Safety Pilot Endorsements?

Ron Levy said:
You also need the 91.411/413 altimeter/static/transponder certifications as well as everything listed in 91.205(d). You can get past the Part 21 equipment certification requirements that equipment installed in Standard airworthiness aircraft must meet, but you still must have all the listed equipment and it must pass the 91.411/413 tests.
Click to expand...
Actually, you need to be approved for IFR in your operating limitations, but they usually say that IFR is approved after the test phase provided the aircraft is equipped in complieance with 91.205(d).
 
gprellwitz said:
True. In fact, the article I linked suggests an operating limitation something like “After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with § 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only.”
And goes on to talk about the transponder requirements.
Click to expand...
You can find that same phrase in FAA Order 8130.2, Paragraph 4084c:
(11) After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR day only.
Click to expand...
No doubt that's where the article got it.
 
Captain said:
Plus, as a matter of fact you know they weren't wearing the foggles. Nobody is there watching. It's their word only. I see this happening most of the time, "hey, I won't tell if you don't".
Click to expand...

I don't understand what the motivation would be to not wear the foggles. It's not like it costs more to wear them. Why would a person pay for flight time and then do something that would guarantee that they didn't get the proficiency benefit that they were paying for. :confused:
 
Palmpilot said:
I don't understand what the motivation would be to not wear the foggles. It's not like it costs more to wear them. Why would a person pay for flight time and then do something that would guarantee that they didn't get the proficiency benefit that they were paying for. :confused:
Click to expand...
One I can think of is the pilot who wants to fly "in the system" to avoid airspace issues but only on VFR days and never really expects (nor wants) to fly in the clouds. Trying to create technical legal currency in his logbook (falsifying it in the process) with zero expectation of proficiency.

If you're always trying to find a reasonable explanation for people's behavior, you're going to be :confused: most of the time :D
 
midlifeflyer said:
One I can think of is the pilot who wants to fly "in the system" to avoid airspace issues but only on VFR days and never really expects (nor wants) to fly in the clouds. Trying to create technical legal currency in his logbook (falsifying it in the process) with zero expectation of proficiency.

If you're always trying to find a reasonable explanation for people's behavior, you're going to be :confused: most of the time :D
Click to expand...

I can buy that there could be some individuals who would do almost anything, but Captain said he can see it happening most of the time, and I really don't see the basis for such an assumption.
 
No, I worded that poorly. I don't know if 'most of the time' students did or didn't wear the foggles. Personally I don't care as I think it's a scam weather they wear them or not and weather it's legal or not. If I were in charge I'd make it not legal...but I'm not in charge.

Any who, what I meant was that when it happens (student not wearing the foggles) that I see the conversation going like what I quoted. Sorry bout that. I bolded the section in question to try and help make it clearer.


Captain said:
They may have deducted .2 to account for taxi time. I honestly don't know. But just the idea of logging a major chunk of your multi time as a safety pilot smacks of wrong in my book. I flew every second of my multi time save when my instructor was demo'ing something and even then I logged the whole flight as 'dual received'.

Plus, as a matter of fact you know they weren't wearing the foggles. Nobody is there watching. It's their word only. I see this happening most of the time, "hey, I won't tell if you don't".

Besides, even if they did follow the rules (they didn't), so what? If you flew 100 hours in a MEL...really flew it and I flew 100 hours with half of it (even minus .2 per flight) as a 'safety pilot' then who's experience is better? It's a scam and everyone knows it.
Click to expand...
 
OK, so you're not as cynical as I thought!
 
So you don't really know if they do or do not cheat on logging their hours...but you hate that they do. And you don't really know if they do or do not cheat by taking the foggles off...but you hate that they do that, too. Makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top