Safety pilot - logging cross-country

Once the safety pilot assumes control of the aircraft and lands, the
other pilot will obviously not be the sole manipulator. Therefore the
other pilot can only log PIC for the enroute portion. Since a XC flight
must involve a landing, I don't see how he could log the flight as XC.

Bob Gardner wrote:
To each his own, Hilton. Unless I am sitting in the left seat and doing
all the work, I do not log things just because I can find regulations that
support doing so. No logging of approaches performed by a student, no
logging of PIC if I'm really the safety pilot, etc.

As long as you log a subset of what the FARs allow, I have no problem with
that - we know the FARs don't require that you log everything. Having said,
the issue here is what the FARs allow (and don't) and not what our opinions
or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
filled in.

Hilton

Hey Hilton,

How about answering my email to your company about the registration key.
I know you're in there.



Hilton wrote:
Bob Gardner wrote:

To each his own, Hilton. Unless I am sitting in the left seat and doing
all the work, I do not log things just because I can find regulations that
support doing so. No logging of approaches performed by a student, no
logging of PIC if I'm really the safety pilot, etc.


As long as you log a subset of what the FARs allow, I have no problem with
that - we know the FARs don't require that you log everything. Having said,
the issue here is what the FARs allow (and don't) and not what our opinions
or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
filled in.

Hilton

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com

Once the safety pilot assumes control of the aircraft and lands, the
other pilot will obviously not be the sole manipulator. Therefore the
other pilot can only log PIC for the enroute portion. Since a XC
flight must involve a landing, I don't see how he could log the
flight as XC.

That wasn't your question, though.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

"S Herman" wrote in message
...
For IFR practice, in the situation where both pilots are logging PIC,
one as sole manipulator, the other as acting PIC, can both pilots log
cross-country (assuming the flight meets the length requirements) for
the purpose of meeting the requirements for the Instrument Rating?



What is the definition of a cross country.... I seem to recall something
along the lines of "A takeoff from one airport with a landing at another
airport utilizing pilotage, dead reckoning, radio nav or other means of
navigation. Kicker is this can include the little five minute hop from one
airport to a less busy one for landing practice... Now then... What are the
requirements for those cross country's for the instrument rating.... They
must be 50+NM right? Now consider this, you are acting as safety pilot on
someone elses cross country, the other person is under the hood. Who is
doing the landings? Hopefully its the guy under the hood so he/she can
practice an approach/breakout/landing sequence and thereby have a landing to
make their flight a cross country. So if they do the landing it must mean
that YOU didn't do the landing. So even though you were acting as PIC wile
the other person was under the hood, AND you may have covered more then
50NM, YOU did not perform the landing and therefor can NOT log it as XC.

Newps wrote:
How about answering my email to your company about the registration key. I
know you're in there.

Gimme a hint at which email that was. We had a couple of emails get
marked as spam. Were you the one I sent an email (and key) to earlier
today? BTW: Make sure when you send an email, you say "I'm Newps" - I'll
make sure to get back to you ASAP.

BTW: WingX Version 1.7.5.0 (Beta) will be made available later this week.
It adds free weather (METARs, TAFs, winds aloft, temps aloft, etc), Seattle
Avionics Voyager and Anywhere Map support, adds a lot more runway
information, as well as numerous other improvements. If you're OK running
Betas, please try it out and let me/us know what you think.

Hilton

Hilton wrote:
BTW: WingX Version 1.7.5.0 (Beta) will be made available later this week.

I meant to add that 1.7.5.0 will be released as a patch so you must have
WingX already installed. We won't be selling 1.7.5.0 separately, it'll be
an update/patch (kinda like buying an XP machine and getting the patches).

Hilton

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
Once the safety pilot assumes control of the aircraft and lands, the
other pilot will obviously not be the sole manipulator. Therefore the
other pilot can only log PIC for the enroute portion. Since a XC flight
must involve a landing, I don't see how he could log the flight as XC.

Part 61.1:
(ii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements
(except for a rotorcraft category rating), for a private pilot certificate
(except for a powered parachute category rating), a commercial pilot
certificate, or an instrument rating, or for the purpose of exercising
recreational pilot privileges (except in a rotorcraft) under §61.101 (c),
time acquired during a flight...

Note "time acquired during a (XC) flight"; it is a XC flight, therefore you
may log the time acquired during it. It's as simple as that, black and
white; no mention of 'planning' in sight and nothing that says you must be
any form of required crewmember during the *entire* flight.

Hilton

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:


The difference, in my opinion, is in who is taking responsibility
for the planning, nav, control, etc. of the flight. In the case where
there are two pilots sharing the duties, is either one really taking
responsibility?


Yes. The pilot acting as PIC takes responsibility.


I know they can decide in advance who will be PIC,
but when you get right down to it, only one person really planned
that flight; only one person really flew it; only one person really
landed, etc.


The FAR's are quite clear. If you are acting as PIC, these
are your responsibilities. You should not accept them
lightly.

A flight has exactly one PIC. That person is the one responsible for
the safe conduct of the flight and is the one that will get sued when
something bad happens. I'm not sure the term "acting PIC" appears in
the FARs -- can someone quote the definition for me?

: or conventions are. For example, I don't necessarily agree that my friend
: who has no complex endorsement should be able to log PIC-complex time when
: he flies the Cutlass with me as a CFI next to him, but he can according to
: the FARs, and when I instruct him, both the PIC and complex columns are
: filled in.

I think that the complex endorsement thing is somewhere where the FAR's
actually do what seems to be the "right way." It's hard enough (in both convenience
and expense) to get the time necessary to satisfy *insurance* requirements these
days... let alone FAR-mandated time requirements. The ability to manipulate the
controls of an aircraft for which you are rated, yet not legally allowed to act as PIC
for (complex/high-performance, no BFR, no medical, etc) lets people fly cheaper and
gain more experience in flying and in different aircraft. If they had to rent a
suitable aircraft and instructor for absolutely everything, they would be much less
inclined to casually learn things at a slower rate. You can bet your ass that if I'm
paying over $150/hour to rent a complex aircraft and instructor to get an endorsement,
I'm not going to fly it a second longer than I have to. If I can fly in a friend's
complex for the cost of (half) the fuel and a burger, I'll enjoy the flight and learn
more. The FARs dictate minimum time, but it's the *experience* and *proficiency* of
the pilot that is the intent.

/rant

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************