2 pilots, 1 plane...

Irish_Armada

Irish_Armada

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
374
Display Name
Display name:
Irish Armada
Time building question, get your minds out of the gutter. So there are two pilots, both seeking their instrument rating, and both interested in overall time building as well. One is new to instrument training, the other about half way through. One pilot owns an airplane. Is there a practical and economical way for both pilots to coordinate and make use of that airplane in a way that advances both of their goals of building time, whether that's overall PIC hours or towards their IR requirements? Flight time would be significantly cheaper in that aircraft than a rental, especially if costs are split. I guess I'm thinking of this notion of one or both pilots (switching off) acting as safety pilot for the other but am unclear whether that's even possible or appropriate for two pilots at this stage in their training. But I feel like I'm missing something. If there's a good way to build time with another pilot in this scenario in a way that is both useful and safe, then I'm all ears. Thanks!
 
Irish_Armada said:
Time building question, get your minds out of the gutter. So there are two pilots, both seeking their instrument rating, and both interested in overall time building as well. One is new to instrument training, the other about half way through. One pilot owns an airplane. Is there a practical and economical way for both pilots to coordinate and make use of that airplane in a way that advances both of their goals of building time, whether that's overall PIC hours or towards their IR requirements? Flight time would be significantly cheaper in that aircraft than a rental, especially if costs are split. I guess I'm thinking of this notion of one or both pilots (switching off) acting as safety pilot for the other but am unclear whether that's even possible or appropriate for two pilots at this stage in their training. But I feel like I'm missing something. If there's a good way to build time with another pilot in this scenario in a way that is both useful and safe, then I'm all ears. Thanks!
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I did for the latter part of my IR training.

I flew with my instructor in my own plane but did a lot of hood work with a friend that has a plane and also going for his IR.

It worked out well, one of us would take off and do a few approaches under the hood while other was safety pilot then land to full stop and we would switch, do a few approaches and land back at the home airport. I would then give him some money for gas expenses while I was flying and we would fight over who would pay for beer and dinner while we discussed what we did right and wrong.
 
Irish_Armada said:
I guess I'm thinking of this notion of one or both pilots (switching off) acting as safety pilot for the other but am unclear whether that's even possible or appropriate for two pilots at this stage in their training.
Click to expand...

When I started IR training, my instructor was starting another guy at the same time. After he had (on an individual basis) got the basics down with us, he told us to go fly and train with each other for 2-3 weeks, then we'd get back together.

It worked very well, the other guy and I were both engineers and thus very detail oriented people. You can really learn a lot from the right seat when the pressure is off and you're observing the other guy sweat. Mistakes are easy to see, and we both benefited. We had a lot of laughs at each other's goofs, but towards the end of the three weeks it was very rewarding to hear "Man, you just nailed that approach, good job" from the other guy. This partnership extended to the ground, where we grilled the hell out of each other in prep for the oral. It was merciless at times, and funny at times.

At the end, it was short work for our CFI to prep us for the IR rides, which we did and passed on sequential days.

IMO, this was very beneficial training and saved us time on AC rentals and CFI fees. And, I met a good friend who became my partner in the Mooney.
 
Makes it a lot cheaper,and it's a good learning experience for both pilots.
 
I did this for my IR and Commercial. I had a lot of fun trips and got to split the costs which was really nice!
 
Newbie question, how is this logged?
 
JoeFromKS said:
Newbie question, how is this logged?
Click to expand...
How is what logged? If one pilot is flying under the hood, the pilot flying logs PIC time while the buddy acting as safety pilot logs either SIC or PIC time, depending on which of the two is acting as PIC. If one pilot is flying with the instructor giving training while the buddy observes from the back seat, the pilot flying and instructor both log PIC time while the buddy in the back logs nothing.

In any event, buddying up for IR training can be very productive. Each trainee observes the other's lesson from the back seat, and then they go out together to swap hood time and practice what they've learned. Lots of bang for the buck doing this.
 
JoeFromKS said:
Thanks, Ron.
I also found this: http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/Learn-to-Fly/Aviation-Subject-Report-Logging-Pilot-in-Command-PIC-Time.aspx which helped, but it's interesting that if it's simulated imc the safety pilot can log PIC, but in actual they cannot. (If I understand correctly)

Anyways, I'm sure all the experienced guys here are tired of the logging questions, but as a student this is one of the very confusing topics.
Click to expand...

