logging approaches as safety pilot?

Yes.

For a very simple example, there is nothing I've seen that corrects a tendency in an instrument pilot to overcorrect better than watching someone else overcorrect.

I learned something about using an HSI in instrument flight when I was safety piloting for a guy who got confused trying to intercept an ILS when he forgot to set the OBS on the HSI. Although it has no effect on the CDI, it made it look like he was flying towards the localizer when he was actually flying away from it!
 
I learned something about using an HSI in instrument flight when I was safety piloting for a guy who got confused trying to intercept an ILS when he forgot to set the OBS on the HSI. Although it has no effect on the CDI, it made it look like he was flying towards the localizer when he was actually flying away from it!
"OMG! Why is she doing THAT!!??" really gets your attention.

Fortunately, you can also learn something while watching someone doing something right :D
 
"OMG! Why is she doing THAT!!??" really gets your attention.
There used to be a line about the three most common questions in an Airbus cockpit:
  1. "Why is it doing that?"
  2. "How do I get it to stop doing that?"
  3. "How do I keep it from doing that again?"
 
There used to be a line about the three most common questions in an Airbus cockpit:
  1. "Why is it doing that?"
  2. "How do I get it to stop doing that?"
  3. "How do I keep it from doing that again?"

What's it doing now?:D
 
There used to be a line about the three most common questions in an Airbus cockpit:
  1. "Why is it doing that?"
  2. "How do I get it to stop doing that?"
  3. "How do I keep it from doing that again?"

Sigh.

Most of the time I could answer those questions. But it isn't limited to Airbus. It also applies to any highly automated airplane when one is relatively inexperienced with the type.
 
You can put in the log book what ever you want, but some states have law that says the pilot in the left seat is PIC unless the pilot in the right seat is a CFI.

Really? What gives a state the right to dictate that? I would like to see references on that.
 
You can put in the log book what ever you want, but some states have law that says the pilot in the left seat is PIC unless the pilot in the right seat is a CFI.

That overrides what your insurance and renters agreement might say and ends questions of who is liable.

I think he's referring to the state of mass confusion and hysteria
 
I learned something about using an HSI in instrument flight when I was safety piloting for a guy who got confused trying to intercept an ILS when he forgot to set the OBS on the HSI. Although it has no effect on the CDI, it made it look like he was flying towards the localizer when he was actually flying away from it!
Yep, and I'll sheepishly admit, that happened to me last weekend in actual. I didn't forget to set the OBS, mine's a Sandel and auto-slew is on. What happened was a good lesson in "trust but verify", and also taught me yet another arcane feature of the 480.
 
You can put in the log book what ever you want, but some states have law that says the pilot in the left seat is PIC unless the pilot in the right seat is a CFI.
I've heard of insurance companies requiring that in their policy, and FBO/flight schools requiring that, but never a state. Some liability cases might have deemed the pilot in the left seat to be the PIC for the purpose of that case, but a state law saying the pilot in the left seat is automatically the PIC? :no:
 
I'd like to see those laws. Please provide us with a link. :rolleyes:
I'd even settle for just one. There have been crazier laws out there so it's possible that one exists. There are in fact state laws that attempt to regulate certain types of flight operations. For example, Michigan has a law that deals with traffic patterns, minimum altitudes and accident reporting (Mich. Comp. Laws 259.80b). Tennessee has one that regulated parachute jumping (Tenn. Code 42-2-106). These usually tend to track federal requirements.

But I've never seen a state law trying to regulate pilot seat assignment.
 
Last edited:
Yep, and I'll sheepishly admit, that happened to me last weekend in actual. I didn't forget to set the OBS, mine's a Sandel and auto-slew is on. What happened was a good lesson in "trust but verify", and also taught me yet another arcane feature of the 480.

I take it you're saying that your OBS is set automatiocally. If so, was there an equipment malfunction?
 
I take it you're saying that your OBS is set automatiocally. If so, was there an equipment malfunction?
No equipment malfunction (except that my Sandel projector lamp bulb is getting a little dim, which delayed my catching the problem since the omnidirectional glare inside the clouds is actually worse than direct sunlight).

No, the problem was my lack of understanding of how the 480 handles D-> legs when an approach is activated while a DirectTo leg is active. I normally use ordinary flight plans having an origin airport and a destination airport. Last weekend when I finished up at DET I did D-> Dest to PTK and then activated the ILS 9R, assuming that the extended final approach leading to the FAF would immediately become the current leg, as it would if I was on an ordinary flight plan, because adding an approach on the 480 eliminates the last leg of the flight plan. Since auto-slew aligns the OBS with the current leg on the GPS, this would have set up the OBS to fly the approach. But the current leg was still the Direct To leg, which was almost exactly 180 degrees from the FAC so it looked right at first glance. So I experienced a moment of confusion where I wasn't sure which side of the localizer I was on. Just enough for ATC to call me up and ask if I was having trouble :redface: (though by then I had figured it out).

I learned later that DirectTo legs are exempt from leg elimination. This was the first time I'd ever activated an approach while on a DirectTo leg since I'd never had to in training.

Always double-check the OBS. Always, always. Trust but verify. :yes:
 
I'd even settle for just one. There have been crazier laws out there so it's possible that one exists. There are in fact state laws that attempt to regulate certain types of flight operations. For example, Michigan has a law that deals with traffic patterns, minimum altitudes and accident reporting (Mich. Comp. Laws 259.80b). Tennessee has one that regulated parachute jumping (Tenn. Code 42-2-106). These usually tend to track federal requirements.

But I've never seen a state law trying to regulate pilot seat assignment.
If a law required the PIC to sit in the left seat of an aircraft it would be impossible to fly my tandem seat taildragger legally.
 
Or most helicopters (Right Seat PIC).
I had that thought as well but figured it wouldn't mean much to the mostly FW crowd here.:D Then again, the owners of tandem seat airplanes are likely in the minority here as well.
 
I'd even settle for just one. There have been crazier laws out there so it's possible that one exists. There are in fact state laws that attempt to regulate certain types of flight operations. For example, Michigan has a law that deals with traffic patterns, minimum altitudes and accident reporting (Mich. Comp. Laws 259.80b). Tennessee has one that regulated parachute jumping (Tenn. Code 42-2-106). These usually tend to track federal requirements.

But I've never seen a state law trying to regulate pilot seat assignment.

The law is so the authorities will know after an accident which body to reanimate and *****-slap.

Simply ridiculous.
 
Back
Top