A couple of questions about IPC

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 02/09/06 07:45, Gary Drescher wrote:
"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message
oups.com...
You have 6 months after your currency lapses to become current, without
having to do an IPC... You are not legal to fly IFR, but you may take
a safety pilot up with you and become current again. If you miss the 6
month window to become current, you will have to perform an IPC.

I'm sure if I stated that incorrectly or unclearly, someone will jump
in to correct me... ;-)

No error, but one addition may be useful: another alternative is to fly
IFR and do the approaches in IMC, but with another pilot (who's
IFR-current) acting as PIC.

--Gary

Wait a tick ;-) Are you saying that if you're beyond the 6-month
currency, that you can fly in actual IMC and all you need is an IR-
current safety pilot - not a CFII?

In this case, the IR-current pilot isn't functioning as "safety pilot".
That's the term for a traffic-spotting pilot in VMC when the pilot doing the
flying is wearing a hood. In my scenario, there's no hood and no safety
pilot--just another pilot acting as PIC.

--Gary

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:23:33 -0800, Mark Hansen
wrote:
Yes, but I didn't think this 'monkey' was allowed to use the time toward
IR currency.

If you review 61.57 regarding instrument currency, you will see that the
requirements are for logging flight under actual or simulated instrument
conditions.

The requirements for logging are merely that you be sole manipulator of
the
controls.

So yes, the non-current pilot can manipulate the controls and log PIC in
IMC, while the IR pilot acts as PIC, but cannot log PIC while in IMC.

Yup. Or alternatively, the PIC can log PIC time, and the non-current pilot
can log the approaches, but not log PIC time. (The PIC's ability to log PIC
time--as long as the sole manipulator doesn't also do so--isn't actually in
the FARs, but has been affirmed in the FAA's legal "interpretations".)

--Gary

On 02/10/06 05:31, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:23:33 -0800, Mark Hansen
wrote:
Yes, but I didn't think this 'monkey' was allowed to use the time toward
IR currency.

If you review 61.57 regarding instrument currency, you will see that the
requirements are for logging flight under actual or simulated instrument
conditions.

The requirements for logging are merely that you be sole manipulator of
the
controls.

So yes, the non-current pilot can manipulate the controls and log PIC in
IMC, while the IR pilot acts as PIC, but cannot log PIC while in IMC.

Yup. Or alternatively, the PIC can log PIC time, and the non-current pilot
can log the approaches, but not log PIC time. (The PIC's ability to log PIC
time--as long as the sole manipulator doesn't also do so--isn't actually in
the FARs, but has been affirmed in the FAA's legal "interpretations".)

--Gary




Perhaps I'm still a little confused here. If I get a safety pilot who
agrees to act as pilot in command of the flight, that pilot will be
able to log the time as PIC.

If I am sole manipulator of the controls, then I can log the time as
PIC as per FAR 61.51(e)(i)

In this case, we would both be logging PIC, although for different
reasons.

Is this wrong?

When flying in VMC and using a view limiting device, the safety pilot
is considered a required crew member, and as such can decide to act
as PIC or SIC. However, I would think this is not the case when flying
in IMC, as the safety pilot must be PIC (because the pilot flying is
not IMC current).

Is this wrong?

If this is covered by one of the Chief Counsel written opinions, can
you please provide a reference to it? I have a hard time finding them.

Thanks,

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

On 02/10/06 05:20, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 02/09/06 07:45, Gary Drescher wrote:
"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message
oups.com...
You have 6 months after your currency lapses to become current, without
having to do an IPC... You are not legal to fly IFR, but you may take
a safety pilot up with you and become current again. If you miss the 6
month window to become current, you will have to perform an IPC.

I'm sure if I stated that incorrectly or unclearly, someone will jump
in to correct me... ;-)

No error, but one addition may be useful: another alternative is to fly
IFR and do the approaches in IMC, but with another pilot (who's
IFR-current) acting as PIC.

--Gary

Wait a tick ;-) Are you saying that if you're beyond the 6-month
currency, that you can fly in actual IMC and all you need is an IR-
current safety pilot - not a CFII?

In this case, the IR-current pilot isn't functioning as "safety pilot".
That's the term for a traffic-spotting pilot in VMC when the pilot doing the
flying is wearing a hood. In my scenario, there's no hood and no safety
pilot--just another pilot acting as PIC.

Yes. My confusion was that my instructor told me that when the IR pilot
was not IMC current, and wanted to perform the actions to regain currency
in actual IMC (not simulated) that the person in the right seat had to
be a CFII.

