A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Logging PIC time as student instrument pilot in IMC



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 28th 03, 11:48 PM
David Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...

FWIW, this is how my actual time is logged: as PIC. My husband,
or my CFI, who acted as PIC, also logged PIC time.


Well, I've often wondered about that one. From everyone's second-favorite
FAR:

A ... pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during
which that person (is sole manip, sole occupant, or) ...is acting as pilot
in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under ...
the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

The regs have to *require* more than one pilot. Usually an ASEL flown under
IFR does not require more than one pilot by regulation. So it would seem not
to count.

However, if you are saying "given that this is a flight under IFR where the
controls are manipulated by a non-IR pilot, then the regulations do require
two pilots: the PF and the PNF/PIC", then they can log it.

-- David Brooks


  #12  
Old July 29th 03, 03:03 AM
Sydney Hoeltzli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Brooks wrote:
"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
FWIW, this is how my actual time is logged: as PIC. My husband,
or my CFI, who acted as PIC, also logged PIC time.


Well, I've often wondered about that one. From everyone's second-favorite
FAR:
A ... pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during
which that person (is sole manip, sole occupant, or) ...is acting as pilot
in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under ...
the regulations under which the flight is conducted.


Correct.

The regs have to *require* more than one pilot. Usually an ASEL flown under
IFR does not require more than one pilot by regulation. So it would seem not
to count.


However, if you are saying "given that this is a flight under IFR where the
controls are manipulated by a non-IR pilot, then the regulations do require
two pilots: the PF and the PNF/PIC", then they can log it.


Yes, exactly. That appears to be the General Counsel interpretation --
Andrew Sarangan had a General Counsel letter on his website relevant to
the topic. Ron Rosenfeld referred to one. I have an email
correspondence with John Lynch of a few years back where he initially
disagreed, then consulted the GC office and came back concurring.

That's why we felt it was appropriate to log it as we did (why we
chose to log it that way is a seperate issue)

Cheers,
Sydney

  #13  
Old July 29th 03, 03:07 AM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:48:03 -0700, "David Brooks"
wrote:

However, if you are saying "given that this is a flight under IFR where the
controls are manipulated by a non-IR pilot, then the regulations do require
two pilots: the PF and the PNF/PIC", then they can log it.


If I understand you correctly, I believe this statement of yours is wrong.
Given a light SEL a/c, what regulation requires *two* pilots under the
circumstances you put forth?

I'm not aware of any such regulation.

The fact that the person manipulating the controls is not legal to act as
PIC under IFR does not lead to a regulatory requirement to have two pilots
in the aircraft. The only pilot that is *required* is the one who is
acting as PIC. The PF is not *required* by the regulations.

So in the instance where the acting PIC/PNF is not a CFI(I) giving
instruction, the PNF cannot log PIC time.

An instance where the non-CFI PNF may log PIC time because of a regulatory
requirement for two pilots would be when the PNF is acting as a safety
pilot in simulated instrument conditions. Under that circumstance, two
pilots are required by the regulations (91.109) and both may log PIC time.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #14  
Old July 29th 03, 05:16 AM
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

No instrument rating is required to log actual. In fact, there are
times when you can log actual in VMC (dark moonless night over water
is the FAA example).
Of course, you cannot, cannot serve as PIC in IMC or anytime while on
an IFR clearance but I assume your CFII took care of that.



"Marty Ross" wrote in message et...
I recently realized that I should not have included any "actual" (IMC) time
recorded in my logbook as PIC time while I was an instrument student.

Any suggestions for correcting this error? Rather than making messy
corrections and recalculating page totals, how about adding a "corrective"
(new) entry?

More generally, are there any accepted conventions for retroactively
correcting logbook errors?

  #15  
Old July 29th 03, 12:25 PM
Barry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A lot of these situations are covered in the FAA's Part 61 Frequently Asked
Questions:

http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/afs800/docs/pt61FAQ.doc

This is a big file (about 2.2MB).

Barry


  #16  
Old July 29th 03, 01:17 PM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 02:03:40 GMT, Sydney Hoeltzli
wrote:

Yes, exactly. That appears to be the General Counsel interpretation --
Andrew Sarangan had a General Counsel letter on his website relevant to
the topic. Ron Rosenfeld referred to one.


