A new logging question!

[TMetzinger]

OK, hope this one will be original and not already debated:

Pilot Allen goes to his AME and gets deferred. He's got to wait six months and then show that his medical regimen has his issue under control to get a special issuance.

But Allen wants to fly, and for his business, he NEEDS to fly. So Allen solicits and hires Bob, a Commercial pilot who is NOT a CFI, to act as pilot in command on his trips for the next six months. Bob gets added to Allen's insurance.

Bob and Allen go off on trips, and Allen requests to do most of the flying. Bob (at this point) has gotten to know Allen and his issue well enough to be comfortable with Allen doing the flying - he's not worried about Allen's skills or his condition causing a problem.

So, a typical trip. 3 hours of flight time, 2 landings. Allen did all the flying and Bob sat in the right seat and watched and was ready to take over if asked/needed.

Questions:
Is there anything wrong with this operation from an FAR standpoint? I don't think so, but would welcome differing opinions and justification.

What (if any) flight time can Bob log, and why? In my opinion, he can log the fact that the flight happened, but he cannot log any time or landings.

 

[kevin47881]

Does "Allen" have a valid medical during this time and just the renewal is awaiting S.I. approval?

 

[EdFred]

At first glance, Bob logs nothing. Allen logs all sole manipulator time.

I'm looking for the "hook" in you scenario because it seems like an easy answer.

 

[gprellwitz]

You say "Pilot Allen." I presume that this means a recreational pilot or beyond (up to but not including ATP)? (I.e. not a student pilot.) I further presume that he's rated in the aircraft. So he logs all the time he was the sole manipulator. Bob logs all the time that HE was sole manipulator (close to zero).

If "Pilot Allen" doesn't meet the aforementioned credentials, then he doesn't log any of it and Bob still logs all the time that HE was sole manipulator (close to zero). So you get a flight during which no one can log any time.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Does "Allen" have a valid medical during this time and just the renewal is awaiting S.I. approval?

Kevin,

Why does it matter? A medical had no bearing on whether or not he can log PIC.

 

[KennyFlys]

Kevin,

Why does it matter? A medical had no bearing on whether or not he can log PIC.

If Allen doesn't have a valid medical in effect, how could he log any time at all?

 

[EdFred]

If Allen doesn't have a valid medical in effect, how could he log any time at all?

Read my flow chart. Learn it. Love it.

LOG vs ACT.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

If Allen doesn't have a valid medical in effect, how could he log any time at all?

BECAUSE 61.51(e) DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT BEING THE LEGAL PIC.

Yes. I am yelling.

 

[KennyFlys]

Read my flow chart. Learn it. Love it.

LOG vs ACT.

(e) Additional training required for operating complex airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a complex airplane (an airplane that has a retractable landing gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch propeller; or, in the case of a seaplane, flaps and a controllable pitch propeller), unless the person has--
(i) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane, or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a complex airplane, and has been found proficient in the operation and systems of the airplane; and
(ii) Received a one-time endorsement in the pilot's logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person is proficient to operate a complex airplane.

According to you, one can log PIC in a complex aircraft BEFORE having received the endorsement. How can you "log" PIC time if you're not legally entitled to "act" as PIC? I have a problem buying that. Please explain further.

 

[EdFred]

61.51. Read it.

Then read it again.

Then read it again.

sole manipulator.

read it again.

and again

and again

 

[EdFred]

I honestly don't think you're going to slide that past an ALJ.

I can't believe anyone made you a CFI with your complete lack of knowledge of flight physics *cough* treadmill *cough* and your inability to read 61.51.

 

[EdFred]

61.51


(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated






(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated





(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated






(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated







(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated








(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated








(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated

 

[gprellwitz]

According to you, one can log PIC in a complex aircraft BEFORE having received the endorsement. How can you "log" PIC time if you're not legally entitled to "act" as PIC? I have a problem buying that. Please explain further.

PJ already did. See http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22506.

