Act as PIC vs log PIC - SFAR 73

[RotaryWingBob]

In doing my transition to the R44, my CFI says that I cannot log PIC time, even though I'm rated in rotorcraft helicopter because of what SFAR 73 says. SFAR 73 talks about acting as PIC. Is the CFI right or not? He says I cannot log as PIC until I satisfy (ii) below (5 hours of dual in an R44 since I have gobs of R22 time) ...

Excerpted from SFAR 73:

(2) No person may act as pilot in command of a Robinson R–44 unless that person—

(i) Has had at least 200 flight hours in helicopters, at least 50 flight hours of which were in the Robinson R–44. The pilot in command may credit up to 25 flight hours in the Robinson R–22 toward the 50 hour requirement in the Robinson R–44; or

(ii) Has had at least 10 hours dual instruction in a Robinson helicopter, at least 5 hours of which must have been accomplished in the Robinson R–44 helicopter and has received an endorsement from a certified flight instructor authorized under paragraph (b)(5) of this section that the individual has been given the training required by this paragraph and is proficient to act as pilot in command of an R–44. Beginning 12 calendar months after the date of the endorsement, the individual may not act as pilot in command unless the individual has completed a flight review in a Robinson R–44 within the preceding 12 calendar months and obtained an endorsement for that flight review. The dual instruction must include at least the following abnormal and emergency procedures flight training—

(A) Enhanced training in autorotation procedures;

(B) Engine rotor RPM control without the use of the governor;

(C) Low rotor RPM recognition and recovery; and

(D) Effects of low G maneuvers and proper recovery procedures.

 

[tonycondon]

As long as you are sole manipulator, and are rated, which you are, you can log it as PIC. For the definitive answer, I will yield to Ed Fred though, he is the master of all things PIC.

 

[poadeleted20]

14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(i) is clear on the subject -- you need only be "rated" (category, class, and, if required, type ratings) to log sole manipulator time in the PIC column. The FAA legal eagles specifically said that being qualified to act as PIC was not necessary, referring to the 14 CFR 61.31 additional training endorsements. While this specific question has not been discussed in either FAA legal or Flight Standards circles, I feel certain that given the precedent on the ATE's and the fact that there is no "R44" rating that goes on your pilot certificate after completing this training, the answer would be that since you are "rated" in the aircraft, you can log the transition training time in both the PIC and "training received" columns of your log book.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Thanks, Ron.

 

[EdFred]

The Master agrees with Tony and Ron.

 

[wesleyj]

Sorry Bob, the FAA in its infinite wisdom, has seen fit to subscribe to the R44 certain restrictions, to wit, (ii), you cannot log PIC until that is complied with, rotorcraft rating and R22 time not withstanding. In this case The SFAR overrides and nullifies standard part 61. That is why they call it a Special FAR

 

[tonycondon]

fascinating, i searched through section ii of that reg and didnt see the word LOG anywhere. what is the deal with the R44 that it requires all this special training anyway?

 

[EdFred]

Sorry Bob, the FAA in its infinite wisdom, has seen fit to subscribe to the R44 certain restrictions, to wit, (ii), you cannot log PIC until that is complied with, rotorcraft rating and R22 time not withstanding. In this case The SFAR overrides and nullifies standard part 61. That is why they call it a Special FAR

(2) No person may act as pilot in command of a Robinson R–44 unless that person

Says nothing about logging. Better brush up on 61.51 again.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

fascinating, i searched through section ii of that reg and didnt see the word LOG anywhere. what is the deal with the R44 that it requires all this special training anyway?

Tony, the R22 and R44 have a semirigid rotor system, which means that it is on a teetering hinge -- that is that if I push up on one blade (of the two blade system) the other blades goes down, just like a seesaw.

All semirigid helicopters have trouble with low-G situations. If the pilot allows the ship to get near weightless, the tail rotor will cause an uncommanded roll. If the pilot counters that with cyclic, the rotor system will contact the mast and may shear it (ie. causing rotor separation).

Robinson claims that they requested that the FAA incorporate safety awareness training (low-G ops, energy management, mast bumping, low RPM hazards) into SFAR 73 as a result of an undue number of accidents early on. Beyond that, SFAR 73 specifies conditions for acting as PIC and carrying PAX for both the R22 and R44.