Where is EdFred when you need him?

http://webpages.charter.net/edfred/LoggingPIC.pdf
 
JoeFromKS said:
Thanks, Ron.
I also found this: http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resource...eport-Logging-Pilot-in-Command-PIC-Time.aspx which helped, but it's interesting that if it's simulated imc the safety pilot can log PIC, but in actual they cannot. (If I understand correctly)
Click to expand...
You did not. The issue is not whether it's actual or simulated instrument conditions, but rather a) whether the pilot flying is wearing a vision restricting device, and b) which of the two pilots is acting as PIC. If the pilot flying is wearing a vision restricting device, then a safety pilot is required by 14 CFR 91.109(c) regardless of any other consideration, and the safety pilot can log the time. If that required safety pilot is also acting as PIC, then per 14 CFR 61.51(e) s/he can log it as PIC time, but if the pilot flying is acting as PIC, then the safety pilot can only log SIC time under 61.51(f)..
 
JoeFromKS said:
Thanks, Ron.
I also found this: http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resource...eport-Logging-Pilot-in-Command-PIC-Time.aspx which helped, but it's interesting that if it's simulated imc the safety pilot can log PIC, but in actual they cannot. (If I understand correctly)

Anyways, I'm sure all the experienced guys here are tired of the logging questions, but as a student this is one of the very confusing topics.
Click to expand...

If you are both students, you both won't be in actual without an instructor on board. SP can log PIC, only if he actually agree's to BE PIC for the flight and then only logs time while the other guy has the hood on.
 
To put it simply, the pilot acting as PIC is the guy who "is in charge of the flight". So if there was an accident or violation, he would be responsible. He can log PIC by virture of "being PIC", being in charge, being captain. The head kahuna. Gives orders, gets saluted, takes the heat. Put a note in the logbook prior to the flight who is PIC to avoid any arguments or confusion.

The other pilot is wearing foggles and flying the airplane and can log PIC by virtue of "manipulating the controls".

So two pilots can both log PIC at the same time. What a deal huh?
 
Here's what I'm seeing from AOPA:

We have provided some scenarios to illustrate the logging of PIC time with regard to safety pilots; in both cases, Pilot A will be the pilot flying the aircraft by reference to instruments under the hood or in actual instrument conditions, and Pilot B will be the safety pilot and/or acting as PIC:

Scenario 1

Pilot A wants to accompany Pilot B on a cross-country flight in a single-engine, high-performance aircraft. Pilot A is rated for the airplane but does not have a current medical, high-performance endorsement, or current flight review. Pilot A will be practicing simulated instrument flying, wearing a view-limited device, and will be sole manipulator of the controls during the en route portion of the flight. Pilot B meets all the requirements to be PIC and has agreed to be PIC and safety pilot during the flight.

Under these circumstances, Pilot A may log PIC time and simulated instrument time; Pilot B may log PIC time but not instrument time, because he/she is not operating the aircraft by reference to instruments (FAR 61.51).

Scenario 2

Pilot A wishes to fly with Pilot B on a cross-country flight in a single-engine, high-performance aircraft. Pilot A is rated for the aircraft but is not instrument rated or endorsed to fly high-performance aircraft and does not have a current medical certificate or flight review. Pilot A will be flying by reference to instruments during actual instrument conditions. Pilot B is legal to act as PIC and has agreed to be the PIC. Under these circumstances, Pilot A may log PIC and actual instrument time (although Pilot A should be prepared to explain to an FAA inspector why PIC time was logged while in actual instrument conditions, when he/she was not instrument rated). Pilot B cannot log PIC as he/she is not the sole manipulator of the flight controls and cannot log instrument time because he/she was not flying the aircraft by reference to instruments (Far 61.51).
Click to expand...

The only differences between 1 and 2 are that in 1 it is simulated and in 2 it is actual. So how does this work? And just for another twist, what if pilot A is wearing a view limiting device and then flies into IMC?
 
The flying situation has to REQUIRE two pilots. One under the hood, the other a safety pilot. In actual, there is no requirement for a safety pilot so the guy not manipulating the controls isn't required crew member and cant log PIC or SIC either.
 
coloradobluesky said:
The flying situation has to REQUIRE two pilots. One under the hood, the other a safety pilot. In actual, there is no requirement for a safety pilot so the guy not manipulating the controls isn't required crew member and cant log PIC or SIC either.
Click to expand...

Unless the pilot at the controls has a view-limiting device on. Regardless of conditions, if the pilot-flying has a hood on, a safety pilot is required.

While redundant, you can still wear a hood in "actual".
 
