Right seat flying

Matt Whiting wrote:
running with scissors wrote:

From: Anthony Acri )
Subject: Right Seat Flying



Date: 2001-12-11 03:21:43 PST




Does anybody know if there is any regulations about flying from the


right

seat? Would like to flyi from the right seat while taking some


people up

for sightseeing. Have been flying from the right when I have been


doing my

instructors courses.



Thanks



As a question, why would you want to place a passenger in the left
seat? what purpose would it serve ?


You might be helping a student pilot work on some procedures in between
their lessons. I went back and re-read Amy's article and she did say
student pilot, however, I don't see why it matters whether the left seat
occupant is a student pilot or a non-pilot. I've never come across an
FAR that says I can't fly from the right seat, no matter who is in the
left seat or whether it is empty.

I heard back from Amy. As I stated above, she was referring
specifically to a student pilot and apparently the "sole manipulator"
rule prohibits a non-instructor pilot from allowing a student pilot to
manipulate the controls as this would constitute the student pilot
carrying a passenger. However, I don't see why this would matter which
seat you were sitting in. If this is illegal, seems it would be as
illegal to have the student in the right seat. It also seems odd that
you can let a non-student handle the controls and be legal, but can't
let a student pilot legally fly when you are in the airplane.

I would have posted Amy's email here, but she didn't respond to my
request for permission to do so and I don't consider it good etiquette
to post an email sent to me without the author's OK.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:
I heard back from Amy. As I stated above, she was referring
specifically to a student pilot and apparently the "sole manipulator"
rule prohibits a non-instructor pilot from allowing a student pilot to
manipulate the controls as this would constitute the student pilot
carrying a passenger. However, I don't see why this would matter which
seat you were sitting in. If this is illegal, seems it would be as
illegal to have the student in the right seat. It also seems odd that
you can let a non-student handle the controls and be legal, but can't
let a student pilot legally fly when you are in the airplane.

That, of course, is even crazier. There is no rule that prevents
a non-instructor pilot from letting someone else manipulate the
controls, or even takeoff and land the plane. The "sole manipulator"
rule applies to logging time (and even with that there was some
odd letter from the FAA implying that if there were no one else
on board who could possibly be PIC, you could log the time that
a passenger was manipulating the controls).

A student isn't "carrying a passenger" if he or she manipulates
the controls when someone else is PIC. The PIC is responsible
for the plane and the passenger no matter who is at the controls.

--
David Rind

David Rind wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:

I heard back from Amy. As I stated above, she was referring
specifically to a student pilot and apparently the "sole manipulator"
rule prohibits a non-instructor pilot from allowing a student pilot to
manipulate the controls as this would constitute the student pilot
carrying a passenger. However, I don't see why this would matter
which seat you were sitting in. If this is illegal, seems it would be
as illegal to have the student in the right seat. It also seems odd
that you can let a non-student handle the controls and be legal, but
can't let a student pilot legally fly when you are in the airplane.


That, of course, is even crazier. There is no rule that prevents
a non-instructor pilot from letting someone else manipulate the
controls, or even takeoff and land the plane. The "sole manipulator"
rule applies to logging time (and even with that there was some
odd letter from the FAA implying that if there were no one else
on board who could possibly be PIC, you could log the time that
a passenger was manipulating the controls).

A student isn't "carrying a passenger" if he or she manipulates
the controls when someone else is PIC. The PIC is responsible
for the plane and the passenger no matter who is at the controls.

The FAA isn't always logical. I got a third email from Amy and she said
an acquaintance of hers was a student pilot and went up with another
pilot (not an instructor) and was flying in the left seat. The FAA
caught wind of this and made the claim that the student was acting as
PIC because they were the sole manipulator of the controls and was
seated in the left seat which is traditionally the seat occupied by the
PIC. Since another person was in the airplane at the time, the student
lost their certificate for 120 days for carrying a passenger illegally.

She said this was challenged and was upheld in court. I don't know all
the details and am not going to send Amy a 4th email, but I have no
reason to doubt what she's saying. I've read enough stories about FAA
actions and NTSB appeals to know that logic seems often absent in these
proceedings.


Matt

I've read enough stories about FAA
actions and NTSB appeals to know that logic seems often absent in these
proceedings.


Then applying logic (or any other kind of reasoning for that matter) to this
question is also pointless.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Teacherjh wrote:
I've read enough stories about FAA
actions and NTSB appeals to know that logic seems often absent in these
proceedings.


Then applying logic (or any other kind of reasoning for that matter) to this
question is also pointless.

That is why I initially was trying to find an FAR related to it
mattering which seat you were in! :-)


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:
The FAA isn't always logical. I got a third email from Amy and she said
an acquaintance of hers was a student pilot and went up with another
pilot (not an instructor) and was flying in the left seat. The FAA
caught wind of this and made the claim that the student was acting as
PIC because they were the sole manipulator of the controls and was
seated in the left seat which is traditionally the seat occupied by the
PIC. Since another person was in the airplane at the time, the student
lost their certificate for 120 days for carrying a passenger illegally.

She said this was challenged and was upheld in court. I don't know all
the details and am not going to send Amy a 4th email, but I have no
reason to doubt what she's saying. I've read enough stories about FAA
actions and NTSB appeals to know that logic seems often absent in these
proceedings.


Matt

The notion that a student pilot can't handle the controls
from the left seat, but an unrated passenger can seems
beyond even FAA illogic. Similarly, the notion that
it would be okay if the student were in the right seat, but
a problem from the left seat seems completely crazy.

You could construct scenarios in which I could imagine them
going after a student, though. I suppose if a student owned
a tailwheel plane and was signed off to fly it, and asked me
to go up for a ride, given that I am not capable of being PIC
for that plane, its possible the FAA might go after the student
for carrying a passenger. And since there would be no legal
PIC on the plane, I guess the FAA might decide that given that
the student was the sole manipulator of the controls and sitting
in the "typical" PIC seat that they would go after the student's
license rather than mine.

I'm going to guess that it was some scenario of this sort where
there was no legal PIC despite a pilot and a student pilot being
in the plane, and they used the seat position plus who was
handling the controls to decide who to prosecute. If so, that's
very different from "you can't allow a student pilot to fly
from the left seat if you are not a CFI."

--
David Rind

David Rind wrote:

The notion that a student pilot can't handle the controls
from the left seat, but an unrated passenger can seems
beyond even FAA illogic. Similarly, the notion that
it would be okay if the student were in the right seat, but
a problem from the left seat seems completely crazy.

My guess is that this was just part of a collection of evidence trying to
establish the pilot's intent. I know nothing about this particular case,
but let's assume that you have the following:

1. There are two people in the plane.
2. The student pilot owns the plane.
3. The other occupant is a licensed private pilot, but not an instructor.
4. The other occupant's logbook shows that he has never been PIC of this
plane before.
5. The other occupant is not on the insurance for the plane.

Now, imagine that you're an investigator, and your job is to decide the
student pilot's actual intent. Obviously, there's nothing illegal about
flying from the right seat, but when you put that together with the other
evidence, it might be enough to convince you that the student pilot was, in
fact, intending to fly as PIC in the left seat.

This is purely hypothetical, of course, since I don't know the details of
the actual case, but if something like this did happen, it would be a gross
overreaction to say that the FAA had ruled that flying from the right seat
was illegal. It's similar to a case where an accused burgler was seen
driving slowly past your house the day before a robbery -- there's nothing
illegal about driving slowly past a house, but together with other evidence
(such as fingerprints, lack of alibi, or possession of some stolen
property), it can help to convince a judge or jury that the accused person
is actually guilty.


All the best,


David