Safety Pilot PIC

C

CerroTorre

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 1, 2020
Messages
136
Display Name
Display name:
CerroTorre
Tried google and my google-fu isn't fu-ing...

I wouldn't be asking this if a knowledgeable friend hadn't drawn a different conclusion than me.

Scenario: Pilot A needs a safety pilot for an IR currency flight in his complex aircraft. Pilot B is an instrument rated pilot with no endorsement for complex aircraft but is ASEL and current.

My interpretation: It is legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC for the flight as a safety pilot, but it is not ok for Pilot B to log PIC time due to the lack of a complex endorsement. FAR 61.31(e)(1) gets in the way of that.

But apparently there might be an FAA LOI out there somewhere that finds differently...? Specifically that it IS ok to log the time as PIC time despite not having the complex endorsement. Anyone have some knowledge to share?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I figured there would be a thread that my searching didn't find. Thanks for the link.
 
CerroTorre said:
But apparently there might be an FAA LOI out there somewhere that finds differently...?
Click to expand...
It is a decent search page for the FAA Legal Interpretations. Give it a try. Could go either way. lol. You might find the search results dry and boring or you might find them interesting.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...c/practice_areas/regulations/Interpretations/


Rizner 1991 - Covers whether a Safety Pilot is legal without a High Performance sign-off
Hicks 1993 - Covers Safety Pilot logging of time as well as the distinction between serving as PIC and logging PIC time

I find interesting not only the answer but also the reasoning which the FAA includes to reach their answer.
 
OK, sorry if I'm mis-reading the above thread you linked, but the OP and subsequent discussion does not seem to cover the case of an appropriately rated (while not endorsed) safety pilot who is NOT ever the sole manipulator of the controls. If they do not manipulate the controls then my interpretation of all the LOIs I can find, is that they can then NOT log the time (as PIC).

All of the discussions seem to talk about those cases where the second required flight crew member (safety pilot) is actually manipulating the controls.

So a safety pilot who is not complex endorsed and who never flies the airplane may function as the APIC while the other pilot is under the hood but may not log PIC time for the flight.

Again, sorry if I am missing something.
 
I restate myself several times in that last post - but I'm trying to be really careful in the distinction.
 
CerroTorre said:
Tried google and my google-fu isn't fu-ing...

I wouldn't be asking this if a knowledgeable friend hadn't drawn a different conclusion than me.

Scenario: Pilot A needs a safety pilot for an IR currency flight in his complex aircraft. Pilot B is an instrument rated pilot with no endorsement for complex aircraft but is ASEL and current.

My interpretation: It is legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC for the flight as a safety pilot,
Click to expand...
No, it is not legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC in a complex airplane unless Pilot B has the endorsement. FAR 61.31(e)(1) gets in the way of that

but it is not ok for Pilot B to log PIC time due to the lack of a complex endorsement. FAR 61.31(e)(1) gets in the way of that.
Click to expand...
Well, it's not OK. But it's not because of 61.31. It's because 61.51 says, too log PIC as a safety pilot, one must be acting as PIC, and can't do that.

But apparently there might be an FAA LOI out there somewhere that finds differently...? Specifically that it IS ok to log the time as PIC time despite not having the complex endorsement. Anyone have some knowledge to share?
Click to expand...
Nope. There is no such FAA LOI. None of those you list say that.

There are FAA LOIs saying he can be a safety pilot without the endorsement but the only "IC" time he can log is SIC, not PIC. And, of course many LOIs saying the pilot flying (not the safety pilot) may log PIC without the endorsements.

You can find the answers to most of this stuff, with references, in my article Safety Pilot Rules (it's been recently updated to discuss the BasicMed changed, but other than that, it remains accurate)
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
No, it is not legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC in a complex airplane unless Pilot B has the endorsement. FAR 61.31(e)(1) gets in the way of that


Well, it's not OK. But it's not because of 61.31. It's because 61.51 says, too log PIC as a safety pilot, one must be acting as PIC, and can't do that.


Nope. There is no such FAA LOI. None of those you list say that.

There are FAA LOIs saying he can be a safety pilot without the endorsement but the only "IC" time he can log is SIC, not PIC. And, of course many LOIs saying the pilot flying (not the safety pilot) may log PIC without the endorsements.