JoeFromKS said:
Here's what I'm seeing from AOPA:



The only differences between 1 and 2 are that in 1 it is simulated and in 2 it is actual. So how does this work? And just for another twist, what if pilot A is wearing a view limiting device and then flies into IMC?
Click to expand...
The scenarios you quote fail to point out that it doesn't matter what the weather conditions are; the only issue determining whether Pilot B can log the time is whether or not Pilot A is using a vision restricting device. Scenario 2 tacitly assumes Pilot A is not using a vision restricting device. As a result, no safety pilot is required, so Pilot B cannot log anything. However, if Pilot A is wearing a hood, then Pilot B can still log SIC or PIC time (depending on who's the PIC) regardless of the outside conditions -- see 14 CFR 91.109(c), which makes no reference to outside conditions, only whether the pilot flying is using a vision restricting device.

Now, why would a pilot be using a hood in IMC? Perhaps in order to log instrument time for the entire flight even though:

  • They are in IMC but not actual instrument conditions, e.g., flying too close to clouds to be legal for VFR but not actually in the clouds.
  • Popping in and out of the clouds.
This may seem confusing, but some definitions may help...

As a legally critical point of semantics, let's not forget the definitions of VMC, IMC, simulated instrument conditions (which for brevity I'll call SIC here), and actual instrument conditions (AIC).

VMC is flight conditions in which VFR flight is permitted under 14 CFR 91.155. These conditions change depending on altitude and airspace.

IMC is flight conditions in which VFR flight is not permitted under 14 CFR 91.155.

From the 1984 Carr letter of interpretation:

"Simulated" instrument conditions occur when the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally restricted, such as by a hood or goggles.

"Actual" instrument flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these conditions involve adverse weather conditions.
Click to expand...
Note in particular the "typically," as opposed to "always" in the AIC definition.

Thus, you can be in AIC in VMC -- say, between layers at night with several thousand feet between the layers and miles of visibility, but no visible ground or horizon references for navigation or control. Likewise, you can be in IMC without being in AIC, say, when you're 1500 feet laterally from the only cloud in a clear blue sky.

This may seem silly, but it's an important point to remember when discussing these rules, particularly since there are times you can be legally logging instrument time in VMC, and there are also times you cannot legally log instrument time when in IMC. So, there are times when you may need to be using the hood to log instrument time even when on an IFR flight plan in IMC (but not in actual instrument conditions), and when you do that, you need a safety pilot, and the safety pilot can log the time.
 
Last edited:
Ok here's another. Friend of my cfi asked me to go up with him to be safety pilot in a Piper 6. VFR conditions. He taxied and took off (.2) and then let me take the controls to fly a bit (.3) Then he went under the hood and did two approaches while I acted as safety pilot (.6). The second approach was at our airport so he took the hood off and landed (.1)

So is this my log entry: (.3) pic; (.6) sic; total time (.9)
 
Last edited:
Irish_Armada said:
Time building question, get your minds out of the gutter. So there are two pilots, both seeking their instrument rating, and both interested in overall time building as well. One is new to instrument training, the other about half way through. One pilot owns an airplane. Is there a practical and economical way for both pilots to coordinate and make use of that airplane in a way that advances both of their goals of building time, whether that's overall PIC hours or towards their IR requirements? Flight time would be significantly cheaper in that aircraft than a rental, especially if costs are split. I guess I'm thinking of this notion of one or both pilots (switching off) acting as safety pilot for the other but am unclear whether that's even possible or appropriate for two pilots at this stage in their training. But I feel like I'm missing something. If there's a good way to build time with another pilot in this scenario in a way that is both useful and safe, then I'm all ears. Thanks!
Click to expand...


Yes, all the above is possible, however using it to supplant a CFII for the allowable hours towards the 40 May not be your wisest choice with regards to actually learning what you are doing and making you time as productive as possible.

As long as one of you is manipulating the controls under the hood, and the other is Acting PIC as required by law, you can both log that time under the hood as PIC. The person under the hood can log it as simulated instrument as well. * Caution!!! The Acting PIC log book should match the Simulated Instrument time of the Manipulating PIC, and only the person manipulating when no hood is worn should add that to the PIC. This has proven a bust before that caused problems. You can apply either 20 or 25 hrs of this IIRC towards your 40hrs of IR practice/training. I did my IR in a week and 40 hrs exactly, the instruction came at a brutal pace for all 40 hrs. No errors or advice went unmentioned. This was with a 30k hr corporate pilot QB CFII. There is no way a person half way through their training would be able to provide that level of information.
 
Last edited:
FlyingTiger said:
Ok here's another. Friend of my cfi asked me to go up with him to be safety pilot in a Piper 6. VFR conditions. He taxied and took off (.2) and then let me take the controls to fly a bit (.3) Then he went under the hood and did two approaches while I acted as safety pilot (.6). The second approach was at our airport so he took the hood off and landed (.1)

So is this my log entry: (.3) pic; (.6) sic; total time (.9)
Click to expand...

