Logging hours without a BFR

Larry in TN said:
You are forgetting WHY we log flight time. Read 14 CFR 61.51(a) for the only resons why we log flight time according to the FAA.

Sec. 61.51 — Pilot logbooks.
(a) Training time and aeronautical experience. Each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:
(1) Training and aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.

(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent flight experience requirements of this part.​

This is why airlines typically have a different definition of "PIC" time on their applications. Their goal is different from the FAA's when it comes to reporting flight time.
Click to expand...

I'm not forgetting. 61.51 doesn't apply to me so I just sorta look at the words that make up PIC and apply that meaning.



Whatever, this debate will go forever until the FAA makes a rule that makes sense or gets rid of one that doesn't.
 
So, what I'm hearing is that the FAA needs to define more types of things to log to keep this all straight - right? I'm thinking some of the categories need to be:

Stick wiggling but not BMFIC
BMFIC not stick wiggling
BMFIC and stick wiggling
Teaching someone else how to wiggle the stick
Programing the auto stick wiggler
Watching the autopilot wiggle the stick
Shutting up and doing what your told


What else?

Now, the next question do only some of these count when you want to get rating X? Do they get weighted differently? Are there minimums in each catagory? Or, could we just add all the columns together?


(BMFIC meaning: Being Most Fully In Charge. Not what you thought it meant)
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
So, what I'm hearing is that the FAA needs to define more types of things to log to keep this all straight - right? I'm thinking some of the categories need to be:

Stick wiggling but not BMFIC
BMFIC not stick wiggling
BMFIC and stick wiggling
Teaching someone else how to wiggle the stick
Programing the auto stick wiggler
Watching the autopilot wiggle the stick
Shutting up and doing what your told


What else?

Now, the next question do only some of these count when you want to get rating X? Do they get weighted differently? Are there minimums in each catagory? Or, could we just add all the columns together?


(BMFIC meaning: Being Most Fully In Charge. Not what you thought it meant)
Click to expand...

No,

Pilot in Command...guy in charge,
Flight Time...guy flying,
SIC...guy required but not in charge,
Dual Received...guy learning,
Dual Given...guy teaching,

How is what we have better? Oh, because we insist that a student be able to log PIC if rated even though the CFI is right there. Well then...let's make it stupid to accommodate that! 'Sole manipulator' should do the trick. He's moving the yolk...must be PIC!

And let's not forget the safety pilot...he has to get PIC hours or heavens to mercurtroid, he might not do it.
 
Last edited:
This is all so entertaining to watch :)

I think I will ask a logging question one day when I'm bored, just to watch the ensuing mayhem.
 
Captain said:
No,

Pilot in Command...guy in charge,
Flight Time...guy flying,
SIC...guy required but not in charge,
Dual Received...guy learning,
Dual Given...guy teaching,

How is what we have better? Oh, because we insist that a student be able to log PIC if rated even though the CFI is right there. Well then...let's make it stupid to accommodate that! 'Sole manipulator' should do the trick. He's moving the yolk...must be PIC!

And let's not forget the safety pilot...he has to get PIC hours or heavens to mercurtroid, he might not do it.
Click to expand...


Nah, probably a sous chef.
 
NoHeat said:
This is all so entertaining to watch :)

I think I will ask a logging question one day when I'm bored, just to watch the ensuing mayhem.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it just torques me off how we end up with stupid as a direct result of lawyers and the freaking litigious soceity we live in. You know the root issue is the FAA feels that whenever something bad happens SOMEBODY just HAS to be at fault. If nobodies at fault well then THEY must be a fault, right?

So, I'd guess way back some plane violated something with two pilots and one under the hood. Both pilots point at each other so the FAA says, 'fine...safety pilot gets to be PIC'. Not because they care...they just want to have someone on the hook when it's investigation time.

Repeat that process one billion times and the FAR2014 gets written.

EdFred said:
Nah, probably a sous chef.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I can't remember if that's an autocorrect issue or if I just thought for a minute that egg parts control airplanes.

:)
 
EdFred said:
Yeah, the FAA messed up with not coming up with two separate terms for PIC - one to act, and one to log. After about the 100th question about it came up, I made the flowchart.
Click to expand...
Of course that would be Pilot in Command and Pilot in Control. That would make the FAA acronym challenged.
 
Captain said:
So, I'd guess way back some plane violated something with two pilots and one under the hood. Both pilots point at each other so the FAA says, 'fine...safety pilot gets to be PIC'. Not because they care...they just want to have someone on the hook when it's investigation time.
Click to expand...
Except the FAA doesn't say that, and never did.
 
gismo said:
Of course that would be Pilot in Command and Pilot in Control. That would make the FAA acronym challenged.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Maybe THAT is what the FAA originally intended when the rule was made. But over time, the difference became muddied to the point where they became one and the same. :rofl:

Makes as much sense as anything else that the feds do.:yes:
 
Ron Levy said:
Except the FAA doesn't say that, and never did.
Click to expand...

So you're up to the challenge of proving a negative, eh? You stand by proclaiming the faa NEVER said something.

...with that said, if I was going to believe anybody in making such a bold statement about the FAA, it'd be you.
 
Just so I understand this correctly, I hadn't flown in 21 years, so when I started flying again with a CFI to get current/prepare for the BFR, those flights could be logged as PIC by me?
 
...as long as you're "rated" in the aircraft. OTOH, if you are a PP-ASEL and you're doing your refresher training in conjunction with getting an AMEL, then you could not log it as PIC time.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
How come you always bring up stuff that was not asked?
Click to expand...

I think it's beneficial that he does that, because it enhances understanding of what the issues are. It's analogous to a good instructor not "teaching to the test."
 
Why not just get the BFR done and not worry about it, 1hr ground 1hr air, what's the BFD?
 
Ron Levy said:
...as long as you're "rated" in the aircraft. OTOH, if you are a PP-ASEL and you're doing your refresher training in conjunction with getting an AMEL, then you could not log it as PIC time.
Click to expand...

Yes I was Ron, have a PP-ASEL and did the flying in a 172M. Looks like I get to add several hours of PIC to my log book. :thumbsup:
 
64 posts for "Yes"?

(Well 65 now. I wasn't even going to look at the thread but just had to see how a simple "yes" to a simple question got expanded)
 
Didn't start this thread. I always do a search before posting a question in a new thread and this came up so I just posted it here. The op was a little different then my query and was probably answered correctly in the first few posts and then it turned into a rather convoluted discussion of some tangents. I sort of thought it answered my question but just wanted to make sure. :idea:
 
Last edited:
gzCzHtb.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top