Having said all of that, I don't view Robinsons as unsafe -- just that there are certain things the pilot needs to be aware of for safe flight, just like an fixed-wing pilot needs to be aware of what might happen on an uncoordinated turn from base to final.

 

[tonycondon]

interesting bob, thanks ive always wondered about that one.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Sorry Bob, the FAA in its infinite wisdom, has seen fit to subscribe to the R44 certain restrictions, to wit, (ii), you cannot log PIC until that is complied with, rotorcraft rating and R22 time not withstanding. In this case The SFAR overrides and nullifies standard part 61. That is why they call it a Special FAR

John -

Can you cite a reference on that? I called the helicopter guy at the Philly FSDO a few minutes ago, and his opinion was the same as Ron and EdFred -- that acting as PIC was forbidden, but that that doesn't preclude logging the time as PIC under 61.51.

 

[poadeleted20]

Sorry Bob, the FAA in its infinite wisdom, has seen fit to subscribe to the R44 certain restrictions, to wit, (ii), you cannot log PIC until that is complied with, rotorcraft rating and R22 time not withstanding.

Can you point me to that regulation? It is certainly not stated in SFAR 73 (which I have reviewed in its entirety); that reg covers only manipulating the controls (which may be done once the "awareness training" is completed and endorsed) and acting as PIC, not logging PIC time. Once the awareness training is completed (until which you can't manipulate the controls, thus making flight training a non-starter), there's nothing in SFAR 73 that says a pilot with "RH" on his/her ticket can't log as PIC time under the sole manipulator clause flight training received from an R44-qualified CFI-RH with the instructor acting as PIC (and, presumably, logging the flight as PIC time under the "authorized instructor" clause). Note that an SFAR is additive to the Part to which it is appended, not in place of that entire part.

 

[wesleyj]

Log or not log, it states that you cannot act as PIC, means you cannot be alone in the R-44, states so in the SFAR.

(2) No person may act as pilot in command

to act means to perform the duties of and accept the responsiblities of

cant be much clearer than that. Until you meet those requirements you cannot log PIC, act as PIC, or in anyway operate the aircraft without a qualified PIC on board,

Personally, dont take this the wrong way please, I do not understand why there seems to be so much question about PIC, the regs are really quite specific, even more so in this case, because it is a special reg

 

[tonycondon]

John,

PLEASE read 61.51 There is a HUGE difference between logging and acting as PIC. There are several instances when it is perfectly legal to Log PIC time while not Acting as PIC. Most notably is when you are rated in category and class, and sole manipulator of the controls. This is what applies in this situation.

 

[EdFred]

John,

PLEASE read 61.51 There is a HUGE difference between logging and acting as PIC. There are several instances when it is perfectly legal to Log PIC time while not Acting as PIC. Most notably is when you are rated in category and class, and sole manipulator of the controls. This is what applies in this situation.

And we wonder why so many pilots have trouble with PIC questions. We've got instructors telling students that ACT = LOG and LOG = ACT, when situations can be cited in which neither case is true. 61.51 is pretty straight forward. I don't see why some people can't differentiate between the two.

Evidently the term sole manipulator means nothing to some people.

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 or has privileges;

 

[poadeleted20]

Log or not log, it states that you cannot act as PIC, means you cannot be alone in the R-44, states so in the SFAR.

No question there, John, but Bob's question was not about acting as PIC during that training, but rather about logging the flight time during R44 training in the PIC column of his log, specifically, "He says I cannot log as PIC until I satisfy (ii) below..."

So do you agree that while Bob cannot act as PIC (his instructor must do that) until he completes the training and has the endorsement, he can log this training in his PIC column? If you agree, we're on the same page. If not, we need to sort it out.

 

[wesleyj]

Under the SFAR he is not qualified to act as PIC, if you cannot act as PIC, you cannot log as PIC, the SFAR negates 61 as it applies to all activities in Robinson Helicopters. If it were not for the SFAR, yes he could log PIC, because without the SFAR he is qualified to act as PIC, But basically until the SFAR is complied with his rating and privileges in that particular aircraft are suspended.