Actually, the CC opinions I referred allowed the *PF* to log PIC time.
They did not allow the PNF (acting PIC) to log PIC time. Although if the
acting PIC were either a CFI(I) giving instruction, or a safety pilot in
simulated instrument conditions, then the regulations would allow the PNF
to log PIC time.

At one time, there was information in the Part 61 FAQ's suggesting that the
PNF acting PIC could also log PIC time when the PF was not instrument
rated/current/confident. However, I just looked at that source again and
cannot locate that information in the revision dated 12/19/2000.

There was a letter from Alan Pinkston (in the FAA CC office) also
suggesting the PNF might be able to log PIC time during IMC, however, the
wording is "When the person in the right seat is acting as safety pilot as
a result of 91.109 for avoidance of traffic, or in the case of instrument
meteorological conditions since that person provides safety for the flight,
(***as well as legal rating requirements***) both persons may log pilot in
command time. "

(Emphasis mine). This implies that if the PNF is required for legal rating
requirements (or under 91.109) then PNF could log PIC time.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #17  
Old July 31st 03, 08:46 PM
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sydney Hoeltzli wrote in message ...

Correct.

The regs have to *require* more than one pilot. Usually an ASEL flown under
IFR does not require more than one pilot by regulation. So it would seem not
to count.


However, if you are saying "given that this is a flight under IFR where the
controls are manipulated by a non-IR pilot, then the regulations do require
two pilots: the PF and the PNF/PIC", then they can log it.


Yes, exactly. That appears to be the General Counsel interpretation --
Andrew Sarangan had a General Counsel letter on his website relevant to
the topic. Ron Rosenfeld referred to one. I have an email
correspondence with John Lynch of a few years back where he initially
disagreed, then consulted the GC office and came back concurring.

That's why we felt it was appropriate to log it as we did (why we
chose to log it that way is a seperate issue)



But the flying pilot must be under a hood in order for the non-flying
(acting as PIC ) pilot to log PIC too. Actual instrument doesn't cut
it because there is no FAR requiring multiple crew for part 91 IFR,
there is one for wearing a hood.
  #18  
Old July 31st 03, 11:14 PM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:17:19 -0700, "David Brooks"
wrote:

If it is "a flight under IFR in
which the controls are, in fact, for at least some of the time, manipulated
by a pilot who is not IR or not current" then two pilots are required


What regulation requires two pilots under this circumstance?


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #19  
Old August 1st 03, 02:14 AM
David Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:17:19 -0700, "David Brooks"


wrote:

If it is "a flight under IFR in
which the controls are, in fact, for at least some of the time,

manipulated
by a pilot who is not IR or not current" then two pilots are required


What regulation requires two pilots under this circumstance?


61.3(e)(1) for the "not IR" option. As I said, I am manufacturing an
artificially rigid definition of the flight to try to figure out if there is
any rationale for logging PIC. Almost a reduction ad absurdum.

-- David Brooks


  #20  
Old August 1st 03, 04:15 AM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:14:00 -0700, "David Brooks"
wrote:

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:17:19 -0700, "David Brooks"


wrote:

If it is "a flight under IFR in
which the controls are, in fact, for at least some of the time,

manipulated
by a pilot who is not IR or not current" then two pilots are required


What regulation requires two pilots under this circumstance?


61.3(e)(1) for the "not IR" option. As I said, I am manufacturing an
artificially rigid definition of the flight to try to figure out if there is
any rationale for logging PIC. Almost a reduction ad absurdum.

-- David Brooks


I don't see 61.3 (e) (1) requiring two pilots in the case where a non-rated
person (or pilot) happens to be manipulating the controls.

The only pilot that is *required* is the one who is acting as PIC.

================
61.3 e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil
aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums
prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and
instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane,
helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;
==================


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? Badwater Bill Home Built 3 June 23rd 04 04:05 PM
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 41 November 20th 03 06:39 AM
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation Gilan Home Built 17 September 24th 03 06:11 AM
Logging instrument approaches Slav Inger Instrument Flight Rules 33 July 27th 03 11:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.