Do you have to solo to get current?

On 3/8/2007 8:29:28 AM, Judah wrote:
"Skidder" wrote in
:


I don't understand why you think that a person sitting in the passenger's
seat who happens to hold a pilot's certificate is anything different than a
person who happens to not hold a pilot's certificate.

Safety pilot.


If he holds an ATP does that make the flight part 121 airline transport?

No clue, but that's not my question anyway.


--
Skidder

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 07:37:13 -0600, "Skidder"
wrote:


That's correct, and I read the FAR the same way. But it puts us in a loop
because the entire focus 61.57 is the currency required to carry
*passengers*. My point is, another pilot with a full set of controls in front
of him is not defined anywhere as a passenger. Furthermore, nothing says that
anyone present in an aircraft that only requires one pilot, has to be
considered a passenger.

You're right -- the FARs don't say that the second pilot is a
passenger. Worse, the FARs don't even define "passenger." But the FARs
don't deifne many other words that are liberarly used throughout the
FARs. It's not the written word alone that counts in courts, but the
interpretation of it. And the interpretation would probably consider
the following:

- A person on board a flying aircraft is either a crewmember or a
passenger (a dead person might be considered cargo, but let's not
discuss that here). And your next comment is correct -- this is not
written anywhere in the FARs either, but I have a feeling that FAA,
NTSB, court, and most pilots would agree with this.

- Knowledge and skill of piloting a plane don't make anyone a
crewmember.

- Moreover, full flight controls in front of a pilot don't make
him/her a crewmember.

- Assigned duty makes a person a crewmember (even if the person is not
a pilot and has no flight controls in front of her/him).
But I seriously doubt that you will be able to convince FAA, NTSB, and
court that your chart-handling friend is a bona-fide crewmember, FAR
1.1 notwithstanding.

- Tom

On 3/8/2007 5:43:09 PM, Tom L. wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 07:37:13 -0600, "Skidder"
wrote:


You're right -- the FARs don't say that the second pilot is a
passenger. Worse, the FARs don't even define "passenger." But the FARs
don't deifne many other words that are liberarly used throughout the
FARs. It's not the written word alone that counts in courts, but the
interpretation of it. And the interpretation would probably consider
the following:

- A person on board a flying aircraft is either a crewmember or a
passenger (a dead person might be considered cargo, but let's not
discuss that here). And your next comment is correct -- this is not
written anywhere in the FARs either, but I have a feeling that FAA,
NTSB, court, and most pilots would agree with this.

- Knowledge and skill of piloting a plane don't make anyone a
crewmember.

- Moreover, full flight controls in front of a pilot don't make
him/her a crewmember.

- Assigned duty makes a person a crewmember (even if the person is not
a pilot and has no flight controls in front of her/him).
But I seriously doubt that you will be able to convince FAA, NTSB, and
court that your chart-handling friend is a bona-fide crewmember, FAR
1.1 notwithstanding.


Very well put Tom and I would have to say I fully agree with 90% of it. I'm
just not certain a court would agree with it, but hey, I'm just guessing on
this part too. I think we got lost on trying to find a label for the second
pilot.

I think the second pilot is still a pilot. What most of us are struggling
with is who is PIC, and perhaps who logs the time. It seems clear to me that
both pilots are clearly there for currency, and would have to hold themselves
jointly accountable in case of an incident. What else could they possible
argue. The know that neither of them can claim to be the others passenger, so
joint accountability seem implied and assured.

Next, both should be fully capible of executing their currency requirements
without incident or assistance, or there is something wrong with the currency
FARs to begin with. So the safety of the flight is assures, to the best of
the FARs ability to control it. And certainly as well as it is if each pilot
when up solo.

Finally, the overall fight is safer, because you have a fully qualified
back-up for it's entire duration.

The only thing left is how to log the time. To keep it simple, pilot A should
maitain all control from the time the prop starts until the end of his third
landing, and log only the time it took. Pilot B should then take the controls
until the prop stops, and record the balance.

How could a reasonable person argue against this? What would the arguement
be? If it is safe for each pilot to go up solo to record their currency. How
could you argue that both going together would not be more prudent?

To me the only down side is if your friend bends the airplane during his
watch. Cause then you are in the soup with him.






--
Skidder

"Skidder" wrote

Ok, first things first, I am not a troll, and this is a very legitimate
question that could be applicable to lots of flyers.

I was just hoping there was enough experience *with
the regs* somewhere in this group, to locate a definitive answer.

For someone who is not a troll, this above wording is almost exactly what MX
would have said.

Why do you need the specific? If you had ever read the regs at all, you
would have read about "required crew members" in multiple places. If you are
not a required crew member, or an instructor, you are a passenger. Period.
Sheesh.

PLONK

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Skidder" wrote

Ok, first things first, I am not a troll, and this is a very legitimate
question that could be applicable to lots of flyers.

I was just hoping there was enough experience *with
the regs* somewhere in this group, to locate a definitive answer.

For someone who is not a troll, this above wording is almost exactly what
MX would have said.

Why do you need the specific? If you had ever read the regs at all, you
would have read about "required crew members" in multiple places. If you
are not a required crew member, or an instructor, you are a passenger.
Period. Sheesh.

PLONK


Interesting that when I also PLONKED "Skidder", my OE took quite a while to
run through all the cached posts.

Methinks Skidder just might be The Albatross in disguise.

