Logging Right Seat Time

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.

Jose wrote:


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

This is where I usually make some crack about the sole manipulator of
the pilot in command.