Logging time in a P51D?

I was under the impression that the FAA had determined that each of the WWII
fighters required a Letter of Authorization (LOA) to be flown by a civilian
pilot. Because of this LOA requirement, which is a practical equivalent to
a type rating, even a military pilot of that particular aircraft model could
not log PIC time as a civilian, unless he had the LOA.

But you don't need to be qualified to be PIC to log PIC, only "rated".
A "rating" is something printed on your certificate. Just like
endorsements are not required, I would think LOA's would not be.

-Robert

"tscottme" wrote
I was under the impression that the FAA had determined that each of the WWII
fighters required a Letter of Authorization (LOA) to be flown by a civilian
pilot. Because of this LOA requirement, which is a practical equivalent to
a type rating, even a military pilot of that particular aircraft model could
not log PIC time as a civilian, unless he had the LOA.

Maybe I'm wrong.

I'm not sure all the WWII fighters require it (I seem to recall that
some of the earlier ones don't) but that's beside the point.

The LOA is indeed a practical equivalent to a type rating, in the
sense that no pilot can act as PIC in an aircraft that requires one
unless he has it. However, the LOA is not a type rating. If it were
a type rating, it would be called a type rating. There are actually
some differences, including the fact that while a type rating always
requires a checkride, the LOA can be issued without one. For example,
a military pilot who showed that he flew that particular model in the
service would almost certainly be issued an LOA on that basis.

Therefore, one can log PIC time without an LOA, in the same way that
one can log PIC time in a taildragger without having a tailwheel
endorsement. One simply can't act as PIC.

Truly I wish the FAA would fix this and make acting as PIC and logging
PIC the same.

Michael

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:34:13 -0700, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

You have so many faulty assumptions here it is difficult to know where to
begin
First of all, the aircraft does not have to require more than one crewmember
in order for the sole manipulator of the controls to act as PIC.

I agree completely. I think you misread my statement about this. I
stated the inverse scenario.

Secondly, the non-flying pilot may act as PIC without being able to log it,
as in this case. What makes you think he is not able to act as PIC?

Because the aircraft does not require more than one crew member, and
it was not an instructional flight.

The current and rated pilot remains PIC throughout the flight whether he is
logging PIC or not.

While this does not necessarily make logical sense, I can see the
point in being a loophole.

The FAA has made it clear in numerous rulings and in the regulations
themselves that logging PIC and acting PIC are two different things. Their
own test materials give numerous questions pertaining to this matter. I know
of one FAA question that asks whether an instructor that has no medical can
log PIC and whether he is acting as PIC. The correct answer is that the
instructor may log PIC any time that he is giving instruction, but he may
not act as PIC because he has no medical. Therefore he can only give
instruction to pilots who can act as PIC even though he himself logs the
time as PIC.

Agreed. As previously stated, instructional flights are a completely
different animal. I'd like to see what has been determined for
non-instructional flights. If you know of any please share, I have
not seen any.

The last lengthy thread you refer to shows you obstinately holding to this
opinion of yours despite the fact that everyone who has any knowledge of the
matter disagrees with you. You are a minority of one. You are flat-out
wrong. And you are beginning to sound pretty stupid as well.

Don't know that I've ever been "obstinate" in any news group.
Vehement maybe, but not obstinate. I also only remember posting two
replies to that thread, so I'm not sure how that could be construed as
obstinateness, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. I also seem
to remember others questioning the validity in that thread (I have not
gone back to study it). I guess those people (if my memory is
correct) are not part of the group "who has any knowledge of the
matter."

Stupid, or not I'll be on the safe side of what is recorded in my
permanent record.


z

"zatatime" wrote in message
...
[...]
Agreed. As previously stated, instructional flights are a completely
different animal.

Instructional flights are different for the person NOT manipulating the
controls. The logging privilege for the person who IS manipulating the
controls remains the same.

The regulations (which CJ posted) are very simple, and very clear. If you
are rated in category and class, and you are the sole manipulator of the
controls, you may log the time as PIC, for that time during which you are
sole manipulator of the controls.

