If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Robert M. Gary wrote
Jose wrote: In IMC, the pilot flying may keep the hood on, and thus a safety pilot would be required. The pilot flying would then log this as simulated instrument flight, even though he is in actual. So your argument is that actual IMC is "simulated instrument flight"? Sounds like you'd have to be a real Perry Mason to argue that. Yeah, I also think that argument is full of BS. Bob Moore ATP FI |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
"Jose" wrote in message . com... 91.109 (b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless- In IMC, the pilot flying may keep the hood on, and thus a safety pilot would be required. The pilot flying would then log this as simulated instrument flight, even though he is in actual. If the fllight is in IMC, then.... 1) VFR flight is not legal, therefore... 2) Flight is conducted under IFR. So, Pilot in Command must either hold an IR, or be a pilot qualifed to fly the A/C, with a CFII in the other seat (NOT a safety pilot, not the same thing). If you are in IMC, why would you need a hood anyway? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
If the fllight is in IMC, then....
1) VFR flight is not legal, therefore... 2) Flight is conducted under IFR. So, Pilot in Command must either hold an IR, or be a pilot qualifed to fly the A/C, with a CFII in the other seat (NOT a safety pilot, not the same thing). True enough, but misses a sliver. If you are in IMC, why would you need a hood anyway? If you are a VFR only pilot, and want to log some instrument PIC time, and conditions are IMC, you would need the hood to comply with 91.109(b). You could not BE PIC, but you do not need a CFII either. You can have an instrument rated safety pilot BE PIC while you, as sole manipulator, log PIC time. You need IR pilot (who also happens to be the safety pilot) as PIC for the flight to be legal IFR, and you need the safety pilot (who also happens to be the PIC) to be a crew member because when you have the hood on, you need somebody to look outside. This is regardless of whether you are in IMC or VMC. Clearly in VMC, even IFR, the safety pilot keeps metal from being bent. In IMC, if the pilot flying is under the hood, he cannot see that it is IMC (and separation is provided) nor can he see when he breaks in and out of the clouds (and separation is no longer provided, thus requiring the safety pilot). So, in either case, as long as the pilot flying is under the hood, a safety pilot is required, =and= the pilot flying can log PIC time. If the pilot flying takes the hood off, he can no longer log PIC time, which may give him incentive to stay hooded. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
"Jose" wrote in message .com... You need IR pilot (who also happens to be the safety pilot) as PIC for the flight to be legal IFR, and you need the safety pilot (who also happens to be the PIC) to be a crew member because when you have the hood on, you need somebody to look outside. This is regardless of whether you are in IMC or VMC. Clearly in VMC, even IFR, the safety pilot keeps metal from being bent. In IMC, if the pilot flying is under the hood, he cannot see that it is IMC (and separation is provided) nor can he see when he breaks in and out of the clouds (and separation is no longer provided, thus requiring the safety pilot). OK forget about logging time and hood for a moment. The flight is either VFR or IFR, it can't just change at will. If it is IFR, then seperation is provided by ATC, not by someone looking outside. Using the term 'safety pilot' for IFR is a little misleading. Seems to me you either have the IR pilot acting as PIC, and the VFR-only pilot is a passenger, OR the IR pilot is an instructor and the VFR pilot is a student, who also should be able to log PIC and dual, no? I don't see how the flight can be legal in IMC any other way. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
OK forget about logging time and hood for a moment. The flight is either VFR
or IFR, it can't just change at will. but VMC and IMC can. If it is IFR, then seperation is provided Only separation from other IFR traffic. VFR traffic is separated by eyeball or by clouds. If there are no clouds, then VFR traffic is separated only by eyeball. Seems to me you either have the IR pilot acting as PIC, and the VFR-only pilot is a passenger, OR the IR pilot is an instructor and the VFR pilot is a student, who also should be able to log PIC and dual, no? I don't see how the flight can be legal in IMC any other way. The IR pilot can be PIC while the VFR-only pilot manipulates the controls. This is completely legal. Even if the IR pilot is an instructor, the VFR-only pilot cannot BE PIC (though then he can log it as PIC time). I do wish they had not used the same terms to mean different things. But maybe the FAA has stock in USENET. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