I didn't catch, so I'll assume you are rated and fit to serve as PIC, you log .9 PIC, simple as that, that's the way it is done everywhere regardless of what may by interpreted about SIC from the rules. If you log the .9 of that flight as PIC, a FAA inspector would not think twice about it, and that is your only concern. If you log them as SIC it will cause confusion and you will likely have to explain it. In the end they won't care which way you do it, so long as it adds up to .9 and you can explain yourself.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
I didn't catch, so I'll assume you are rated and fit to serve as PIC, you log .9 PIC, simple as that, that's the way it is done everywhere regardless of what may by interpreted about SIC from the rules. If you log the .9 of that flight as PIC, a FAA inspector would not think twice about it, and that is your only concern. If you log them as SIC it will cause confusion and you will likely have to explain it. In the end they won't care which way you do it, so long as it adds up to .9 and you can explain yourself.
Click to expand...
Henning's post is not consistent with either the regulations as written or the FAA Chief Counsel's interpretations of those regulations. Since it's clear you were not acting as PIC, you cannot log PIC time for any portion of the flight other than when you were manipulating the controls. There will be no confusion whatsoever about the time you properly logged as you described it, and no FAA Inspector in the country will question you about it. OTOH, if you log it all as PIC, that indicates you were acting as PIC, which has a lot of ramifications, as well as the question of whether or not you were qualified to act as PIC of that aircraft with a passenger (starting with whether or not you have a high performance endorsement for that 300 HP Piper 6X). So, you did right, and there's no need to worry about anything you did.
 
The Chief Counsel will never in the wildest day in hell ever see your log book. You, and your log book, stop at the inspector.

I just bellied in a plane, went through a 44709 ride, whole 9 yards. My log book was looked at for 7 seconds to determine if I had a current Flight Review, that's it. An employer will be the only person that may, (more likely not), to scrutinize your log book. I would bet that person has time as safety pilot logged as PIC in their log book.

If somehow you get to be an airline pilot and cause a travesty of stupidity that has the entire world crawling up your ass and the Feds are scrutinizing every line of your log book searching for something to skin you with, as long as the number there is .9 for that flight, they will continue on.

If you believe anyone in the federal government gives a flying **** as to whether you log that as SIC or PIC, you are sadly mistaken in a really depressing way. I have never been left with any such impression in any dealings with the FAA in nearly 30 years.

Log it however as long as you log it as .9.
 
Ron Levy said:
Henning's post is not consistent with either the regulations as written or the FAA Chief Counsel's interpretations of those regulations. Since it's clear you were not acting as PIC, you cannot log PIC time for any portion of the flight other than when you were manipulating the controls. There will be no confusion whatsoever about the time you properly logged as you described it, and no FAA Inspector in the country will question you about it. OTOH, if you log it all as PIC, that indicates you were acting as PIC, which has a lot of ramifications, as well as the question of whether or not you were qualified to act as PIC of that aircraft with a passenger (starting with whether or not you have a high performance endorsement for that 300 HP Piper 6X). So, you did right, and there's no need to worry about anything you did.
Click to expand...

I have my high performance and complex endorsement. Been flying the Arrow on a regular basis lately. Seems like a transition to the Piper 6 would be pretty easy based on my limited time behind the controls. Of course, I didn't get to land.
 
Henning said:
The Chief Counsel will never in the wildest day in hell ever see your log book. You, and your log book, stop at the inspector.

I just bellied in a plane, went through a 44709 ride, whole 9 yards. My log book was looked at for 7 seconds to determine if I had a current Flight Review, that's it. An employer will be the only person that may, (more likely not), to scrutinize your log book. I would bet that person has time as safety pilot logged as PIC in their log book.

If somehow you get to be an airline pilot and cause a travesty of stupidity that has the entire world crawling up your ass and the Feds are scrutinizing every line of your log book searching for something to skin you with, as long as the number there is .9 for that flight, they will continue on.

If you believe anyone in the federal government gives a flying **** as to whether you log that as SIC or PIC, you are sadly mistaken in a really depressing way. I have never been left with any such impression in any dealings with the FAA in nearly 30 years.

Log it however as long as you log it as .9.
Click to expand...
At the risk of quoting R&W...:rolleyes2:
 
FlyingTiger said:
I have my high performance and complex endorsement. Been flying the Arrow on a regular basis lately. Seems like a transition to the Piper 6 would be pretty easy based on my limited time behind the controls. Of course, I didn't get to land.
Click to expand...
All that may be true, but you weren't the PIC, so you only get to log PIC time for the time you were sole manipulator -- which you apparently already correctly did.
 