 

[KennyFlys]

I can't believe anyone made you a CFI with your complete lack of knowledge of flight physics *cough* treadmill *cough* and your inability to read 61.51.

I asked for an explanation, not the response of an ass.

Forget I even made a post in this thread. Geeze.

 

[EdFred]

I asked for an explanation, not the response of an ass.

Forget I even made a post in this thread. Geeze.

The explanation is in the flowchart. It's even annotated with 61.51(e)!!!!

 

[ntbjounin]

FIRST THINGS FIRST!!! I wouldn't NOT pass my medical!

2nd, If i didn't pass (which I would, to clarify) I don't think I could ACT as PIC on that flight. I MAY be able to log it, but I'm not really sure on that. I do believe the flow chart, but if you've lost your medical I know there's some FAR that says clearly you CANNOT fly if you're medical has been taken away form you. Even sport pilots, if they have some sort of medical issue they're aware of can't fly. I don't recall exactly the one, I'm sure someone can help me out there.

3rd- back to the logging / acting. Lets say we're flying in a Complex aircraft, and I'm not complex rated, but you are. You'll be the PIC, however, any time you let me play w. the controls, I'm able to Log pic.... MY QUESTION would be.... during that time you let me be the sole manipulator... could YOU also log PIC since you're the one in charge of the flight? I think not (unless I'm under the hood) but that's a whole new can of worms...

 

[dbman5]

Kevin,
Why does it matter? A medical had no bearing on whether or not he can log PIC.

It sure as heck does!

Like most documents, you can't just just take one paragraph (like 61.51e) of the FAR on a "stand alone" basis.

According to 61.3c: (emphasis added)

... a person may not act as pilot in command or in any other capacity as a required flight crewmember of an aircraft, ..., unless that person has a current and appropriate medical certificate ...

Since Bob wasn't sole manipulator of the controls, he can't log the time but neither can Allen - assuming, of course, that Allen's 'existing' medical isn't valid anymore. I think this is the point Rev Kev was getting at in the first place.

I'd hate to say whether or not it's legal to fly like this but I'd sure as heck hate to be either one of those guys if something bad happened while Allen was flying the plane. I have a feeling the insurance company would honestly be very happy about the situation. I suspect they would consider this a very good reason not to pay. At the very least, I'd make sure Bob, the only valid crew member, was in the left seat! Even if it's legal to fly from the right seat, the impression it leaves wouldn't be very good in a legal battle with the insurance company.

Is it possible to have a legal flight if nobody can log the time? Somehow I doubt it. Of course, if nobody says anything and Bob logs the time anyway since he's the only legal pilot, then it would look legal.

 

[jesse]

It sure as heck does!

Like most documents, you can't just just take one paragraph (like 61.51e) of the FAR on a "stand alone" basis.

According to 61.3c: (emphasis added)

Since Bob wasn't sole manipulator of the controls, he can't log the time but neither can Allen - assuming, of course, that Allen's 'existing' medical isn't valid anymore. I think this is the point Rev Kev was getting at in the first place.

I'd hate to say whether or not it's legal to fly like this but I'd sure as heck hate to be either one of those guys if something bad happened while Allen was flying the plane. I have a feeling the insurance company would honestly be very happy about the situation. I suspect they would consider this a very good reason not to pay. At the very least, I'd make sure Bob, the only valid crew member, was in the left seat! Even if it's legal to fly from the right seat, the impression it leaves wouldn't be very good in a legal battle with the insurance company.

Is it possible to have a legal flight if nobody can log the time? Somehow I doubt it. Of course, if nobody says anything and Bob logs the time anyway since he's the only legal pilot, then it would look legal.

Let me help you out.

... a person may not act as pilot in command or in any other capacity as a required flight crewmember of an aircraft, ..., unless that person has a current and appropriate medical certificate ...

may not ACT as. Does not say may not log.
Logging != Acting

 

[dbman5]

Let me help you out.
may not ACT as. Does not say may not log.
Logging != Acting

I'm sorry. Slap me silly for being so stupid as to assume that the question was what LEGAL PIC time can be logged.