Since the Robinson has some unique and potentially devastating characteristics, the FEDs in their infinite wisdom are for all practical purposes requiring a type rating in order to fly one.

Under the current FAR, you, me, or any other properly certificated pilot, with the proper authorizations, can climb into any aircraft for which we are properly rated, even though we have never flown that make or model, fly it legally and log PIC time,. Since the FEDS cannot mandate type ratings below 12.5, the did a SFAR, look for another soon for the Rice Rocket.

 

[EdFred]

if you cannot act as PIC, you cannot log as PIC

Regulation please?

 

[wesleyj]

Your favorite, 61.51, says it all, you have to be rated and qualified to act as PIC, but in this case the SFAR takes precedence and it is quite specific, no person may act as PIC of a R44 until all of the requirements of the SFAR are met, cant get much clearer than that.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Your favorite, 61.51, says it all, you have to be rated and qualified to act as PIC, but in this case the SFAR takes precedence and it is quite specific, no person may act as PIC of a R44 until all of the requirements of the SFAR are met, cant get much clearer than that.

But it doesn't say qualified, it says:

"... for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;"

(My emphasis)

And I am rated in category (rotorcraft) and class (helicopter)...

 

[tonycondon]

We understand the requirements of acting as PIC John. The part we are off on is when you can LOG PIC.

They are two different beasts.

 

[wesleyj]

yes they are 2 differant beast, but you cannot log activity for an activity that the regulations have forbidden you from participating in.

you have to be the sole manipulator of the controls in an aircraft that you are rated in and have privileges, the SFAR revokes those privileges, by say that no person may act as pilot in command,

 

[RotaryWingBob]

you have to be the sole manipulator of the controls in an aircraft that you are rated in and have privileges, the SFAR revokes those privileges, by say that no person may act as pilot in command,

John -

See my prior post. 61.51 doesn't use the word "and", it says "or have privileges".

 

[poadeleted20]

Your favorite, 61.51, says it all, you have to be rated and qualified to act as PIC,

No, it doesn't, and the FAA Chief Counsel's office agrees. The exact quote from 61.51(e)(1)(i): "Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges." The FAA Chief Counsel's office issued a formal interpretation saying that "rated" means you have any required ratings in section XII on your pilot certificate, and that is all. There is no requirement to be qualified as PIC in order to log PIC time for the time spent as sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you are rated.

BTW, the phrase "or has privileges" was added to include LS pilots who fly aircraft for which there are no ratings, only priviliges granted via endorsements; otherwise, they could never log the time in those aircraft. So, you can log any time you spend as the sole manipulator of the controls of any aircraft for which you are either "rated" as defined above, or have privileges via 14 CFR 61.315 et seq.

 

[wesleyj]

and, or, splitting hairs, because of the SFAR, your rating and your privileges no longer exist as relating to any type of activity in the R44,

go ahead, log it, really makes me no differance, then take your log book to the FEDS, show them where you logged PIC before (ii) was complied with, and see how long it is before you are allowed to act as PIC in anything.

Or God forbid down the road sometime have an accident, and the insurance company finds while auditing your logbook that during your transition to the R44 you violated the SFAR, any violation of the REGs while operating is grounds for cancellation of your insurance at the time of violation.

think about it,

 

[poadeleted20]

There is nothing in SFAR 73 that "suspends" your rating -- just setting several training and endorsement requirements before manipulating the controls or acting as PIC. In that sense, it's no different than the additional training endorsements for tailwheel, complex, etc., which the FAA Chief Counsel's office has said are no barrier to logging PIC time when acting as sole manipulator of the controls as long as a properly qualified pilot is acting as PIC while you do that. If someone wants to confirm this with the FAA Chief Counsel's office, mighty fine, but I'm as certain as I can be about any regulatory matter of what the answer will be -- if you have an RH rating, once you've completed the "awareness training," it's OK to log the sole manipulator time during R44 training as PIC time.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

Thanks Ron.

I intend to log the time as PIC time based on your comments plus those on the Vertical Reference board.

