Pvt Pilot as Passenger local day Part 91 Sightseeing Flt (not 135). Gets to fly and logs it all PIC?

[fly4usa]

So I have 18 yr old student. Got is Pvt last year at another flight outfit. He did not fly for almost a year, did not fly at all post Pvt.

He joined our club and I am his CFI-I teaching him for Instrument rating. He still lives with parents and went on Vacation with folks.

So I see his log book has two dubious entries. BTW I don't think he is doing something intentionally wrong, but I don't want a DPE to see this when he goes for check ride.

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

2) A local flight (our airport) with a member in club C182 and he logs PIC. He is a C152 club member (C152 is IFR/GNS430W/G5's). Two things. The member he flew with is not an instructor. Second my student is not High Performance rated. I think this is iffy, especially since he again logged the whole flight. To his credit he did not log it as PIC but total time. Total time and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. He also flubbed logging total time writing 1.5 hrs twice once in hour column and again in 10th column, twice side by side. It sticks out. Hate to be picky but I have reasons for him to log properly.

REASON to remove redact revise these two flights. I am not an authoritarian, my concern is it's right there not long after his Pvt check ride, stands out, under scrutiny (check ride, pilot interview for job) it looks and sounds sketchy. He wants to be an airline pilot. I am an airline pilot (ATP) as well as CFI-I-ME, and have done hiring at airlines. More over after 5 airlines (3 went under start up, 9/11, 2008) I have been through many interviews and getting hired. I remember doing paired interview, two candidates, me and another guy. They asked the guy next to me about the King Air time he logged. He knew nothing of the King Air, he melted down. It got worse from there. He may have sat in one while flying and got to touch the controls? May be he did legit fly it, just forgot everything? Bad for him the interviewer, line Captain on B1900 (King Air based 19 seater).

My point is it is his log book and I told him. He has done nothing. Leave to be? It looks sketchy to me even if the intent is good and it is technically legal.

Another example he needs cross country. I have him flying solo to gain some of that time (as well as dual under hood with me) he needs for his Inst rating. He logged the whole flight as cross country when he did a handful of touch and goes at his destination and a few back at base. Only time in route from takeoff to landing counts. I suppose you can circle the airport for an hour before landing and call it cross country. Once you land done. That is defiantly no bueno in my understanding of the FARs. I am sure someone is going to argue, but an hour or two of iffy log entries is not worth it. I know a CFI whose student went for Pvt Check. It never left the brief room. The airport pair for a cross country was 49 nm. Check ride was over. That was 100% instructors fault. One could argue if not used for a rating it's OK. In my case when I do IFR training, simulated, I don't log the whole flight obviously, only actual time under hood. Devils in the details.

Do you think I should insist he redact or revise.

I have no problem memorializing a fun plane ride, I did when I was a new PVT. I got a half hour ride in T-6 and got the fly it, do a loop and roll. However no tail wheel, no high performance/complex at the time. I also flew a Stearman, again did not log time. That was 15,000 hrs ago and 1,500 tailwheel hours ago. I write it in my log book, as a line item with date, but did not log hours wrote time in comments.

 

[ateamer]

There is a difference between acting as pilot in command and being sole manipulator of the controls. Either one may be logged as PIC time. To log PIC as sole manipulator, you need to be rated in category and class (airplane single-engine land). Endorsements such as high performance and tailwheel are not a factor in logging time as sole manipulator.

 

[midlifeflyer]

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

2) A local flight (our airport) with a member in club C182 and he logs PIC. He is a C152 club member (C152 is IFR/GNS430W/G5's). Two things. The member he flew with is not an instructor. Second my student is not High Performance rated. I think this is iffy, especially since he again logged the whole flight. To his credit he did not log it as PIC but total time. Total time and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. He also flubbed logging total time writing 1.5 hrs twice once in hour column and again in 10th column, twice side by side. It sticks out. Hate to be picky but I have reasons for him to log properly.

So long the only time he logged PIC was when he was "the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated," I don't see a problem. "Rated" in this case means it says "Airplane Single Engine Land" in the "Ratings" section on the back of his pilot certificate.

Nothing sketchy about it.

Do you think I should insist he redact or revise.

The pilot might come back and insist his instructor learn the rules of logging as they have been consistently interpreted by the FAA for over 40 years If you've been away long enough to have never learned them, try my article in IFR Magazine. It includes official references.

 

[RyanB]

Here we go again…

 

[midlifeflyer]

Reviewing a bit, the only potential issue I see is the sightseeing flight. Maybe.

If it was a Part 91 sightseeing flight, I really don't see the pilot handing the controls over to someone else. But if he did...

 

[dmspilot]

There is a difference between acting as pilot in command and being sole manipulator of the controls. Either one may be logged as PIC time.

I hope you don't mean that a person can log any time they are acting PIC but not the sole manipulator, since that would not be correct.

 

[Lindberg]

I am an airline pilot (ATP) as well as CFI-I-ME

You may want to brush up on a few things, beginning with the logging rules. You could start with this sticky thread.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I hope you don't mean that a person can log any time they are acting PIC but not the sole manipulator, since that would not be correct.

Good catch.

 

[fly4usa]

You may want to brush up on a few things, beginning with the logging rules. You could start with this sticky thread.