You can write anything in the log that you want to. You can write poetry in it if you want to. However, just writing it in the log book doesn't mean it would be considered valid by the FAA and I see no reason to log something if it isn't valid.

How can you say, "It's not legal to act as PIC but I'm going to log it anyway." That sounds to me like saying, "It's not legal to run red lights but I do it all the time anyway."

If the FAA or the insurance company ever reviewed the log and noted that someone without a valid medical was logging PIC time (or any time other than "I went flying as a passenger with someone"), I'm sure they would NOT consider it legal PIC time. In fact, it would probably raise a lot of questions about the other log entries and anything else the pilot did/said as well.

 

[dmccormack]

I can't believe anyone made you a CFI with your complete lack of knowledge of flight physics *cough* treadmill *cough* and your inability to read 61.51.

Get out -- a CFI who can't divine the fine nuances of regulations that are subject to interpretation by jurists?

It cannot be.....

 

[TMetzinger]

I'm sorry. Slap me silly for being so stupid as to assume that the question was what LEGAL PIC time can be logged.

You can write anything in the log that you want to. You can write poetry in it if you want to. However, just writing it in the log book doesn't mean it would be considered valid by the FAA and I see no reason to log something if it isn't valid.

How can you say, "It's not legal to act as PIC but I'm going to log it anyway." That sounds to me like saying, "It's not legal to run red lights but I do it all the time anyway."

If the FAA or the insurance company ever reviewed the log and noted that someone without a valid medical was logging PIC time (or any time other than "I went flying as a passenger with someone"), I'm sure they would NOT consider it legal PIC time. In fact, it would probably raise a lot of questions about the other log entries and anything else the pilot did/said as well.

Then you really don't get it. The FAA and insurance companies consider that time completely valid.

The example I gave is common - people hire commercial pilots to "ride-along" all the time - either because they can't ACT as PIC due to medical issues, or because they don't have enough time in type to be covered by insurance.

Did you ever wonder how a brand new owner of a PC-12 gets enough turboprop PIC time to be covered by his insurance? By having a qualified pilot in the right seat. Sometimes the other pilot is a CFI, and they treat the flight as dual instruction and BOTH log PIC. Sometimes the other pilot is not a CFI (or chooses not to treat the flight as dual) and the pilot flying logs PIC and the pilot not flying logs nothing.

OK -for additional debate... Let's make Bob a Private pilot, who's a good buddy of Allen (they have a pre-existing long term relationship). Allen doesn't pay Bob for being a ride-along, but they don't share expenses - it's Allen's plane and Allen covers all the bills. Bob pays for his own meals and lodging, etc.

Is Bob violating any regs by helping his buddy out?

 

[EdFred]

I'm sorry. Slap me silly for being so stupid as to assume that the question was what LEGAL PIC time can be logged.

You can write anything in the log that you want to. You can write poetry in it if you want to. However, just writing it in the log book doesn't mean it would be considered valid by the FAA and I see no reason to log something if it isn't valid.

How can you say, "It's not legal to act as PIC but I'm going to log it anyway." That sounds to me like saying, "It's not legal to run red lights but I do it all the time anyway."

If the FAA or the insurance company ever reviewed the log and noted that someone without a valid medical was logging PIC time (or any time other than "I went flying as a passenger with someone"), I'm sure they would NOT consider it legal PIC time. In fact, it would probably raise a lot of questions about the other log entries and anything else the pilot did/said as well.

Chief Counsel letter dated December 8th 1993 completely disagrees with you

Prior to providing a specific response to your inquiry, it is appropriate to note here the distinction between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. PIC, as defined in FAR 1.1, means the pilot responsible for the operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time. FAR 61.51 pertains to the logging of PIC flight time, and it provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as PIC time only that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated, or when he is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or when he acts as PIC 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.

emphasis mine.

Why would the chief counsel throw in OR ACTING AS PIC, if it wasn't a separate scenario.

He doesn't say "and when he acts" he says "or when he acts" meaning there are two separate issues. Acting, and logging.