You can find the answers to most of this stuff, with references, in my article Safety Pilot Rules (it's been recently updated to discuss the BasicMed changed, but other than that, it remains accurate)
Click to expand...
Thanks, I think that reply clarifies things for me. The distinction that you make (from what I stated above) is that a non-endorsed pilot cannot be the APIC (although they can still be the safety pilot under Category and Class rules). Which makes it a moot point - they could not be designated as APIC and they are never manipulating controls so end up with no loggable time.

Is that correct?
 
CerroTorre said:
Thanks, I think that reply clarifies things for me. The distinction that you make (from what I stated above) is that a non-endorsed pilot cannot be the APIC (although they can still be the safety pilot under Category and Class rules). Which makes it a moot point - they could not be designated as APIC and they are never manipulating controls so end up with no loggable time.

Is that correct?
Click to expand...
I take it by "APIC" you mean "Acting PIC."

Mostly correct, but the non-endorsed safety pilot does have loggable time. It's just not PIC time. Check out the Hicks interpretation you referenced (below). Remember that "rated" for the airplane just means the category, class (and type) ratings which appear on the back of your pilot certificate. That's things like "Airplane Single Engine Land" an "B737". Endorsements are not ratings.

upload_2023-3-2_13-6-16.png
 
CerroTorre said:
Tried google and my google-fu isn't fu-ing...

I wouldn't be asking this if a knowledgeable friend hadn't drawn a different conclusion than me.

Scenario: Pilot A needs a safety pilot for an IR currency flight in his complex aircraft. Pilot B is an instrument rated pilot with no endorsement for complex aircraft but is ASEL and current.

My interpretation: It is legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC for the flight as a safety pilot, but it is not ok for Pilot B to log PIC time due to the lack of a complex endorsement. FAR 61.31(e)(1) gets in the way of that.

But apparently there might be an FAA LOI out there somewhere that finds differently...? Specifically that it IS ok to log the time as PIC time despite not having the complex endorsement. Anyone have some knowledge to share?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Huh? No person may act as pilot in command of a complex airplane, unless the person has - in your scenario pilot B hasn’t.
 
Clip4 said:
Huh? No person may act as pilot in command of a complex airplane, unless the person has - in your scenario pilot B hasn’t.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am aware. This is exclusively about some complexity that gets introduced when it comes to acting as a safety pilot and when it can be logged.

Carry on.
 
CerroTorre said:
Yes, I am aware. This is exclusively about some complexity that gets introduced when it comes to acting as a safety pilot and when it can be logged.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

If you can't act as PIC then you can't as PIC. Period.

The complexity has to do with logging.
 
Jeezus. Ok cool. No complexity. Find your own adjective I guess? There are some folks out there who have had a different understanding, or an incomplete understanding, or are confused. Who knows? I don't really care. I had at least two conflicting opinions on various parts of the topic. That's why I posted. It's now been discussed and clarified and my incorrect usage of APIC as part of the discussion corrected. Neato.

A complete understanding requires comparing and understanding at least some detail in the regs. Like everything. This particular topic has resulted in enough confusion that there have been at least a few FAA LOI's written in order to clarify various parts of the discussion. And a few internet articles.

But whatever. I'm glad it's very clear to you fellas.
 
dmspilot said:
If you can't act as PIC then you can't as PIC. Period.

The complexity has to do with logging.
Click to expand...
Precisely what the OP was about. Logging.

The OP incorrectly uses "APIC as a safety pilot" when it shouldn't have. Should have only referred to safety pilot. That's been clarified above.
 
CerroTorre said:
Precisely what the OP was about. Logging.
Click to expand...

You made it about acting when you made an incorrect statement about acting PIC in the OP.

"Pilot B is an instrument rated pilot with no endorsement for complex aircraft"

"It is legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC"
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
You made it about acting when you made an incorrect statement about acting PIC in the OP.

"Pilot B is an instrument rated pilot with no endorsement for complex aircraft"

"It is legal for Pilot B to be the acting PIC"
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct.
 