This Forum is full of paganizing people. I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

 

[Palmpilot]

This Forum is full of paganizing people. I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

Currency is required to act as PIC while carrying passengers, but not to log PIC as the sole manipulator of the controls.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

This Forum is full of paganizing people. I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

Currency is irrelevant in this case. He is logging, not acting.

As long as he can adequately explain why he logged as he did, he is good to go.

 

[MauleSkinner]

This Forum is full of paganizing people. I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

Brush up some more.

 

[jbarrass]

This is not hard.

Category and Class Matter.

Currency, endorsements, medical, Don't matter.

 

[Dave Theisen]

We are only paganizing to people who are patronizing, or is that the other way around?

 

[Salty]

You all is witches.

 

[flyingron]

There is a difference between acting as pilot in command and being sole manipulator of the controls. Either one may be logged as PIC time. To log PIC as sole manipulator, you need to be rated in category and class (airplane single-engine land). Endorsements such as high performance and tailwheel are not a factor in logging time as sole manipulator.

Being PIC is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition to log PIC. You can't log PIC just because you are the PIC.

 

[Hang 4]

Being PIC is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition to log PIC. You can't log PIC just because you are the PIC.

And that is why we have so many threads on logging time

 

[ateamer]

Being PIC is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition to log PIC. You can't log PIC just because you are the PIC.

True. I was focused on logging PIC as sole manipulator, and should have been more clear.

 

[Lindberg]

This Forum is full of paganizing people. I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

I think you mean "patronizing." And you're clearly not. You came in here looking for support in bashing your student, but you're wrong.

The details are important here. Logging is all about details. And you're missing them. All the while speaking from authority and touting your qualifications.

 

[Clip4]

So I have 18 yr old student. Got is Pvt last year at another flight outfit. He did not fly for almost a year, did not fly at all post Pvt.

He joined our club and I am his CFI-I teaching him for Instrument rating. He still lives with parents and went on Vacation with folks.

So I see his log book has two dubious entries. BTW I don't think he is doing something intentionally wrong, but I don't want a DPE to see this when he goes for check ride.

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

2) A local flight (our airport) with a member in club C182 and he logs PIC. He is a C152 club member (C152 is IFR/GNS430W/G5's). Two things. The member he flew with is not an instructor. Second my student is not High Performance rated. I think this is iffy, especially since he again logged the whole flight. To his credit he did not log it as PIC but total time. Total time and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. He also flubbed logging total time writing 1.5 hrs twice once in hour column and again in 10th column, twice side by side. It sticks out. Hate to be picky but I have reasons for him to log properly.

REASON to remove redact revise these two flights. I am not an authoritarian, my concern is it's right there not long after his Pvt check ride, stands out, under scrutiny (check ride, pilot interview for job) it looks and sounds sketchy. He wants to be an airline pilot. I am an airline pilot (ATP) as well as CFI-I-ME, and have done hiring at airlines. More over after 5 airlines (3 went under start up, 9/11, 2008) I have been through many interviews and getting hired. I remember doing paired interview, two candidates, me and another guy. They asked the guy next to me about the King Air time he logged. He knew nothing of the King Air, he melted down. It got worse from there. He may have sat in one while flying and got to touch the controls? May be he did legit fly it, just forgot everything? Bad for him the interviewer, line Captain on B1900 (King Air based 19 seater).

My point is it is his log book and I told him. He has done nothing. Leave to be? It looks sketchy to me even if the intent is good and it is technically legal.

Another example he needs cross country. I have him flying solo to gain some of that time (as well as dual under hood with me) he needs for his Inst rating. He logged the whole flight as cross country when he did a handful of touch and goes at his destination and a few back at base. Only time in route from takeoff to landing counts. I suppose you can circle the airport for an hour before landing and call it cross country. Once you land done. That is defiantly no bueno in my understanding of the FARs. I am sure someone is going to argue, but an hour or two of iffy log entries is not worth it. I know a CFI whose student went for Pvt Check. It never left the brief room. The airport pair for a cross country was 49 nm. Check ride was over. That was 100% instructors fault. One could argue if not used for a rating it's OK. In my case when I do IFR training, simulated, I don't log the whole flight obviously, only actual time under hood. Devils in the details.

Do you think I should insist he redact or revise.

I have no problem memorializing a fun plane ride, I did when I was a new PVT. I got a half hour ride in T-6 and got the fly it, do a loop and roll. However no tail wheel, no high performance/complex at the time. I also flew a Stearman, again did not log time. That was 15,000 hrs ago and 1,500 tailwheel hours ago. I write it in my log book, as a line item with date, but did not log hours wrote time in comments.

You are a CFI, you should know the regs. He is certificated as private pilot with airplane category and SEL class on his certificate. If he was sole manipulator of the controls during these flights, he can log the time.

 

[Brad Z]

So I have 18 yr old student. Got is Pvt last year at another flight outfit. He did not fly for almost a year, did not fly at all post Pvt.

He joined our club and I am his CFI-I teaching him for Instrument rating. He still lives with parents and went on Vacation with folks.

So I see his log book has two dubious entries. BTW I don't think he is doing something intentionally wrong, but I don't want a DPE to see this when he goes for check ride.

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

2) A local flight (our airport) with a member in club C182 and he logs PIC. He is a C152 club member (C152 is IFR/GNS430W/G5's). Two things. The member he flew with is not an instructor. Second my student is not High Performance rated. I think this is iffy, especially since he again logged the whole flight. To his credit he did not log it as PIC but total time. Total time and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. He also flubbed logging total time writing 1.5 hrs twice once in hour column and again in 10th column, twice side by side. It sticks out. Hate to be picky but I have reasons for him to log properly.