 

[EdFred]

Then you really don't get it. The FAA and insurance companies consider that time completely valid.

The example I gave is common - people hire commercial pilots to "ride-along" all the time - either because they can't ACT as PIC due to medical issues, or because they don't have enough time in type to be covered by insurance.

Did you ever wonder how a brand new owner of a PC-12 gets enough turboprop PIC time to be covered by his insurance? By having a qualified pilot in the right seat. Sometimes the other pilot is a CFI, and they treat the flight as dual instruction and BOTH log PIC. Sometimes the other pilot is not a CFI (or chooses not to treat the flight as dual) and the pilot flying logs PIC and the pilot not flying logs nothing.

OK -for additional debate... Let's make Bob a Private pilot, who's a good buddy of Allen (they have a pre-existing long term relationship). Allen doesn't pay Bob for being a ride-along, but they don't share expenses - it's Allen's plane and Allen covers all the bills. Bob pays for his own meals and lodging, etc.

Is Bob violating any regs by helping his buddy out?

Well, I think that since Bob can not legally log anything, he's not getting any of the bullcrap "compensation" the FAA likes to broadly define. However, 61.113 says Bob may not ACT as PIC for compensation or hire. While he is being paid $0.00 it could techinically be looked at that he was being hired for his pilot services. Allen needs an acting PIC, but Bob is not legal to act as PIC. It is not Bob's business. Now if Bob were a full time employee of the company, it could be looked upon the flight being incidental to business - which for Allen it is, but for Bob it is not.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

2nd, If i didn't pass (which I would, to clarify) I don't think I could ACT as PIC on that flight.

You are correct.

I MAY be able to log it, but I'm not really sure on that.

61.51 is your ONLY guide on that. If you are rated, and you wiggle the controls, you are entitled to log that time.

I do believe the flow chart, but if you've lost your medical I know there's some FAR that says clearly you CANNOT fly if you're medical has been taken away form you.

That is not entirely true. What you cannot do is ACT as PIC. No where does it say you cannot fly. In those cases where you cannot act as PIC, there MUST be someone onboard who CAN act as legal PIC.

Even sport pilots, if they have some sort of medical issue they're aware of can't fly. I don't recall exactly the one, I'm sure someone can help me out there.

See above. Same situation.

MY QUESTION would be.... during that time you let me be the sole manipulator... could YOU also log PIC since you're the one in charge of the flight? I think not (unless I'm under the hood) but that's a whole new can of worms...

You've got it right. Only one person at a time may log the time unless there is a CFI onboard who is providing instruction or the flight requires two pilots. Then two may log time.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Dan, unlike the perceived demeanor of some other posters, I will try to be nice.

Just keep in mind there is a difference between the logging of PIC and the acting as PIC. This has been discussed and debated ad infinitum. If we CAN'T agree on this one point, there really is no point in discussing this further.

It sure as heck does!

Like most documents, you can't just just take one paragraph (like 61.51e) of the FAR on a "stand alone" basis.

In this case, however we CAN take them as stand alone. 61.31 deals with ACTING as PIC and 61.51 deals with logging. Two separate things.

According to 61.3c: (emphasis added)

Since Bob wasn't sole manipulator of the controls, he can't log the time but neither can Allen - assuming, of course, that Allen's 'existing' medical isn't valid anymore. I think this is the point Rev Kev was getting at in the first place.

That is exactly what Kevin was getting at. But keep in mind one does not need to be able to act as PIC in order to log PIC. No where in 61.51 does it specify that that condition be met.

I'd hate to say whether or not it's legal to fly like this but I'd sure as heck hate to be either one of those guys if something bad happened while Allen was flying the plane. I have a feeling the insurance company would honestly be very happy about the situation. I suspect they would consider this a very good reason not to pay.

Well, that is a valid concern, but not really germane to this discussion. What the insurance company does or does not do has no real relevance on how to interpret the FAR's.

At the very least, I'd make sure Bob, the only valid crew member, was in the left seat! Even if it's legal to fly from the right seat, the impression it leaves wouldn't be very good in a legal battle with the insurance company.