CerroTorre said:
Jeezus. Ok cool. No complexity. Find your own adjective I guess? There are some folks out there who have had a different understanding, or an incomplete understanding, or are confused. Who knows? I don't really care. I had at least two conflicting opinions on various parts of the topic. That's why I posted. It's now been discussed and clarified and my incorrect usage of APIC as part of the discussion corrected. Neato.

A complete understanding requires comparing and understanding at least some detail in the regs. Like everything. This particular topic has resulted in enough confusion that there have been at least a few FAA LOI's written in order to clarify various parts of the discussion. And a few internet articles.

But whatever. I'm glad it's very clear to you fellas.
Click to expand...
Don't worry about it. 98% of these issues have have had official answers for decades but it was forums like this which really got the information out there. And not without a lot of very heated arguments. Some of us have been through the "logging wars" where even the evidence of Chief Counsel interpretations was misread or rejected because it conflicted with people's beliefs. I remember proper logging being a major subject in recurrent training for instructors because it was so poorly understood.

OTOH, many have participated in online discussions just long enough to miss the wars and learn the answers in a way that makes them seem obvious. The FAA's non-intuitive use of the term PIC to mean two unrelated things seems clear and simple. Some manage to forget that the only reason it seems that way is that they already learned it from someone else. Many so early in their flying lives that it was primary learning and thus seems intuitive.

Safety pilot qualification and logging? I still see plenty of questions and confusion. That was the reason for my article. Actually, probably 90% of my IFR Magazine articles are based on questions I see raised online.
 
So how do most people handle it in the real world? I've flown as safety pilot a few times at the request of the owner/ pilot. On all cases it would have been perfectly legal for me to fly the airplane solo, and I logged as pic all the time the pilot was under the hood.

In all of these cases, I never said "I am the pic in charge of safety for this flight. In your airplane. That you're flying. And paying for." I also never touched the controls. I am quite sure the pilot/ owner logged the entire flight as pic. The way I read the letters, I should only have logged sic time. Is that correct? Is it customary for safety pilots to take pic authority when they don't do any of the flying?

Then bring insurance into the mix. If I'm acting as pic so we can both log pic time, and for example the gear collapses, will insurance deny the claim because the acting pic didn't meet the open pilot warranty? Obviously they couldn't prove it.... unless you logged it as pic....

I still find the whole thing confusing and stupid. I suspect 99% of pilots aren't doing it "right".
 
Jim K said:
Is it customary for safety pilots to take pic authority when they don't do any of the flying?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. My friend Chris and I did it regularly for years. We rented an airplane we were both PIC qualified for. We were in fairly busy airspace and our operating rule was, "he who has his eyes open is in command."

If it was a rental or club airplane where the rules prevented me from being in command from the right seat, I logged SIC.

You might find the FAA's policy of incentivizing maintenance of currency by allowing the safety pilot to log flight time "confusing and stupid." I don't find it to be either.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Absolutely. My friend Chris and I did it regularly for years. We rented an airplane we were both PIC qualified for. We were in fairly busy airspace and our operating rule was, "he who has his eyes open is in command
Click to expand...
So the acting pic can change during the flight? I was under the impression that was a decision made before the flight commenced.

ETA: I stand by my "confusing and stupid" statement. If the goal is to incentivize safety piloting, why not just explicitly say safety pilots can log pic while the pilot is under the hood, and forget all this "acting pic" silliness?
 
Jim K said:
If the goal is to incentivize safety piloting, why not just explicitly say safety pilots can log pic while the pilot is under the hood, and forget all this "acting pic" silliness?
Click to expand...
How many “except as provided in (c)(2)(iI)(A)(3)(q)(iv) decision trees do you want to trudge through?
 
Jim K said:
So the acting pic can change during the flight? I was under the impression that was a decision made before the flight commenced.

ETA: I stand by my "confusing and stupid" statement. If the goal is to incentivize safety piloting, why not just explicitly say safety pilots can log pic while the pilot is under the hood, and forget all this "acting pic" silliness?
Click to expand...

The acting PIC can change anytime throughout the flight. In the 25 years and thousands of hours of I have gone flying with friends that are pilots, We have never stated anytime prior to the flight who the PIC was going to be.
 