REASON to remove redact revise these two flights. I am not an authoritarian, my concern is it's right there not long after his Pvt check ride, stands out, under scrutiny (check ride, pilot interview for job) it looks and sounds sketchy. He wants to be an airline pilot. I am an airline pilot (ATP) as well as CFI-I-ME, and have done hiring at airlines. More over after 5 airlines (3 went under start up, 9/11, 2008) I have been through many interviews and getting hired. I remember doing paired interview, two candidates, me and another guy. They asked the guy next to me about the King Air time he logged. He knew nothing of the King Air, he melted down. It got worse from there. He may have sat in one while flying and got to touch the controls? May be he did legit fly it, just forgot everything? Bad for him the interviewer, line Captain on B1900 (King Air based 19 seater).

My point is it is his log book and I told him. He has done nothing. Leave to be? It looks sketchy to me even if the intent is good and it is technically legal.

Another example he needs cross country. I have him flying solo to gain some of that time (as well as dual under hood with me) he needs for his Inst rating. He logged the whole flight as cross country when he did a handful of touch and goes at his destination and a few back at base. Only time in route from takeoff to landing counts. I suppose you can circle the airport for an hour before landing and call it cross country. Once you land done. That is defiantly no bueno in my understanding of the FARs. I am sure someone is going to argue, but an hour or two of iffy log entries is not worth it. I know a CFI whose student went for Pvt Check. It never left the brief room. The airport pair for a cross country was 49 nm. Check ride was over. That was 100% instructors fault. One could argue if not used for a rating it's OK. In my case when I do IFR training, simulated, I don't log the whole flight obviously, only actual time under hood. Devils in the details.

Do you think I should insist he redact or revise.

I have no problem memorializing a fun plane ride, I did when I was a new PVT. I got a half hour ride in T-6 and got the fly it, do a loop and roll. However no tail wheel, no high performance/complex at the time. I also flew a Stearman, again did not log time. That was 15,000 hrs ago and 1,500 tailwheel hours ago. I write it in my log book, as a line item with date, but did not log hours wrote time in comments.

As his instrument flight instructor, are you going to freak out when he logs his instrument training flights as PIC time?

As part of the logbook review, I would have used the time as an opportunity to review 61.51 and when you can log flight specific flight time. It's natural for an 18 year old pilot to log every second he or she can scrounge up (sometimes even logging just looking at an airplane). This would also be a good opportunity to discuss logging flight with a safety pilot, and the conditions under which your student or the safety pilot can log PIC time, XC time, etc.

 

[dbahn]

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

Pesonally, this is the only part I would have to investigate. Can a private pilot be sole manipulator of the controls for a commercial flight? If the acting PIC is not instructing and the private pilot is sole manipulator of the controls during a commercial operation can they BOTH log PIC?

 

[Brad Z]

Pesonally, this is the only part I would have to investigate. Can a private pilot be sole manipulator of the controls for a commercial flight? If the acting PIC is not instructing and the private pilot is sole manipulator of the controls during a commercial operation can they BOTH log PIC?

No. According to 61.51(e), the commercial pilot acting as pic may not log any time that he is not sole manipulator of the flight controls. The only way they could both log it under part 91 is if the operation required both pilots or the OP’s student was receiving instruction.

There is no prohibition from the PIC allowing someone else to manipulate the flight controls under part 91. That said, most sightseeing operations prohibit their pilots from allowing passengers to manipulate the flight controls. I wouldn’t be surprised if the kid sat up front and just logged the time because he was sitting in the right seat.

 

[Kritchlow]

Of course I log PIC every minute I’m in the airplane… whether or not at the controls.
Those rules, although notated in the logging thread, are generalized in common conversation.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So I have 18 yr old student. Got is Pvt last year at another flight outfit. He did not fly for almost a year, did not fly at all post Pvt.

He joined our club and I am his CFI-I teaching him for Instrument rating. He still lives with parents and went on Vacation with folks.

So I see his log book has two dubious entries. BTW I don't think he is doing something intentionally wrong, but I don't want a DPE to see this when he goes for check ride.

OK, facts established. Thank you.

1) He goes to Hawaii with folks and does a local part 91 sight seeing in a Piper Cherokee. He was in front seat. I think Left. He did not get CFI dual. This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr. He has zero PA-28 before or after. He logged all of it. Again he is 18, not dishonest just new. This may be OK? I have reasons this might be important.

We in aviation have so many "discussions" of whether things can be logged, that I don't even have to look it up to point you to 14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(i).

§ 61.51 Pilot logbooks. (e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1)A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-​

(i) Except when logging flight time under § 61.159(c), when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated...​

Sport pilot stuff redacted as it is not applicable. 61.159(c) is the SIC Professional Development Program which is also not applicable here.

Now, what does "Rated" mean? It is not defined in 61.1, likely because it applies to more than just pilots, so we back up to 1.1:

Rating means a statement that, as a part of a certificate, sets forth special conditions, privileges, or limitations.​

So, if it's a thing that is written on a certificate, it's a rating. In this case, Airplane Single Engine Land.

So, for case 1, provided that he was the person who was flying the plane, he can log it.