You are making the classic mistake of thinking that a pilot needs to be
acting as PIC in order to log the time as PIC. That's simply not true, and
the fact that the pilot flying isn't qualified to act as PIC in no way
prevents them from logging the time as PIC.

Pete

Agreed, log it however you want. Just don't depend on that hour to
count for any checkrides.

Bushy wrote:
I took a ride in a P51D recently.


Who cares how you log it?

Lucky C...
;)

Peter

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:25:18 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

You are making the classic mistake of thinking that a pilot needs to be
acting as PIC in order to log the time as PIC. That's simply not true, and
the fact that the pilot flying isn't qualified to act as PIC in no way
prevents them from logging the time as PIC.


OK, please give a True/False for the statements below (assume
non-instructional flights).

In a single pilot airplane, the person not flying can act as PIC, but
cannot log PIC for the time he is not manipulating the controls.

In a single pilot airplane, it is fine for the person to log PIC even
if he is not current, as long as there is someone current on board
acting as PIC.

The non-current pilot logging the PIC time cannot use this for
currency requirements because he was not acting as PIC.

The idiosyncrasies between logging and acting as PIC are more complex
than needed for single crew member aircraft.

If all of the above are true I understand your statements, and the
concepts even though I still find it bizarre.

Thanks.
z

"zatatime" wrote in message
...
In a single pilot airplane, the person not flying can act as PIC, but
cannot log PIC for the time he is not manipulating the controls.

It is true that that scenario is possible. It is false that that scenario
is the only one possible.

In a single pilot airplane, it is fine for the person to log PIC even
if he is not current, as long as there is someone current on board
acting as PIC.

True. It is also fine for the person to log PIC even if he is not current,
even if there is NOT someone current on board acting as PIC. Nothing about
the regulation requires the flight to be legal in order to log the flight as
PIC.

The non-current pilot logging the PIC time cannot use this for
currency requirements because he was not acting as PIC.

False. Logged PIC time is logged PIC time, and it is just as useful whether
or not the logging pilot was acting as PIC.

The idiosyncrasies between logging and acting as PIC are more complex
than needed for single crew member aircraft.

Possibly.

If all of the above are true I understand your statements, and the
concepts even though I still find it bizarre.

Yes, there are some non-intuitive conclusions the regulations create.
That's why I wrote "classic mistake". Don't use your intuition to try to
understand the FARs.

Pete

"zatatime" wrote in message
...
OK, please give a True/False for the statements below (assume
non-instructional flights).

In a single pilot airplane, the person not flying can act as PIC, but
cannot log PIC for the time he is not manipulating the controls.

That's true as the regs are stated, but it's sometimes false as the regs are
interpreted. In particular, if you're acting as PIC and you let a non-pilot
passenger manipulate the controls, the FAA says you can log that time as
PIC, even though the FARs say otherwise.

--Gary

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 12:15:59 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

Don't use your intuition to try to
understand the FARs.


Now there's a comment I think Everyone would agree on, which is mighty
rare for these forums!

z

"zatatime" wrote in message


In a single pilot airplane, it is fine for the person to log PIC even
if he is not current, as long as there is someone current on board
acting as PIC.

Let's expand this scenario a bit. Let's say that my instrument currency has
lapsed and before I can schedule a flight, my night currency lapses, too. I
find a pilot friend (who is current) to fly safety pilot. Who logs the PIC
time for the duration I'm the only one manipulating the controls flying
approaches during a night flight?

The non-current pilot logging the PIC time cannot use this for
currency requirements because he was not acting as PIC.

See above scenario.

The idiosyncrasies between logging and acting as PIC are more complex
than needed for single crew member aircraft.

Not really. I think the confusion stems from the use of "PIC" in two
similar but logically separate functions. There's the guy in charge of the
flight and there's the guy manipulating the controls. Think of it as "pilot
in command" and "pilot in control". They're both PIC and they may both log
PIC for the same hour. (See "safety pilot".)

...I still find it bizarre.

You're not alone.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________