OK forget about logging time and hood for a moment. The flight is either VFR or IFR, it can't just change at will. If it is IFR, then seperation is provided by ATC, not by someone looking outside. Not true!!!! That's a good recipe for a mid-air. The pilot STILL has to look outside and provide his own separation, even if IFR, and especially out of cloud. You can't just fly along fat, dumb, and happy.........thinking ATC will save you ass! There is all sorts of VFR traffic climbing and descending through your IFR altitudes. Karl ATP CFIAIM "Curator" N185KG |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
Jose wrote: If you are a VFR only pilot, and want to log some instrument PIC time, and conditions are IMC, you would need the hood to comply with 91.109(b). You could not BE PIC, but you do not need a CFII either. You can have an instrument rated safety pilot BE PIC while you, as sole manipulator, log PIC time. You need IR pilot (who also happens to be the safety pilot) as PIC for the flight to be legal IFR, and you need the safety pilot (who also happens to be the PIC) to be a crew member because when you have the hood on, you need somebody to look outside. There is no regulation in the above proposal that requires multiple pilots (the requirement for the non-flying pilot to log PIC under 61.51(e). The FAR that requires multiple pilots says "simulated instrument conditions". 91.109(b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless- (1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
karl gruber wrote: Not true!!!! That's a good recipe for a mid-air. The pilot STILL has to look outside and provide his own separation, even if IFR, and especially out of cloud. You can't just fly along fat, dumb, and happy.........thinking ATC will save you ass! There is all sorts of VFR traffic climbing and descending through your IFR altitudes. You actually make an excellent point. We use the term "IMC" and "VMC". However those terms actually refer to the legal minimums ("IMC" meaning below VFR minumums). However, a safety pilot is required in IMC conditions where visibility is clear enough to allow for "see and avoid" and the flying pilot is under the hood. Above 10,000 feet this could be as much as 4.9 miles visibility. The safety pilot is requires anytime the hooded pilot is flying in conditions that allow for see-and-avoid. -Robert, CFII |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 08:33:09 +0100, Peter wrote:
Jose wrote This doesn't contradict me. Note the difference between BEING and LOGGING PIC. I didn't wish to go into whether they can *both* log. The situation here is this: I am instrument rated. A friend is not, but is legal to fly the plane in VFR. He sits in LH seat, is renting the plane, and understandably wants to end up with a nice 10-hour (it's two long flights) logbook entry, in return for his money. (I am not sure whether Americans are as dead keen as Europeans to log everything they pay for ) We will do a long flight, under IFR. Clearly my presence is required because he doesn't have an IR. Does it mean that I must be PIC on that flight (because I am the only one with an IR). The obvious practical reality is that he can do all the flying. *What* can he log this time as? If he is the sole manipulator of the controls, he may, under US rules, log all of the flying time as PIC. Can he log instrument time, or (if under the hood) simulated instrument time)? What if the whole flight is VMC on top (most likely). If he requires use of the instruments in order to fly the a/c, whether in actual or simulated, he may log actual instrument time, or simulated instrument time, as the case may be. I would be suprised if he could log it as instrument instruction, because I am not an instructor. He could NOT log it as dual, as you are not an instructor. Your name, as safety pilot (for that part of the flight requiring a safety pilot) must be recorded in his log book. In the US regs, there is this strange dichotomy between logging PIC, and acting as PIC. It is possible to act as PIC, but not be able to log it; and also possible to log PIC, without being authorized to act as PIC. You could log PIC for that portion of the flight when a safety pilot is required under 91.109 (i.e. simulated instrument flight). But you would be the acting PIC for the entire flight if under IFR. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
IFR logging question - is this legal?
There is no regulation in the above proposal that requires multiple
pilots (the requirement for the non-flying pilot to log PIC under 61.51(e). The FAR that requires multiple pilots says "simulated instrument conditions". As soon as you put the hood on, you are in simulated instrument conditions, whether in cloud or not, and whether IFR or not. You may =also= be in actual instrument conditions, but that is irrelevant. Using a flight simulator is still simulated flight, even if the simulator is on board a flying 747. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to ask you the most important question of your life. | Douglas Olson | Owning | 1 | May 22nd 05 05:15 AM |
182RG question | Paul Anton | Owning | 11 | May 16th 05 09:45 PM |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
Could the Press Grow a Spine? | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 259 | July 11th 04 08:35 PM |