 

[inav8r]

because of the SFAR, your rating and your privileges no longer exist as relating to any type of activity in the R44,

Please provide a regulation or FAA Counsel's opinion stating this as fact please. You're intrepretation is just not correct. SFAR 73 certainly does not say this...

SFAR 73 talks about ACTing as PIC. 61.51 doesn't say ACT, it says LOG. "To LOG PIC, you must..."

 

[midlifeflyer]

if you cannot act as PIC, you cannot log as PIC,

25 years of consistent FAA Legal opinions and there's no convincing some folks of the complete and utter falsity of this statement.

Don't even bother trying..

 

[Ed Guthrie]

go ahead, log it, really makes me no differance, then take your log book to the FEDS, show them where you logged PIC before (ii) was complied with, and see how long it is before you are allowed to act as PIC in anything.

The FAA won't look any further than the CFI signature and "dual received" entry on that R22/R44 PIC time log entry line. The FAA understands the difference between acting PIC and logging PIC.

Same for the insurance company.

I wish some CFIs understood it as well.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

The FAA won't look any further than the CFI signature and "dual received" entry on that R22/R44 PIC time log entry line. The FAA understands the difference between acting PIC and logging PIC.

Same for the insurance company.

I wish some CFIs understood it as well.

That's two of us, Ed. I went ahead and added PIC time to the entries. I know that at least one of my partners is logging it also.

 

[RogerT]

There is no requirement to be qualified as PIC in order to log PIC time for the time spent as sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you are rated.

That may be true under some circumstances. But from what I've read it's
the FAA's intent to limit PIC time to only one person at a time unless the
operation being conducted (flight instruction, aircraft or operation
requiring more than one crew member) requires more.

With Bob's operation, I'd say he can log as PIC time that time he's the
sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he's rated (RH) and
flying with a CFI. He simply isn't legal PIC for the flight, nor can he function
as such until he's met the requirements of the SFAR.

Now in other circumstances you can't log it. An example would be if
you're not 90 day current and you're flying a single pilot aircraft with a
friend who's not a CFI. You may be rated in category/class but you
can't log PIC time for time as sole manipulator since there's no legal
basis for a two member crew.

RT

 

[poadeleted20]

But from what I've read it's the FAA's intent to limit PIC time to only one person at a time unless the operation being conducted (flight instruction, aircraft or operation requiring more than one crew member) requires more.

Where did you read that? Certainly not in any FAA regulation, Chief Counsel opinion, or Flight Standards Service document.

With Bob's operation, I'd say he can log as PIC time that time he's the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he's rated (RH) and flying with a CFI. He simply isn't legal PIC for the flight, nor can he function as such until he's met the requirements of the SFAR.

I agree.

Now in other circumstances you can't log it. An example would be if you're not 90 day current and you're flying a single pilot aircraft with a
friend who's not a CFI. You may be rated in category/class but you can't log PIC time for time as sole manipulator since there's no legal basis for a two member crew.

That's just not true. The FAA Chief Counsel has spoken on this subject -- it is indeed legal for you to log PIC time in this situation under the sole manipulator clause even though you're not the actual PIC. What isn't legal is for your friend to log PIC time during this flight since your friend doesn't meet any of the requirements to log PIC time under 14 CFR 61.51(e) and doesn't meet the "sole rated pilot aboard" exception cited by the Chief Counsel opinion for the case where a pilot takes a non-pilot flying and lets the non-pilot (who can't log anything) handle the controls.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(i) is clear on the subject -- you need only be "rated" (category, class, and, if required, type ratings) to log sole manipulator time in the PIC column. The FAA legal eagles specifically said that being qualified to act as PIC was not necessary, referring to the 14 CFR 61.31 additional training endorsements. While this specific question has not been discussed in either FAA legal or Flight Standards circles, I feel certain that given the precedent on the ATE's and the fact that there is no "R44" rating that goes on your pilot certificate after completing this training, the answer would be that since you are "rated" in the aircraft, you can log the transition training time in both the PIC and "training received" columns of your log book.

I did a transition session Saturday with the DPE who did my PP-RH checkride. Out of curiousity, I asked him the question, and he responded just as you did, and then shook his head and said "there's some instructors who will never understand the difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC". He turns out to be a really good instructor, BTW, and we're going to try for another session with him this weekend...