However, after the discussions in the other parts of this thread and more
looking through the FARs, I see no evidence for this and now believe that
my instructor was wrong. Perhaps what he meant to say was "A CFII would
be more experienced in that situation, and so it would be safer, etc.".

.... it wouldn't be the first time I was given an opinion by the CFII
which was represented a fact/rule.


--Gary




--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

This same topic came up in a post a few months back, where there seemed
to be a lot of gray area around "logging" PIC time. I don't recall
ever seeing a clear response as to what the definitive regs around
logging PIC are supposed to mean. I am as interested as you, and I'm
sure as are others, as to when we can legally log PIC time (in the
stated circumstances), both as a safety pilot, and as the sole
manipulators fo the controls.

Best Regards,
Todd

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
When flying in VMC and using a view limiting device, the safety pilot
is considered a required crew member, and as such can decide to act
as PIC or SIC.

Correct. And because the flight is construed to require multiple crew
members, the safety pilot (if acting as PIC) can log PIC time (in addition
to the sole manipulator doing so), according to 61.51e1iii.

However, I would think this is not the case when flying
in IMC, as the safety pilot must be PIC (because the pilot flying is
not IMC current).

In the IMC scenario, there is no safety pilot, and there is only one
required crew member (the PIC). Under those circumstances, merely acting as
PIC does not entitle the pilot to log PIC time (acting as PIC is not one of
the three conditions listed in 61.51e1 as the *only* conditions that allow
PIC time to be logged).

Nonetheless, the FAA has reportedly said that a pilot acting as PIC (even
when just one crewmember is required) can log PIC time if the sole
manipulator does not or cannot.

If this is covered by one of the Chief Counsel written opinions, can
you please provide a reference to it?

That's certainly a reasonable question, but they're not readily available as
far as I know; they circulate mainly as Usenet chain mail. So my own policy
when a purported Chief Counsel opinion flatly contradicts the FARs is just
to follow the FARs.

--Gary

On 02/10/06 08:54, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
When flying in VMC and using a view limiting device, the safety pilot
is considered a required crew member, and as such can decide to act
as PIC or SIC.

Correct. And because the flight is construed to require multiple crew
members, the safety pilot (if acting as PIC) can log PIC time (in addition
to the sole manipulator doing so), according to 61.51e1iii.

However, I would think this is not the case when flying
in IMC, as the safety pilot must be PIC (because the pilot flying is
not IMC current).

In the IMC scenario, there is no safety pilot, and there is only one
required crew member (the PIC). Under those circumstances, merely acting as
PIC does not entitle the pilot to log PIC time (acting as PIC is not one of
the three conditions listed in 61.51e1 as the *only* conditions that allow
PIC time to be logged).

Nonetheless, the FAA has reportedly said that a pilot acting as PIC (even
when just one crewmember is required) can log PIC time if the sole
manipulator does not or cannot.

Thank you, Gary. This is certainly very clear, although it is not what
I previously understood. I wonder if the Chief Counsel simply hasn't been
asked this specific case:

- IMC conditions
- Pilot flying is not IMC current
- Pilot flying is sole manipulator of the controls, and thus logs PIC
- Pilot not flying is acting PIC (required because the pilot flying is
not IMC current) and so logs PIC

Perhaps what is confusing me is that I thought that any pilot "acting"
as PIC was entitled to log the time as PIC. Your statement to the contrary,
above, is the first time I've ever heard that.

Thanks again - this is a great discussion!


If this is covered by one of the Chief Counsel written opinions, can
you please provide a reference to it?

That's certainly a reasonable question, but they're not readily available as
far as I know; they circulate mainly as Usenet chain mail. So my own policy
when a purported Chief Counsel opinion flatly contradicts the FARs is just
to follow the FARs.

--Gary




--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 02/10/06 08:54, Gary Drescher wrote:
In the IMC scenario, there is no safety pilot, and there is only one
required crew member (the PIC). Under those circumstances, merely acting
as PIC does not entitle the pilot to log PIC time (acting as PIC is not
one of the three conditions listed in 61.51e1 as the *only* conditions
that allow PIC time to be logged).

Nonetheless, the FAA has reportedly said that a pilot acting as PIC (even
when just one crewmember is required) can log PIC time if the sole
manipulator does not or cannot.