Well, you MAY have a point. But no where in the FAR's does it state which seat the PIC MUST occupy. And if Bob is the only legal PIC, and it is Bob's coverage, the insurance company does not have any real grounds not to provide the coverage. But I agree they might be able to make an issue out of it.

Is it possible to have a legal flight if nobody can log the time? Somehow I doubt it.

In technical terms, with a strict reading of the relevant FAR's, it is in fact possible to have scenarios in which no one may log time.

Of course, if nobody says anything and Bob logs the time anyway since he's the only legal pilot, then it would look legal.

Can't argue with that. But it does not mean it is right. It just means no one else was there to dispute it.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

How can you say, "It's not legal to act as PIC but I'm going to log it anyway." That sounds to me like saying, "It's not legal to run red lights but I do it all the time anyway."

1. Acting and logging are covered by two separate and independent regulations. Say what you want, but they are not tied to each other and they are not related to each other.

2. The red light analogy is not relevant because it is clearly illegal to run a red light. It is NOT illegal to log PIC per 61.51 if one is not able to be legal PIC.

If the FAA or the insurance company ever reviewed the log and noted that someone without a valid medical was logging PIC time (or any time other than "I went flying as a passenger with someone"), I'm sure they would NOT consider it legal PIC time.

What the insurance company says is irrelevant to this conversation. And I believe the FAA is on record somewhere (someone else who is familiar with where to find legal interpretations will have to chime in here because I can't find them when I want them. ) as saying that one does not have to be able to act as PIC in order to log PIC.

In fact, it would probably raise a lot of questions about the other log entries and anything else the pilot did/said as well.

Actually, the FAA won't give it a second look in this situation.

 

[TMetzinger]

Well, I think that since Bob can not legally log anything, he's not getting any of the bullcrap "compensation" the FAA likes to broadly define. However, 61.113 says Bob may not ACT as PIC for compensation or hire. While he is being paid $0.00 it could techinically be looked at that he was being hired for his pilot services. Allen needs an acting PIC, but Bob is not legal to act as PIC. It is not Bob's business. Now if Bob were a full time employee of the company, it could be looked upon the flight being incidental to business - which for Allen it is, but for Bob it is not.

Well, if he's not being compensated by logging time (which is where the FAA stretches IMHO, but they've made the ruling and it hasn't been overturned), and he's not getting any $$, then one could argue just as strongly that he's NOT acting as PIC for compensation or hire.

But I agree that it's not clear (where the commercial pilot situation is clear).

This is just like ferrying an airplane for a buddy when you hold only a private certificate - if you're not logging the time or getting paid, it shouldn't be an issue, but it COULD be an issue if the FAA wants to push it.

 

[ntbjounin]

The example I gave is common - people hire commercial pilots to "ride-along" all the time - either because they can't ACT as PIC due to medical issues, or because they don't have enough time in type to be covered by insurance.

OK -for additional debate... Let's make Bob a Private pilot, who's a good buddy of Allen (they have a pre-existing long term relationship). Allen doesn't pay Bob for being a ride-along, but they don't share expenses - it's Allen's plane and Allen covers all the bills. Bob pays for his own meals and lodging, etc.

Is Bob violating any regs by helping his buddy out?

Paragraph 1 - Good point.
Paragraph 2 - That may get into the "what is a commercial operation?" debate. I know that I was told by an insurance company that ANY TIME You're not sharing paying your pro rata share in the flight, there's a commercial operation going on. Then the question is, are you a commercial operator... Is this common carriage? etc...

You are correct.


That is not entirely true. What you cannot do is ACT as PIC. No where does it say you cannot fly. In those cases where you cannot act as PIC, there MUST be someone onboard who CAN act as legal PIC.

yes we're on the same page there. I didnt mean to use the word fly. I of course meant ACT as PIC. sorry for my poor word choice.