2) A local flight (our airport) with a member in club C182 and he logs PIC. He is a C152 club member (C152 is IFR/GNS430W/G5's). Two things. The member he flew with is not an instructor. Second my student is not High Performance rated. I think this is iffy, especially since he again logged the whole flight. To his credit he did not log it as PIC but total time. Total time and $4 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. He also flubbed logging total time writing 1.5 hrs twice once in hour column and again in 10th column, twice side by side. It sticks out. Hate to be picky but I have reasons for him to log properly.

Per the definition above, High Performance is not a rating. It is an endorsement - It lives in the logbook, not on the pilot certificate. He cannot act as the pilot in command per 61.31(f), but he can log PIC per 61.51(e)(1)(i) as shown above.

The only thing he did wrong here was to NOT log it as PIC. I would advise him to add the PIC time, but also to fix up the notation mistake you noted in the hour and 1/10th columns.

REASON to remove redact revise these two flights. I am not an authoritarian, my concern is it's right there not long after his Pvt check ride, stands out, under scrutiny (check ride, pilot interview for job) it looks and sounds sketchy. He wants to be an airline pilot. I am an airline pilot (ATP) as well as CFI-I-ME, and have done hiring at airlines. More over after 5 airlines (3 went under start up, 9/11, 2008) I have been through many interviews and getting hired. I remember doing paired interview, two candidates, me and another guy. They asked the guy next to me about the King Air time he logged. He knew nothing of the King Air, he melted down. It got worse from there. He may have sat in one while flying and got to touch the controls? May be he did legit fly it, just forgot everything? Bad for him the interviewer, line Captain on B1900 (King Air based 19 seater).

Really, this discussion should be about how you didn't know the regs, and you've done hiring in airlines, and how he will need to know the regulations and may need to be able to explain them to the guy on the other side of the table whose knowledge of Part 61 may not be up to date.

There are numerous FAA Chief Counsel interpretations that make what I am telling you here clearly the opinion of the FAA, not just SGOTI.

Another example he needs cross country. I have him flying solo to gain some of that time (as well as dual under hood with me) he needs for his Inst rating. He logged the whole flight as cross country when he did a handful of touch and goes at his destination and a few back at base. Only time in route from takeoff to landing counts. I suppose you can circle the airport for an hour before landing and call it cross country. Once you land done. That is defiantly no bueno in my understanding of the FARs. I am sure someone is going to argue, but an hour or two of iffy log entries is not worth it.

Except it's not iffy:

§ 61.65 Instrument rating requirements. (d) Aeronautical experience for the instrument-airplane rating. A person who applies for an instrument-airplane rating must have logged:​

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command, of which 10 hours must have been in an airplane​

​

§ 61.1 Applicability and definitions. (b) For the purpose of this part: Cross-country time means—​

(ii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for ... an instrument rating, ... time acquired during a flight—​

(B) That includes a point of landing that was at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure​

So, as long as there was ONE landing anywhere at least 50nm straight line distance from the original point of departure, all of it may be logged as cross country. In fact, there is a scenario that seems unbelievable but is allowed and has also been specifically clarified as OK in an FAA Chief Counsel interpretation.

I'll set the stage using airports local to me. If I were to fly from KMSN to KUES, it wouldn't count as cross country because it's only 49nm. However, if I flew 8nm across town to C29, and then 56nm the other direction to KUES, and then return to KMSN, it depends how it's logged:
1) KMSN-C29-KUES-KMSN, let's say 0.2+0.5+0.4 = 1.1: Not cross country, because KMSN is the original point of departure and I never made it 50nm away.

OR

2a) KMSN-C29 0.2 total, no XC
2b) C29-KUES-KMSN 0.9 total, 0.9 XC

So it's the same 1.1 flight, but if I log it on 2 lines, most of it becomes cross country by virtue of the "original point of departure" changing to C29 thanks to the "repositioning flight" on line 2a, so KUES is now 56nm from the "original point of departure".

Now, I never said it was going to make sense, but again, this was enumerated in an FAA Chief Counsel interpretation.

I know a CFI whose student went for Pvt Check. It never left the brief room. The airport pair for a cross country was 49 nm. Check ride was over. That was 100% instructors fault. One could argue if not used for a rating it's OK. In my case when I do IFR training, simulated, I don't log the whole flight obviously, only actual time under hood. Devils in the details.

Always! And there are additional details regarding when/who can log cross country and such in that scenario as well... One pilot can, one pilot can't. But I've done enough here for one day.

Do you think I should insist he redact or revise.

Nope. And I hope you no longer think so either! But I do think it's worth having the discussion with him that not everyone he'll meet in an interview is going to be up on the regs, so he should be ready to answer for the time he's logged.

I have no problem memorializing a fun plane ride, I did when I was a new PVT. I got a half hour ride in T-6 and got the fly it, do a loop and roll. However no tail wheel, no high performance/complex at the time. I also flew a Stearman, again did not log time. That was 15,000 hrs ago and 1,500 tailwheel hours ago. I write it in my log book, as a line item with date, but did not log hours wrote time in comments.

Guess what - You can log that time. Tailwheel, HP, complex are all endorsements, not ratings.

This Forum is full of paganizing people.

Huh?

paganize | ˈpāɡəˌnīz | verb [with object] make pagan in character or form: the Church adopted pagan festivals without paganizing the Gospel.​

​

Oh, I think you meant

patronizing | ˈpātrəˌnīziNG | adjective apparently kind or helpful but betraying a feeling of superiority; condescending: we both occasionally experienced patronizing attitudes from staff | he smiled in a rather patronizing manner.​

And yes, I have now crossed that line. But I do genuinely hope the earlier part of this post was helpful!

I am brushed up. Sole manipulator of controls for plane they are qualified (cat and class) and current.

At the point he flew he was NOT CURRENT, had not flown in 90 days and there were others on board.

Check 61.51(e)(1)(i) again. "Current" doesn't matter for logging... So, better keep brushing up.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Personally, this is the only part I would have to investigate. Can a private pilot be sole manipulator of the controls for a commercial flight?

The regulation for a sightseeing flight is 91.147 and does not specifically preclude a passenger (pilot or not) from manipulating the controls. There is no part 91 analog to 135.115 or 121.545. So, the answer to your question is "yes". The commercial or greater pilot who is the PIC still retains all responsibility, however.

If the acting PIC is not instructing and the private pilot is sole manipulator of the controls during a commercial operation can they BOTH log PIC?

No. There are several scenarios where PIC can be logged, and the acting PIC on a flight like that doesn't satisfy any of them: (all 61.51(e))

(1)​

(i) Sole manipulator of the controls: Nope.​

(ii) Sole occupant of the aircraft: Nope.​

(iii) Acting PIC of an aircraft or operation that requires more than one pilot: Nope.​

(iv) Performing duties of PIC under supervision of qualified PIC in an approved PIC training program: Nope.​

(2) ATP acting as PIC of an ATP-required operation: Nope.​

(3) CFI serving as instructor: Nope.​

(4) Student pilot solo: Nope.​

(5) Commercial or ATP as PIC of SIC PDP flight: Nope.​

Basically, if the sightseeing pilot let the private pilot fly the plane, the private pilot can log it as PIC, and the sightseeing pilot can't log it as anything.

 

[dbahn]

No. According to 61.51(e), the commercial pilot acting as pic may not log any time that he is not sole manipulator of the flight controls. The only way they could both log it under part 91 is if the operation required both pilots or the OP’s student was receiving instruction.

There is no prohibition from the PIC allowing someone else to manipulate the flight controls under part 91. That said, most sightseeing operations prohibit their pilots from allowing passengers to manipulate the flight controls. I wouldn’t be surprised if the kid sat up front and just logged the time because he was sitting in the right seat.

The only hooker I see in that is thefact that this was a 50 mile sighteeing flight. Part 91.147 limits the flight to a 25 statute mile radius from the point of departure, which has to be the same as the point of return landing. So the flight as described can't be legally flown under Part 91, and I wonder if there is a prohibition against having a private pilot log PIC in a commercial operation. If the commercial pilot can't also log the time as PIC in that situation how does the FAA assure that the commericial pilot was acting PIC? Is it just by default?

 

[midlifeflyer]

I wonder if there is a prohibition against having a private pilot log PIC in a commercial operation.

There are no prohibitions on logging in accordance with 61.51 based on the type of operation. But there are a few prohibitions on a non-qualified pilot manipulating the controls, such as 135.115.

Logging in such circumstances is fine from a logging standpoint, although it’s generally considered bad form to write evidence of a violation in one’s logbook

 

[midlifeflyer]

If the commercial pilot can't also log the time as PIC in that situation how does the FAA assure that the commericial pilot was acting PIC? Is it just by default?

You’re looking for too much. There is no requirement for anyone to log anything to show they were PIC. Do you think if I crash an airplane and decide not to log the flight, the FAA is In any way hampered in coming after me as the pilot in command of the flight?

 

[Brad Z]

The only hooker I see in that is thefact that this was a 50 mile sighteeing flight. Part 91.147 limits the flight to a 25 statute mile radius from the point of departure, which has to be the same as the point of return landing. So the flight as described can't be legally flown under Part 91, and I wonder if there is a prohibition against having a private pilot log PIC in a commercial operation. If the commercial pilot can't also log the time as PIC in that situation how does the FAA assure that the commericial pilot was acting PIC? Is it just by default?

I thought he said it was under 50nm. We really have no idea what the flight was or what part it was being flown under, aside from what the OP reported to us (part 91).

 

[dbahn]

His post was, "This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr." so it's not completely clear, but I did quite a few sightseeing flights under 91.147 and was very careful to stay within the 25 statute miles of the airport. I may have been overly cautious but I always worried about snitches among other things or having an incident of some kind while beyond that. I admit that both of those were unlikely, but possible.

Doing them under part 135 was just too complex and expensive to even consider.

 

[Lindberg]

His post was, "This is a commercial sight seeing within 50nm of airport, day vfr." so it's not completely clear, but I did quite a few sightseeing flights under 91.147 and was very careful to stay within the 25 statute miles of the airport. I may have been overly cautious but I always worried about snitches among other things or having an incident of some kind while beyond that. I admit that both of those were unlikely, but possible.

Doing them under part 135 was just too complex and expensive to even consider.

We don't know anything for sure since it's third hand information, but assuming Oahu, you'd have to go well offshore to get 50 miles from an airport, and the island itself has a <25mi radius.

 

[fly4usa]

Hey guys and gals WOW... You all can really "debate". I talked to my student and we both agree, he was not current, qualified.

He was not current in 3 takeoffs and landings in last 90 days and therefore can not fly with a non instructor and legally log it with passengers, in my opinion and my student agrees. In both cases there were passengers in plane. Lack of high performance endorsement, factor or not, it's another questionable issue.

My student has no knowledge (a PIC should have) of C182, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The non commercial private pilot erroneously advised him to log it all, thinking he was doing him a favor to build hours. Further the student does not have a high performance endorsement.​

Well meaning Non-CFI played flight instructor (illegal) and allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flow high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls. Sound Safe? Legal? Maybe/No/Grey Area. PIC (pilot authorized to use CLUB plane) violated club rules. More over when he let my student to fly the aircraft was a passenger. I GET IT, people let kids fly. Fine but they don't LOG IT.​

​

My student has no pilot knowledge (a PIC should have) of PA-28-235, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, limitations, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The commercial pilot, not a CFI, made the log book entry (not the student) and credited the full flight in students log book, and he did sloppily and incorrectly. Again student does not have high performance endorsement.​

Commercial flight FOR HIRE for $$$$ with a PIC being a commercial non CFI pilot allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flew a high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls with PASSNGERS! OK. But if an accident happened I am 100% sure lawsuits and FAA sanctions would happen guaranteed. ​

​

​

NOTE: You want to be a CFI get your instrument, commercial and CFI (from Pvt pilot a total of 4 written exams, 3 check rides, and 250 hrs). When a NON current pilot fly's with a CFI and gets current during that flight (take off landings, flight review) they can log it as PIC. It is like Pvt Pilot Check Ride. After successful completion you can log check ride as PIC. ​

YOU CAN NOT FLY (PIC) WITH A NON CFI if you are NOT CURRENT and log it, period... That is my story and sticking to it. Post all the FAR's about sole manipulator you want. Read all of the regulations, as I have for 39 yrs. My interpretation controls and is final as PIC and CFI. We can agree to disagree.​

We , my student and I, his instructor, have decided that the log book entries are not proper or needed and redacted. As a Captain who has done hiring interviews at airlines, I can tell you log book entries like this will get you out the door not the job. Joy ride away if you are a GA private pilot and log all the P-51 time you like. If you want a pilot career be righteous and meticulous of how and what you log hours. I have seen this kind of "time" rejected by airlines and DPE's. Also do NOT let someone other than a CFI log time in you book. Neatness counts.

Falsification of log book per FAR's (14 CFR 61.59) SUSPENSION or REVOCATION OF YOUR AIRMAN CERTIFICATE... Do not take advice from people on line. We (student and instructor) are taking the proper course in our judgement, even if it's conservative and you disagree. Sorry.

Tme logged does NOTHING to help my student get his Instrument Pilot Rating, no simulated instrument, no cross country, no new skill or meaningful experience. As his instructor with my students concurrence, after much thought and the comments above, the time has been removed and fortunately was never totaled. That is the final decision. I am out. You all have fun arguing and good grief. If you want to troll me go ahead. I am not reading this thread again. Go for it.

PS New Pilots BE CAREFUL who you fly with, who may want to show off or play CFI or play loose with the FAR's. They may tell you things (how to wink wink nod nod build hours) and have you do things (watch this) that ARE NOT SAFE or LEGAL. Don't be too eager to fly with people you don't know. They see a newly minted Pvt and think I am going to impress them. I think and HOPE this is rare. In the above two examples I think intentions were good and not unsafe. If you want to transition to a new aircraft make/model in Cat/class of aircraft you are qualified and current in, study, get the POH/AFM and find a qualified experienced CFI. Logging hours in planes you know nothing of may be fun and in many cases OK to log, but not always. Nuff Said.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Wow. Just… Wow.

Too much here to parse.

Wait a minute! It has already been parsed.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Hey guys and gals WOW... You all can really "debate". I talked to my student and we both agree, he was not current, qualified.

He was not current in 3 takeoffs and landings in last 90 days and therefore can not fly with a non instructor and legally log it with passengers, in my opinion and my student agrees. In both cases there were passengers in plane. Lack of high performance endorsement, factor or not, it's another questionable issue.

My student has no knowledge (a PIC should have) of C182, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The non commercial private pilot erroneously advised him to log it all, thinking he was doing him a favor to build hours. Further the student does not have a high performance endorsement.​

Well meaning Non-CFI played flight instructor (illegal) and allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flow high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls. Sound Safe? Legal? Maybe/No/Grey Area. PIC (pilot authorized to use CLUB plane) violated club rules. More over when he let my student to fly the aircraft was a passenger. I GET IT, people let kids fly. Fine but they don't LOG IT.​

​

My student has no pilot knowledge (a PIC should have) of PA-28-235, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, limitations, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The commercial pilot, not a CFI, made the log book entry (not the student) and credited the full flight in students log book sloppily and incorrectly. Again student does not have high performance endorsement.​

Commercial flight FOR HIRE for $$$$ with a PIC being a commercial non CFI pilot allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flew a high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls with PASSNGERS!!! If an accident happened I am 100% sure lawsuits and FAA sanctions would happen.​

​

​

NOTE: You want to be a CFI get your instrument, commercial and CFI (from Pvt pilot a total of 4 written exams, 3 check rides, and 250 hrs). When a NON current pilot fly's with a CFI and gets current during that flight (take off landings, flight review) they can log it as PIC. It is like Pvt Pilot Check Ride. After successful completion you can log check ride as PIC. ​

YOU CAN NOT FLY (PIC) WITH A NON CFI if you are NOT CURRENT and log it, period... That is my story and sticking to it. Post all the FAR's about sole manipulator you want. Read all of the regulations, as I have for 39 yrs. My interpretation controls and is final as PIC and CFI. We can agree to disagree.​

We , my student and I, his instructor, have decided that the log book entries are not proper or needed. As a Captain who has done hiring interviews at airlines, I can tell you log book entries like this will get you out the door not the job. Joy ride away if you are a GA private pilot and log all the P-51 time you like. If you want a pilot career be righteous and meticulous of how and what you log hours. I have seen this kind of "time" rejected by airlines and DPE's. Also do NOT let someone other than a CFI log time in you book. Neatness counts.

Falsification of log book per FAR's (14 CFR 61.59) SUSPENSION or REVOCATION OF YOUR AIRMAN CERTIFICATE... Do not take advice from people on line. We (student and instructor) are taking the proper course in our judgement, even if it's conservative and you disagree. Sorry.

Tme logged does NOTHING to help my student get his Instrument Pilot Rating, no simulated instrument, no cross country, no new skill or meaningful experience. As his instructor with my students concurrence, after much thought and the comments above, the time has been removed and fortunately was never totaled. That is the final decision. I am out. You all have fun arguing and good grief. If you want to troll me go ahead. I am not reading this thread again. Go for it.

PS New Pilots BE CAREFUL who you fly with, who want to show off or play CFI or play loose with the FAR's. They may tell you things (how to wink wink nod nod build hours) and have you do things (watch this) that ARE NOT SAFE of LEGAL. Don't be too eager to fly with people you don't know. They see newly minted Pvt and think I am going to impress them. I think and HOPE this is rare and in the above two examples I think intentions were good and it was not unsafe. If you want to transition to a new aircraft make/model, study, get the POH/AFM and find a qualified experienced CFI. Logging hours in planes you know nothing of may be fun and in many cases OK to log, but not always. Nuff Said.

You may agree, but you’re both still wrong.

I doubt anyone here has a problem with not logging it, but not logging it because of blatant misinterpretation/misapplication of regs is another matter.

 

[jbarrass]

Ignorance is bliss I guess....

CFI's that can't/won't read regulations is a little bit scary.

This is pretty simple. Not all regulations are clear, but this one is. There should be a flow chart.

 

[darthanubis]

Hey guys and gals WOW... You all can really "debate". I talked to my student and we both agree, he was not current, qualified.

He was not current in 3 takeoffs and landings in last 90 days and therefore can not fly with a non instructor and legally log it with passengers, in my opinion and my student agrees. In both cases there were passengers in plane. Lack of high performance endorsement, factor or not, it's another questionable issue.

My student has no knowledge (a PIC should have) of C182, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The non commercial private pilot erroneously advised him to log it all, thinking he was doing him a favor to build hours. Further the student does not have a high performance endorsement.​

Well meaning Non-CFI played flight instructor (illegal) and allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flow high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls. Sound Safe? Legal? Maybe/No/Grey Area. PIC (pilot authorized to use CLUB plane) violated club rules. More over when he let my student to fly the aircraft was a passenger. I GET IT, people let kids fly. Fine but they don't LOG IT.​

​

My student has no pilot knowledge (a PIC should have) of PA-28-235, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, limitations, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The commercial pilot, not a CFI, made the log book entry (not the student) and credited the full flight in students log book, and he did sloppily and incorrectly. Again student does not have high performance endorsement.​

Commercial flight FOR HIRE for $$$$ with a PIC being a commercial non CFI pilot allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flew a high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls with PASSNGERS! OK. But if an accident happened I am 100% sure lawsuits and FAA sanctions would happen guaranteed. ​

​

​

NOTE: You want to be a CFI get your instrument, commercial and CFI (from Pvt pilot a total of 4 written exams, 3 check rides, and 250 hrs). When a NON current pilot fly's with a CFI and gets current during that flight (take off landings, flight review) they can log it as PIC. It is like Pvt Pilot Check Ride. After successful completion you can log check ride as PIC. ​

YOU CAN NOT FLY (PIC) WITH A NON CFI if you are NOT CURRENT and log it, period... That is my story and sticking to it. Post all the FAR's about sole manipulator you want. Read all of the regulations, as I have for 39 yrs. My interpretation controls and is final as PIC and CFI. We can agree to disagree.​

We , my student and I, his instructor, have decided that the log book entries are not proper or needed and redacted. As a Captain who has done hiring interviews at airlines, I can tell you log book entries like this will get you out the door not the job. Joy ride away if you are a GA private pilot and log all the P-51 time you like. If you want a pilot career be righteous and meticulous of how and what you log hours. I have seen this kind of "time" rejected by airlines and DPE's. Also do NOT let someone other than a CFI log time in you book. Neatness counts.

Falsification of log book per FAR's (14 CFR 61.59) SUSPENSION or REVOCATION OF YOUR AIRMAN CERTIFICATE... Do not take advice from people on line. We (student and instructor) are taking the proper course in our judgement, even if it's conservative and you disagree. Sorry.

Tme logged does NOTHING to help my student get his Instrument Pilot Rating, no simulated instrument, no cross country, no new skill or meaningful experience. As his instructor with my students concurrence, after much thought and the comments above, the time has been removed and fortunately was never totaled. That is the final decision. I am out. You all have fun arguing and good grief. If you want to troll me go ahead. I am not reading this thread again. Go for it.

PS New Pilots BE CAREFUL who you fly with, who may want to show off or play CFI or play loose with the FAR's. They may tell you things (how to wink wink nod nod build hours) and have you do things (watch this) that ARE NOT SAFE or LEGAL. Don't be too eager to fly with people you don't know. They see a newly minted Pvt and think I am going to impress them. I think and HOPE this is rare. In the above two examples I think intentions were good and not unsafe. If you want to transition to a new aircraft make/model in Cat/class of aircraft you are qualified and current in, study, get the POH/AFM and find a qualified experienced CFI. Logging hours in planes you know nothing of may be fun and in many cases OK to log, but not always. Nuff Said.

That poor kid.

 

[Lindberg]

Hey guys and gals WOW... You all can really "debate". I talked to my student and we both agree, he was not current, qualified.

He was not current in 3 takeoffs and landings in last 90 days and therefore can not fly with a non instructor and legally log it with passengers, in my opinion and my student agrees. In both cases there were passengers in plane. Lack of high performance endorsement, factor or not, it's another questionable issue.

My student has no knowledge (a PIC should have) of C182, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The non commercial private pilot erroneously advised him to log it all, thinking he was doing him a favor to build hours. Further the student does not have a high performance endorsement.​

Well meaning Non-CFI played flight instructor (illegal) and allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flow high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls. Sound Safe? Legal? Maybe/No/Grey Area. PIC (pilot authorized to use CLUB plane) violated club rules. More over when he let my student to fly the aircraft was a passenger. I GET IT, people let kids fly. Fine but they don't LOG IT.​

​

My student has no pilot knowledge (a PIC should have) of PA-28-235, CS Prop, Cowl Flaps, limitations, weights, power settings and did not manipulate the controls the full time as logged. The commercial pilot, not a CFI, made the log book entry (not the student) and credited the full flight in students log book, and he did sloppily and incorrectly. Again student does not have high performance endorsement.​

Commercial flight FOR HIRE for $$$$ with a PIC being a commercial non CFI pilot allowed a passenger (my student, non current Pvt pilot who never flew a high performance aircraft) to manipulate controls with PASSNGERS! OK. But if an accident happened I am 100% sure lawsuits and FAA sanctions would happen guaranteed. ​

​

​

NOTE: You want to be a CFI get your instrument, commercial and CFI (from Pvt pilot a total of 4 written exams, 3 check rides, and 250 hrs). When a NON current pilot fly's with a CFI and gets current during that flight (take off landings, flight review) they can log it as PIC. It is like Pvt Pilot Check Ride. After successful completion you can log check ride as PIC. ​

YOU CAN NOT FLY (PIC) WITH A NON CFI if you are NOT CURRENT and log it, period... That is my story and sticking to it. Post all the FAR's about sole manipulator you want. Read all of the regulations, as I have for 39 yrs. My interpretation controls and is final as PIC and CFI. We can agree to disagree.​

We , my student and I, his instructor, have decided that the log book entries are not proper or needed and redacted. As a Captain who has done hiring interviews at airlines, I can tell you log book entries like this will get you out the door not the job. Joy ride away if you are a GA private pilot and log all the P-51 time you like. If you want a pilot career be righteous and meticulous of how and what you log hours. I have seen this kind of "time" rejected by airlines and DPE's. Also do NOT let someone other than a CFI log time in you book. Neatness counts.

Falsification of log book per FAR's (14 CFR 61.59) SUSPENSION or REVOCATION OF YOUR AIRMAN CERTIFICATE... Do not take advice from people on line. We (student and instructor) are taking the proper course in our judgement, even if it's conservative and you disagree. Sorry.

Tme logged does NOTHING to help my student get his Instrument Pilot Rating, no simulated instrument, no cross country, no new skill or meaningful experience. As his instructor with my students concurrence, after much thought and the comments above, the time has been removed and fortunately was never totaled. That is the final decision. I am out. You all have fun arguing and good grief. If you want to troll me go ahead. I am not reading this thread again. Go for it.

PS New Pilots BE CAREFUL who you fly with, who may want to show off or play CFI or play loose with the FAR's. They may tell you things (how to wink wink nod nod build hours) and have you do things (watch this) that ARE NOT SAFE or LEGAL. Don't be too eager to fly with people you don't know. They see a newly minted Pvt and think I am going to impress them. I think and HOPE this is rare. In the above two examples I think intentions were good and not unsafe. If you want to transition to a new aircraft make/model in Cat/class of aircraft you are qualified and current in, study, get the POH/AFM and find a qualified experienced CFI. Logging hours in planes you know nothing of may be fun and in many cases OK to log, but not always. Nuff Said.

It's been thoroughly explained to you in this thread, and there's references elsewhere on the forum, but you insist on continuing to make incorrect statements. All the while claiming the high ground and boasting about your qualifications. And yet you accuse other members of being patronizing, pedantic, and argumentative. I've noticed the same pattern in most of the threads you start. Maybe that indicates something.

 

[Lindberg]

I do have a high performance endorsement, but I know jack s*** about constant speed props or cowl flaps. I wonder if I could log time in a 182? I guess not if you were my CFI, despite the fact that I could legally fly one solo.

 

[Mikey52]

I do have a high performance endorsement, but I know jack s*** about constant speed props or cowl flaps. I wonder if I could log time in a 182? I guess not if you were my CFI, despite the fact that I could legally fly one solo.

Why couldn't you fly passengers too?