 

[TangoWhiskey]

go ahead, log it, really makes me no differance, then take your log book to the FEDS, show them where you logged PIC before (ii) was complied with, and see how long it is before you are allowed to act as PIC in anything.

http://www.aopa.org/members/files/topics/pic.html

Nobody will have more experience with this than Robinson. I've emailed them for a "final decision". I cast my vote with Ron, Ed, etc. There is a clear difference in the FARs between LOG and ACT.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I did a transition session Saturday with the DPE who did my PP-RH checkride. Out of curiousity, I asked him the question, and he responded just as you did, and then shook his head and said "there's some instructors who will never understand the difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC".

I was at a live FIRC a few years back and the No. 1 difficulty that the CFIs attending had was with getting their minds around the FAA's unfortunate separation of the concepts of being the PIC and writing it down in a logbook.

That's just the way it is. I suspect that CFI use of the Internet, especially aviation discussion forums like this, is helping the situation. I've been in groups like this for more than 15 years and, as time goes on, even though it obviously still exists, I've seen less and less arguments over it, especially the "I ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT BELIEVE IT NO MATTER WHAT THE FAA SAYS!" variety.

 

[RogerT]

Where did you read that? Certainly not in any FAA regulation, Chief Counsel opinion, or Flight Standards Service document.

In an article on www.faa.gov


How might a person get a copy of the Chief Counsel opinion that says
you can go flying with your buddy who isn't a CFI and log the PIC time
as sole manipulator when not 90 day current to act as PIC.

 

[TMetzinger]

Good grief. I logged all the time in actual IMC during my instrument training as PIC, even though I wasn't acting as PIC - perfectly correct. I logged the time I spent flying a retractable before I got my complex endorsement as PIC, again even though I couldn't act as PIC. My examiner, my ops inspector, my insurer, my 135 Check Airman, and every nitpicking SOB who's gone through my logbook has been quite happy with it - one inspector even went so far as to say it was one of the few logs he'd seen where the difference between ACTING as PIC and LOGGING PIC was properly documented (referring to the entries about my instrument training).

The only thing I've had to correct (and none of them caught it, Ron clued me in) was where I'd logged flight time in a simulator without an instructor. Turns out I could log the approaches and holds, etc, but not the time.

Nothing in SFAR73 says one word about logging time, and the FSDOs and insurers understand the difference between logging and acting. As long as the all the R44 time (until the requirements are met) shows PIC but not SOLO, it will be obvious that there was someone else in the plane. One thing that might be helpful (if not required) would be to log the name of the acting PIC if the flight is not dual instruction from a CFI.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

In an article on www.faa.gov


How might a person get a copy of the Chief Counsel opinion that says
you can go flying with your buddy who isn't a CFI and log the PIC time
as sole manipulator when not 90 day current to act as PIC.

All you have to do is look at 61.51(e). It is spelled out there. As long as someone is in the other control seat that is the legal PIC, the sole manipulator may log PIC according to 61.51. No regional counsel needed.

 

[RogerT]

All you have to do is look at 61.51(e). It is spelled out there. As long as someone is in the other control seat that is the legal PIC, the sole manipulator may log PIC according to 61.51. No regional counsel needed.

Greg, with all due respect, that's where I disagree and please understand that
what I'm talking about is when the PF is NOT current in accordance with
61.57. I'm aware of two situations where both pilots can log PIC. First
when one is a CFI giving instruction to the other who is rated category and
class. Second is when one is legal PIC acting as safety pilot for the PF under the hood.

I'm not aware of any legal basis for two pilots flying together in a plane
or operation not requiring more than one crew member to both log
PIC. When two pilots are out together outside the above operations then I believe only one at a time can log PIC. So if a pilot who is current hands
over the controls to a pilot who is not .. then the one who's current
can no longer log PIC or be legal PIC (only one crewmember required) so
that pilot now becomes a passenger. If the other pilot isn't current then
he isn't legal to haul that passenger.

So if something from the FAA exists to contradict my long time understanding of this then I'm just asking to be able to review it.

RT