 

[TMetzinger]

Ya know, I was hoping someone would have been creative and said that since Allen can't ACT as PIC, and the regs under which the flight are conducted (FAR 91) REQUIRE a PIC, that a second pilot is required, thus Bob can LOG PIC.

And before anyone says "yeah, that's right", the minute BOB gets in the airplane ALLEN is no longer required, so only one pilot is required, and Bob can't log the time when he's acting but not manipulating.


Ooooh - who logs time when the autopilot is flying? Don't answer until I get some popcorn. My opinion is whoever turned on the autopilot logs the time, he was the one who manipulated it.

 

[EdFred]

Ooooh - who logs time when the autopilot is flying? Don't answer until I get some popcorn. My opinion is whoever turned on the autopilot logs the time, he was the one who manipulated it.

Whoever fills out his logbook first!

 

[midlifeflyer]

OCT. 28, 1980

WINSTON SCOTT JONES

Dear Mr. Jones:

This is in response to your letter in which you request an interpretation of Section 61.51(2)(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, regarding logging of pilot-in-command (PIC) flight time.

Specifically, you ask what time may be logged as PIC time when the pilot in the right seat is a certificated flight instructor (CFI) along for the purpose of instruction and is not a required crewmember, and the pilot in the left seat holds either a private or commercial certificate in an aircraft for which he is rated.

Section 61.51 is a flight-time logging regulation, under which PIC time may be logged by one who is not actually the pilot in command (i.e., not "ultimately" responsible for the aircraft) during that time. This is consistent with the purpose of Section 61.51, which as stated in 61.51(a) is to record aeronautical training and experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating, or the recent flight experience requirements of Section 61.

Section 61.51(c)(2)(i) provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as pilot-in-command time only that flight time during which the pilot--

1. Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated; or

2. Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or

3. Acts 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.

Under Section 61.51(c)(2)(iii) a certificated flight instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time during which he or she acts as a flight instructor. Sections 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) provide for logging of flight instruction and instrument flight instruction received.

Accordingly, two or more pilots may each log PIC time for the same flight time. For example, a pilot who is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he or she is rated may log that time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(i) while receiving instruction, and the instructor may log that same time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(iii).

There is no provision in the FAR's for logging of "dual" flight time; however, we assume that you are referring to logging time as instruction received. Section 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) allow flight instruction and instrument instruction received time to be recorded. There is nothing in the FAR's which prevents a pilot from logging the same time as both instruction received and PIC time, as long as each requirement is met. The pilot may also log the same time as instrument instruction. Note, though, that one hour of flight logged both as one hour of PIC and one hour of instruction received still adds up to only one hour total flight time.

You request interpretations of these regulations for situations in which:

1. The purpose of the flight is instruction in advanced maneuvers.

2. The purpose of the flight is simulated instrument instruction in actual VFR conditions.

3. The purpose of the flight is instrument instruction actual IFR conditions.

4. The pilot in the left seat is not current in the aircraft or in the conditions of flight.

5. The purpose of the flight is transition from tricycle to conventional landing gear.

6. The purpose of the flight is obtaining logbook endorsement authorizing operation of a high performance aircraft, as required by FAR 61.31(e).

7. The purpose of the flight is transition to a different type aircraft of the same category and class for which the left seat pilot is rated and a type rating is not required.

In each situation, the CFI may log PIC time for all flight time during which she or he acts as flight instructor. The pilot receiving instruction may also log PIC time in each of these situations, as the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which she or he is rated. Specifically, neither the currency requirements of situation 4 nor the log book endorsement of situation 6 are ratings within the meaning of Section 61.51. "Rating" as used in that section refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates.

We trust that this discussion answers your questions.

Sincerely,

EDWARD P. FABERMAN
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division

 

[poadeleted20]

Since Bob is a Commercial Pilot (see Post #1), Bob can legally receive compensation for acting as the PIC in this operation. One of the few things a CPL entitles you to do is to provide pilot services for compensation (14 CFR 61.133(a)(2)). It's not a 135 situation because Allan is the owner/operator and isn't providing air transportation for hire -- kind of like corporate ops.