Thank you, Gary. This is certainly very clear, although it is not what
I previously understood. I wonder if the Chief Counsel simply hasn't been
asked this specific case:

- IMC conditions
- Pilot flying is not IMC current
- Pilot flying is sole manipulator of the controls, and thus logs PIC
- Pilot not flying is acting PIC (required because the pilot flying is
not IMC current) and so logs PIC

I'd guess that the Chief Counsel hasn't addressed that particular
combination of circumstances. But even flying VFR with no instrument
practice, you can have a pilot acting as PIC and another pilot acting as
sole manipulator (who may or may not be qualified to be PIC for that
flight). There's nothing special about being in IMC or being IFR that bears
on the PIC-logging questions for such a flight, so there's no need for the
FAA to separately address those specific circumstances.

Perhaps what is confusing me is that I thought that any pilot "acting"
as PIC was entitled to log the time as PIC.

Nope, 61.51e1 clearly states the contrary (even though it's partially
contradicted by the FAA's "interpretations").

Thanks again - this is a great discussion!

You're welcome! Perhaps if enough pilots keep raising this question, the FAA
will eventually fix either the FARs or the Chief Counsel opinions.

--Gary

I think I'm clear now, but wanted to clarify a point from the last post

- Pilot not flying is acting PIC (required because the pilot flying is
not IMC current) and so logs PIC

Was meant to be posted as a question to the Chief Counsel and not as a
statement of understanding, right?

Acting PIC (not flying) may NOT log PIC, based on what I'm hearing and
reading in other searches... From the following link
(http://www.propilot.com/doc/logging2.html) I snipped a section
regarding this specific situation...

========= Begin Snip ==========
A non-instrument-rated private pilot (but rated in the aircraft
category and class) flies with another private pilot who is instrument
rated, on an IFR flight plan in IMC conditions. The non-IFR pilot
manipulates the flight controls for the entire flight. The IFR pilot
acts as PIC, and is required to be the PIC since he/she is the only
pilot appropriately rated to act as PIC under IFR, but logs no flight
time. Why?
The instrument-rated pilot did not manipulate the flight controls and
is not acting as PIC of an aircraft requiring more than one pilot.

The non-IFR pilot may log PIC time for the entire flight since he/she
was the sole manipulator of the flight controlsof an aircraft for whih
he/she is rated. See legal opinion # 5 for details.

This legal opinion is written to answer a question involving a CFII as
the PIC, but the opinion later states "The other pilot must be the PIC,
....", and does not impose a requirement to hold an instructor
certificate.

Also, see legal opinion # 6 , under "TAB AERO Question # 2" which
further clarifies the fact that a non-rated pilot can manipulate the
controls under IFR.

This represents no change from the old rules.
========= End Snip ==========

Best Regards,
Todd

On 02/10/06 09:35, Gary Drescher wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...
On 02/10/06 08:54, Gary Drescher wrote:
In the IMC scenario, there is no safety pilot, and there is only one
required crew member (the PIC). Under those circumstances, merely acting
as PIC does not entitle the pilot to log PIC time (acting as PIC is not
one of the three conditions listed in 61.51e1 as the *only* conditions
that allow PIC time to be logged).

Nonetheless, the FAA has reportedly said that a pilot acting as PIC (even
when just one crewmember is required) can log PIC time if the sole
manipulator does not or cannot.

Thank you, Gary. This is certainly very clear, although it is not what
I previously understood. I wonder if the Chief Counsel simply hasn't been
asked this specific case:

- IMC conditions
- Pilot flying is not IMC current
- Pilot flying is sole manipulator of the controls, and thus logs PIC
- Pilot not flying is acting PIC (required because the pilot flying is
not IMC current) and so logs PIC

I'd guess that the Chief Counsel hasn't addressed that particular
combination of circumstances. But even flying VFR with no instrument
practice, you can have a pilot acting as PIC and another pilot acting as
sole manipulator (who may or may not be qualified to be PIC for that
flight). There's nothing special about being in IMC or being IFR that bears
on the PIC-logging questions for such a flight, so there's no need for the
FAA to separately address those specific circumstances.

Perhaps what is confusing me is that I thought that any pilot "acting"
as PIC was entitled to log the time as PIC.

Nope, 61.51e1 clearly states the contrary (even though it's partially
contradicted by the FAA's "interpretations").

61.51(e)(iii) (what I think you meant above) states:

"Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command of an
aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type
certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight
is conducted."

It would be possible for someone to interpret "... the regulations under
which the flight is conducted" to indicate that because the pilot flying
cannot legally fly in IMC, due to currency, that the pilot not flying is
required.

Okay ... I'm ready ;-)


Thanks again - this is a great discussion!

You're welcome! Perhaps if enough pilots keep raising this question, the FAA
will eventually fix either the FARs or the Chief Counsel opinions.

--Gary




--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA