you are flying an experimental class
aircraft. (At least I think that's true - how much does the FAA get
involved in certification of instrumentation and such for experimentals?)
It's unclear as to whether you can let a monkey operate the controls and
still log it as PIC (which may be a problem for those that employ the
cat-dog-duck method of IFR flight), but if you let a human act as your
autopilot, a strict reading of the rules says nix on the logbook.

So, you (a regular private pilot) go up in a 172 with a friend who is not
a pilot, you let him take the controls while you very carefully supervise
her, and you can't log the time PIC. The next day you fly a Cirrus by
programming the CID (Cirrus Autoflight Device) and pushing the GO button,
essentially become a passenger while the glass cockpit does the work, and
all that time goes in your book as PIC.

Doesn't make sense to me. This is why I mention the organic autopilot.

Jose
--
I used to make money in the stock market, now I make money in the
basement.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I think that it is simpler. You can log pilot time when the FAA requires
you to be in the airplane performing as pilot. If you are not required (ie
you are one of 4 pilots in a 172) you can't log the time.

If you go through the specific rules this seems to hold true. Every time
that there is an instance where two pilots can log time, it is becasue two
pilots are required by regulation.

Mike
MU-2

"Jose" wrote in message
news
So, you (a regular private pilot) go up in a 172 with a friend who is not
a pilot, you let him take the controls while you very carefully supervise
her, and you can't log the time PIC.

That's correct, at least according to the wording of the FARs (61.51e).
Whether it's what the FAA really intended is anyone's guess.

Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control.

Yup. Whereas a passenger does not count as a control. That distinction per
se (between what is and isn't a control) is reasonable, though the
corresponding distinction between the time you can and can't log is less
reasonable, as you point out.

--Gary

Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control.


Yup. Whereas a passenger does not count as a control. That distinction per
se (between what is and isn't a control) is reasonable

Why?

This is a serious question, especially considering the capabilities of
some robots, and the lack of capability of some organic autopilots.

Jose
--
I used to make money in the stock market, now I make money in the basement.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
news
Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control.


Yup. Whereas a passenger does not count as a control. That distinction
per se (between what is and isn't a control) is reasonable

Why?

This is a serious question, especially considering the capabilities of
some robots, and the lack of capability of some organic autopilots.

The distinction is reasonable because the ordinary meaning of 'control' is
that it refers to an inanimate or non-sentient device, not to a person. As
sophisticated as some autopilots are, they are not yet sentient. You're
right that *for purposes of logging PIC time*, that distinction doesn't
matter (though for many *other* purposes it certainly matters!). So the line
drawn by 61.51e doesn't make much sense, but that's different from the
distinction between control and non-control not making sense. The FAA should
just rephrase 61.51e(ii) to say "sole rated occupant" rather than "sole
occupant".

--Gary

Jose wrote:
Handling the robot (turning on the autopilot) apparantly counts as
handling a control.



Yup. Whereas a passenger does not count as a control. That distinction
per se (between what is and isn't a control) is reasonable


Why?

This is a serious question, especially considering the capabilities of
some robots, and the lack of capability of some organic autopilots.


It's a distinction without a difference. Nobody with more than three
brain cells left who goes flying for an hour and lets their 10 year old
kid fly for 30 minutes of that hour only logs 30 minutes as PIC.

"Newps" wrote in message
...
Nobody with more than three brain cells left who goes flying for an hour
and lets their 10 year old kid fly for 30 minutes of that hour only logs
30 minutes as PIC.

Why? Even if you're convinced that the FAA didn't mean what it said when it
wrote 61.51e (which is quite possible), what would be the harm in playing it
safe and logging no more time than the FARs actually say you can log?

--Gary

Nobody with more than three brain cells left who goes flying for an hour and lets their 10 year old kid fly for 30 minutes of that hour only logs 30 minutes as PIC.

Well that leaves me out. I have three functioning brain cells, of which
only two operate at the same time.

How many rat cells is the new organic autopilot made from?

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.