And to answer the original post -- it's all kosher as stated: Allan (whom we assume is rated because he was flying the plane himself before he lost his medical) logs PIC time for the whole flight (14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(i)), and Bob can't log anything unless Allan puts on the hood, at which point Bob can log PIC time as long as Allan has the hood on (14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(iii)).

And Tim's right about the autopilot -- whoever's twisting the knobs logs PIC time as the sole manipulator (albeit indirectly) of the controls.

 

[dbman5]

I seem to be going against everybody else here but I actually find this quite interesting and hope someone can convince me that I'm wrong. Not just tell me I'm wrong but convince me with evidence from the FARs or better evidence from the Chief Counsel or even something from your insurance company. So far there have been lots of statements but no convincing references that actually address the issue of logging time when the medical certificate has expired or been denied. That includes the references to chief counsel letters.

I understand the PC-12 example completely and I agree that one doesn't have to be acting as PIC in order to log PIC time. That is not my issue. My issue is with finding something that says a pilot without a medical is still a pilot in the FAA's viewpoint and can therefore log PIC time.

I would hate to be put in the situation of saying, "Because they didn't address it, it's OK." Maybe I've just been tainted by my years working with township planning ordinances where "if it isn't listed as a permitted use, you can't do it." Saying, "Well, it doesn't say I can't do it so I did it." usually doesn't cut it there.

Upon further investigation I found this in 61.23:
... a person (3) must hold at least a third class medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate;

It would seem to me that logging time would be one of the privileges of a private pilot certificate. IF that's true, then you can't legitimately log time without a valid medical. Section 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: PIC is mostly directed at limitations so it's not really clear here either. It still sounds to me like there is a big hole in there that could cause problems for someone without a medical.

Just because "it's done all the time" doesn't mean it's legit.

If someone's medical has expired or been denied, is he considered to have a "valid pilot license"? Section 61.23 seems to say "no" - although one could argue the semantics between "valid pilot license" and "exercising the privileges". If not, how can he legitimately log PIC time or any other time?

Maybe I'm missing another paragraph somewhere that says it's OK for someone without a valid pilot license to log flight time. Or, maybe I'm missing the part that says your license is valid without a medical certificate. (I know it doesn't expire but is it 'valid' without a medical?) And please be aware that I'm being serious here - not trying to be facetious or anything else. (And I apologize for reacting negatively to the negative comment originally directed at me.) The FARs are definitely complicated. They don't seem to specifically say "you can't legally fly the plane without a medical" only that you can't act as a crew member. So, if you can't legally act as a crew member, how can you legally fly the plane or log the time? Wouldn't that be viewed the same as "I took my non-pilot friend up and let him fly the plane - so he logged it as PIC time so that when he got his PPL he'd have enough hours to meet that part of the experience requirements for starting his CPL."

Let me reiterate my position. I have no problem at all with the fact that someone with a valid pilot license and a valid medical can log PIC time without actually acting as PIC. My only issue is when the medical is no longer valid.

 

[TMetzinger]

LOGGING time is addressed by 61.51. Period. Find me a sentence in that section that explicitly calls for a medical.

Bzzzt! Times up. It's not there.

It's implied in the section where you log time because you're acting as PIC. YES, if you want to LOG time because you are ACTING as PIC, you have to have a medical, because you have to have a medical to ACT as PIC in the first place.

But if you want to LOG time as the sole manipulator, you don't have to be ACTING as PIC, and unless you're a required crew member, no medical is needed.

Logging time is not one of the "privileges" of a pilot certificate. Students logged time before they ever even get their student certificate. Glider pilots don't need medicals at all, do they? But THEY get to log PIC.

 

[EdFred]

It would seem to me that logging time would be one of the privileges of a private pilot certificate.

Can you act as a private pilot while wearing a pirate costume? After all 61.11x does not say one way or the other about acting as PIC while wearing a pirate costume. So I guess it must not be legal since they don't address it correct?

