Safety pilot in and out of IMC

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:28:22 -0600, "Stan Prevost"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On 18 Dec 2004 21:24:47 -0800, "5pguy" wrote:
A pilot is njot allowed to even file an IFR flight plan if he is not
current,

Where did you get that?


Hey it wasn't me that said that.

Sorry, darn multilevel postings/replies (as in above).

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:33:51 -0600, "Stan Prevost"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:28:22 -0600, "Stan Prevost"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On 18 Dec 2004 21:24:47 -0800, "5pguy" wrote:
A pilot is njot allowed to even file an IFR flight plan if he is not
current,

Where did you get that?


Hey it wasn't me that said that.

Sorry, darn multilevel postings/replies (as in above).

[OffTopic] It would make threads easier to read if people would check
how that thread is going and then use one form (top/bottom posting)
when adding commentary... But anyway. [/OffTopic]

Is box 14 on the standard FAA flight plan (Pilot's Name) supposed to
be listing the PIC? If it is and you're not rated (or have fallen out
of currency) wouldn't filing an IFR flight plan under your name be
against 61.57(c) ('Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR,')? Or are we
splitting hairs (you can file all you want, it's fine until you call
up to get the clearance and start working under IFR)?

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:09:07 -0500, Peter Clark
wrote:

Is box 14 on the standard FAA flight plan (Pilot's Name) supposed to
be listing the PIC? If it is and you're not rated (or have fallen out
of currency) wouldn't filing an IFR flight plan under your name be
against 61.57(c) ('Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR,')? Or are we
splitting hairs (you can file all you want, it's fine until you call
up to get the clearance and start working under IFR)?

No, the hair splitting comes from the fact (and common practice by
students) that there is no requirement for the PIC to be the person
actually filing the flight plan.




--ron

"Peter Clark" wrote in message
...
Is box 14 on the standard FAA flight plan (Pilot's Name) supposed to
be listing the PIC? If it is and you're not rated (or have fallen out
of currency) wouldn't filing an IFR flight plan under your name be
against 61.57(c) ('Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather
conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR,')? Or are we
splitting hairs (you can file all you want, it's fine until you call
up to get the clearance and start working under IFR)?


I don't call it splitting hairs when the issue is legality.

Yes, box 14 of the flight plan is supposed to list the name of the person
who is planned to be PIC on the proposed flight. But nothing says that the
actual PIC must be the filed PIC. The clearance will not have a name
associated with it, and ATC will not know nor do they care who the PIC is or
whether you are rated or current.

I don't believe that filing a plan for a proposed flight is "acting as PIC".
When someone files a flight plan, they are not acting "as pilot in command
under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for
VFR".

I don't believe that accepting a clearance is "acting as PIC". When someone
accepts a clearance, they are not acting "as pilot in command under IFR or
in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR".

I do believe that operating an aircraft, or being in the aircraft while it
is being operated and being responsible for its operation, can be "acting as
PIC".

But I don't think any of that really matters much, practically, it is just
getting to the actual meaning of the regulation. What matters is that the
flight itself must be conducted in accordance with the regulations. The
only time I am aware that the issue even comes up is when one files a flight
plan for VFR Flight Following. To route a flight plan to ATC rather than to
FSS, the "IFR" block must be checked. Someone always wants to argue that
that is filing an IFR flight plan and a VFR pilot cannot do that. First,
there is no prohibition against it. Second, it is not a proposal for a
flight to be conducted under IFR, it is a proposal for a flight to be
conducted under VFR and for which certain radar services to VFR aircraft are
requested; the IFR/VFR block on the flight plan serves as a routing flag to
cause the computers to send the flight proposal to the provider of those
services, ATC.

Regards,
Stan