Jay B

Interesting that when I also PLONKED "Skidder", my OE took quite a while to
run through all the cached posts.

Methinks Skidder just might be The Albatross in disguise.

Jay B



Thanks troll.


--
Skidder

On 3/8/2007 12:19:17 AM, "Morgans" wrote:

"Skidder" wrote

Ok, first things first, I am not a troll, and this is a very legitimate
question that could be applicable to lots of flyers.

I was just hoping there was enough experience *with
the regs* somewhere in this group, to locate a definitive answer.

For someone who is not a troll, this above wording is almost exactly what MX
would have said.

Why do you need the specific? If you had ever read the regs at all, you
would have read about "required crew members" in multiple places. If you are
not a required crew member, or an instructor, you are a passenger. Period.
Sheesh.

PLONK



Oh really. At what point have I insulted anyone, or encouraged an arguement.
If anything I would have to say you are the troll here because you want to
cause and arguement, when you have nothing to add to the discussion.

Or perhaps you just want to disturb or sabatoge the thread because you don't
personally happen to like the question.

--
Skidder

If you're not current to carry a passenger and the aircraft
does not require two pilots, then one of the pilots onboard
must be current to have a legal flight. That pilot must be
PIC and does not have to be a CFI.
The pilot getting current must make the required TO&L and
can log that time as PIC.

Once three TO&L have been done [and logged] the pilot is
current to carry passengers. The CFI can log the landings
for his/her currency w/o ever touching the controls and w/o
a medical. But as I understand it, unless the "passenger"
is a CFI, legal to be PIC with a medical, the sole
manipulator PIC must be fully current. Or in a LSA.



"Skidder" wrote in message
...
| On 3/7/2007 7:10:07 PM, "Skidder" wrote:
| As we all know, you can't carry a passenger unless you
are current. But if
| two pilots get in an aircraft with dual controls, can
either of them really
| be considered a passenger? You can log PIC from either
seat.
|
| Lets say, I have a PPL but am not current. My best friend
has a PPL but is
| not current. Both of us have a current medical? Is it
legal for both of us to
| get in an aircraft with dual controls, at the same time,
shoot 6 take offs
| and landings, 3 each, and log ourselves as current and
split the flying time
| in our logs?
|
| Would be both absolutely have to have a current medical?
|
| He is an attorney and says the way he reads the regs,
that it's not exactly
| clear. I myself don't know, but thought the group might
enjoy debating the
| question.
|
| Along the same lines, if a PPL *is* current. Can he go
for insurance check
| ride with an instructor that is not, or doesn't have a
current medilcal?
|
|
|
| Ok, first things first, I am not a troll, and this is a
very legitimate
| question that could be applicable to lots of flyers.
|
| Second, were all over the place here. MEIs, seaplanes,
instructor without
| medicals, you can't be PIC unless you are current (who's
pic when you do your
| currency work), ......sheesh guys let's keep our eyes on
the ball.
|
| You have two pilots, dual controls, both have full control
of the aircraft.
| To simplify more, let's say they both have current
medicals, and have logged
| at least 100 hours in this specific aircraft in the past.
It's just been 95
| days since each have flown.
|
| What in the regs states that, a pilot with a full set of
controls in front of
| him, must be considered a passenger, just because someone
else is flying the
| plane.
|
| It's a fair question, and I can't find a clear answer in
the regs. But I'm
| not a book worm either. I was just hoping there was enough
experience *with
| the regs* somewhere in this group, to locate a definitive
answer.
|
|
| --
| Skidder
|

On 3/8/2007 1:45:33 AM, "Jim Macklin" wrote:
If you're not current to carry a passenger and the aircraft
does not require two pilots, then one of the pilots onboard
must be current to have a legal flight. That pilot must be
PIC and does not have to be a CFI.
The pilot getting current must make the required TO&L and
can log that time as PIC.

Once three TO&L have been done [and logged] the pilot is
current to carry passengers. The CFI can log the landings
for his/her currency w/o ever touching the controls and w/o
a medical. But as I understand it, unless the "passenger"
is a CFI, legal to be PIC with a medical, the sole
manipulator PIC must be fully current. Or in a LSA.



I appreciate your input Jim, but the regs don't say that. It says you have to
be current to carry a passenger. It does not say you have to be current to
carry another pilot seeking currency, or that anyone in an aircraft that
requires only one pilot, has to be considered a passenger.

--
Skidder

"Skidder" wrote in
:

I appreciate your input Jim, but the regs don't say that. It says you
have to be current to carry a passenger. It does not say you have to be
current to carry another pilot seeking currency, or that anyone in an
aircraft that requires only one pilot, has to be considered a passenger.

Actually, the regs (61.57) prohibit a pilot from acting as THE PILOT IN
COMMAND of a flight if he has not, as sole manipulator of the flight
controls, performed 3 takeoffs and landings within the preceding 90 days.

Furthermore, according to section (2), if he is out of currency, he may act
as THE PIC of a flight under day VFR or IFR, *** provided no persons or
property are carried on board the aircraft, other than those necessary for
the conduct of the flight. ***

In what way is pilot #2 necessary for the conduct of the flight?

http://tinyurl.com/2n5epj

For further clarification, the PILOT IN COMMAND of an aircraft is defined
in 91.3

"(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and
is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft."

There can only be 1 final authority. There is only one Pilot in Command of
the aircraft, even if there are 100 other pilots in the plane.

http://tinyurl.com/2v9266