When I was working on my instrument rating I flew several times with other students, alternating safety pilot and real pilot.

It was a great help to me and saved a few bucks.

I personally only log PIC if I'm the PIC per FAR-1, and think Warrior SIC time is really silly. YMMV
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Go on Pprune and start a thread there telling them that all the safety pilot time they logged as PIC should be changed to SIC and post a link to the thread. :rofl::rofl::rofl:
Click to expand...
Why bother? I doubt anyone on pprune is logging PIC time when acting only as a safety pilot.
 
Ron Levy said:
Why bother? I doubt anyone on pprune is logging PIC time when acting only as a safety pilot.
Click to expand...

I bet you in the first 1500 hrs of their log books, they most all have. Hell, the rating mills sell multi time with two guys logging PIC as a matter of course, it's the basis of every ME time building scheme sold.
 
Henning said:
I bet you in the first 1500 hrs of their log books, they most all have. Hell, the rating mills sell multi time with two guys logging PIC as a matter of course, it's the basis of every ME time building scheme sold.
Click to expand...
And I'll bet you're wrong. I'll bet every one of those ME time-building schemes involve the PNF acting as PIC (qualified, current, and commanding) and the paperwork shows it that way. And the FAA would roast their chestnuts if they weren't doing it "according to Hoyle".
 
Look at time building programs:

http://aviator.edu/home/flight-training-programs/multi-engine-time-building-programs.aspx

Under FAQ: Safety pilot can log PIC

http://www.timebuildinc.com/program.html

Under FAQ: Safety pilot can log PIC

Etc.

I don't have a dog in this hunt and I think logging PIC time sitting there looking out the window is B.S. I would never do it.

However, IF this is illegal why doesn't the FAA come down on all these operations that openly tell you they do this? It's right there on the web page. Kind of hard to deny.
 
Ron Levy said:
And I'll bet you're wrong. I'll bet every one of those ME time-building schemes involve the PNF acting as PIC (qualified, current, and commanding) and the paperwork shows it that way. And the FAA would roast their chestnuts if they weren't doing it "according to Hoyle".
Click to expand...

:confused: That's what I said, PF & PNF are logging PIC, nobody is logging SIC. You just agreed with me.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Look at time building programs:

http://aviator.edu/home/flight-training-programs/multi-engine-time-building-programs.aspx

Under FAQ: Safety pilot can log PIC

http://www.timebuildinc.com/program.html

Under FAQ: Safety pilot can log PIC

Etc.

I don't have a dog in this hunt and I think logging PIC time sitting there looking out the window is B.S. I would never do it.

However, IF this is illegal why doesn't the FAA come down on all these operations that openly tell you they do this? It's right there on the web page. Kind of hard to deny.
Click to expand...
As I said, I'm pretty sure those outfits are showing the PNF as the PIC on the paperwork, not just a safety pilot.
 
Henning said:
:confused: That's what I said, PF & PNF are logging PIC, nobody is logging SIC. You just agreed with me.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't say that, and no, I don't agree with you. Read it all again, including what the poster who restarted this said and what I replied -- if you're only a safety pilot, you can't legally log PIC time. Those logging PIC time in those programs are actually acting as PIC, not just being a safety pilot, so they can legally log it as PIC time. OTOH, in the post which restarted this thread, the safety pilot was clearly not acting as PIC, hence, legally able to log only SIC time -- and the poster got it right.
 
Holy nits, besides, I stipulated in the very beginning being qualified to act as PIC.
 
Ron Levy said:
As I said, I'm pretty sure those outfits are showing the PNF as the PIC on the paperwork, not just a safety pilot.
Click to expand...

I am confused. Here is a section from the AOPA web page:

When practicing flying in simulated instrument conditions with a safety pilot, both the pilot flying the aircraft by reference to instruments and the safety pilot may log PIC time if the safety pilot is acting as PIC. As long as the pilot flying the aircraft is rated for the aircraft being flown, he/she may log this time as PIC because he/she is sole manipulator of the controls (FAR 61.51). Because the pilot flying will be wearing a view-limiting device, a safety pilot will be a required crewmember on board (FAR 91.109). The safety pilot may log as PIC any flight time for which he/she is acting PIC in an operation requiring more than one pilot crew member (FAR 61.51).

http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources...Report-Logging-Pilot-in-Command-PIC-Time.aspx

Simply put two people can log PIC at the same time in a 172. Their logs will in no way indicate what they were doing (looking out the window) just that it was PIC time. My log doesn't have a column for safety pilot.

What am I missing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top