Yes, my example is somewhat facetious, but the point is....don't go reading things into the FARs that are not there. There is only one place where logging PIC needs to be looked at, and that is in 61.51(e). The only other FAR to ever be reference when logging PIC time is 61.87 and that applies ONLY to student pilots.

There are have been numerous Chief Counsel letters stating that acting as PIC is NOT a requirement to log PIC. The Hicks letter dated December 1993 is one of them.

Prior to providing a specific response to your inquiry, it is appropriate to note here the distinction between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. PIC, as defined in FAR 1.1, means the pilot responsible for the operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time. FAR 61.51 pertains to the logging of PIC flight time, and it provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as PIC time only that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated, or when he is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or when he acts as PIC 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.

If acting as PIC was a requirement to logging PIC why would the Chief Counsel specifically say "or when he acts" ? Wouldn't he had said "and when he acts" ?

 

[brcase]

It sure as heck does!

Like most documents, you can't just just take one paragraph (like 61.51e) of the FAR on a "stand alone" basis.

According to 61.3c: (emphasis added)

Since Bob wasn't sole manipulator of the controls, he can't log the time but neither can Allen - assuming, of course, that Allen's 'existing' medical isn't valid anymore. I think this is the point Rev Kev was getting at in the first place.

I'd hate to say whether or not it's legal to fly like this but I'd sure as heck hate to be either one of those guys if something bad happened while Allen was flying the plane. I have a feeling the insurance company would honestly be very happy about the situation. I suspect they would consider this a very good reason not to pay. At the very least, I'd make sure Bob, the only valid crew member, was in the left seat! Even if it's legal to fly from the right seat, the impression it leaves wouldn't be very good in a legal battle with the insurance company.

Is it possible to have a legal flight if nobody can log the time? Somehow I doubt it. Of course, if nobody says anything and Bob logs the time anyway since he's the only legal pilot, then it would look legal.

I agree I think the FAA would have some serious issues with looking at Allens Log book and noting that he has been logging PIC time without a valid medical certificate.

Of course if he had been logging it as Dual with a CFI that would be a different story.

Brian

 

[EdFred]

I agree I think the FAA would have some serious issues with looking at Allens Log book and noting that he has been logging PIC time without a valid medical certificate.

Of course if he had been logging it as Dual with a CFI that would be a different story.

Brian

No they wouldn't. See my post quoting the Hicks letter.

 

[TMetzinger]

I agree I think the FAA would have some serious issues with looking at Allens Log book and noting that he has been logging PIC time without a valid medical certificate.

Of course if he had been logging it as Dual with a CFI that would be a different story.

Brian

You're wrong. They'd ask - were you acting as PIC? and Allen would say "Why no! Mr. Bob Smith was the PIC on those flights. Here's our contract/my cancelled checks/etc."

Now it might make the log easier to understand if Allen logged the fact that Bob was acting as PIC, but he's under no requirement to do so.

Thinking back, I believe Bob Hoover kept in practice doing this very thing with his ferry pilot acting as PIC when his medical certificate was in dispute.

 

[Ghery]

If Allen doesn't have a valid medical in effect, how could he log any time at all?

The same way I've been logging (not acting) PIC since April 28. With a current pilot in the right seat (in my case, CFII) who is acting PIC. And it's all legal.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I seem to be going against everybody else here but I actually find this quite interesting and hope someone can convince me that I'm wrong. Not just tell me I'm wrong but convince me with evidence from the FARs or better evidence from the Chief Counsel or even something from your insurance company. So far there have been lots of statements but no convincing references that actually address the issue of logging time when the medical certificate has expired or been denied. That includes the references to chief counsel letters.

I really like EdFred's costume example. It does show the point.

There's probably no convincing you if you need to take the view that unless something is explicitly permitted, it's prohibited. In the case of 61.51 every FAA Legal opinion on the subject so far has been based on it standing on its own, unless, as in the case of 2-pilot ops, 61.51 specifically sends you to a qualification reg.

But no, like EdFred's costume, I'm not aware of an FAA Legal opinion that specifically says that 61.51 has a requirement it doesn't mention.