Jim K said:
So the acting pic can change during the flight? I was under the impression that was a decision made before the flight commenced.
Click to expand...
FAR 1.1
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;
(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and
(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.​

I'm still wondering what is so confusing about:
  1. When a pilot is operating with a view limiting device, a safety pilot is required.
  2. The safety pilot must have at least a private certificate with the applicable aircraft category and class ratings and an appropriate medical.
  3. A safety pilot may log flight time for the time the flying pilot is under the hood.
  4. A safety pilot who is acting as PIC may log the safety pilot time as PIC flight time.
  5. A safety pilot who is not acting as PIC may log the safety pilot time as SIC flight time.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
before or during the flight
Click to expand...
Well there's the piece I was missing. I didn't know that the acting PIC could be switched willy-nilly, essentially rendering it meaningless beyond whether you're appropriately rated and hold an appropriate medical. So apparently I have been logging it correctly, in spite of not shouting "I'M THE PIC NOW".

mspic.jpg picnow.jpg

You're right, it's definitely not confusing at all, to anyone, which is why there's a hundred threads about it, a sticky, and you've written articles about it.
 
Jim K said:
Well there's the piece I was missing. I didn't know that the acting PIC could be switched willy-nilly, essentially rendering it meaningless beyond whether you're appropriately rated and hold an appropriate medical. So apparently I have been logging it correctly, in spite of not shouting "I'M THE PIC NOW".
Click to expand...
Well, first, no. It's not just appropriately rated with a medical. Acting as PIC requires being qualified to act as PIC. Current flight review. Required endorsements for complex, high performance, tailwheel, etc.
[/quote]
You're right, it's definitely not confusing at all, to anyone, which is why there's a hundred threads about it, a sticky, and you've written articles about it.[/QUOTE]
I used to have a signature blurb that said, "'I don't personally understand' doesn't mean it's grey."

And yes, most of the articles I've written for IFR are on a subjects where people have questions and don't understand. Like all those those stupid requirements for IFR flight. Airspace and communication? How silly! Where is the protected area in a hold? Ridiculous!

Of course, YMMV and it obviously does.

Peace.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I'm still wondering what is so confusing about:
  1. When a pilot is operating with a view limiting device, a safety pilot is required.
  2. The safety pilot must have at least a private certificate with the applicable aircraft category and class ratings and an appropriate medical.
  3. A safety pilot may log flight time for the time the flying pilot is under the hood.
  4. A safety pilot who is acting as PIC may log the safety pilot time as PIC flight time.
  5. A safety pilot who is not acting as PIC may log the safety pilot time as SIC flight time.
Click to expand...

The entire discussion is helpful (at least for me) including all the references to the LOIs and the FARs. At the end of all that, the summary bullet points are great and (at least for me) super helpful.
 
CerroTorre said:
Ok cool. No complexity. Find your own adjective I guess?
Click to expand...
Find your own noun…or or direct object, or whatever adding “for me” at the end would be.

Just like diagramming sentences isn’t difficult, it’s merely difficult for me.
 
Like most internet discussions at some point, there's a semantic argument going on here that is both ridiculous and apropos.

Complexity > complicated > "consisting of many interconnecting parts" or > intricate > detailed

Saying the FARs are not complex or complicated is like saying an internal combustion engine isn't complicated. Sure. It's not ... once you understand all the complexities...
 
CerroTorre said:
Like most internet discussions at some point, there's a semantic argument going on here that is both ridiculous and apropos.

Complexity > complicated > "consisting of many interconnecting parts" or > intricate > detailed

Saying the FARs are not complex or complicated is like saying an internal combustion engine isn't complicated. Sure. It's not ... once you understand all the complexity...
Click to expand...
Nobody said the FARs aren’t complex. We said the requirement to act as PIC isn’t complex.
The Sun doesn’t turn off at night. The fact that night occurs at different times in different places doesn’t make the statement that the Sun doesn’t turn off at night complex.
Good news is, if you don’t like the truth, you can always find an answer that agrees with you.
 
Jim K said:
Then bring insurance into the mix. If I'm acting as pic so we can both log pic time, and for example the gear collapses, will insurance deny the claim because the acting pic didn't meet the open pilot warranty? Obviously they couldn't prove it.... unless you logged it as pic...
Click to expand...
As a safety pilot, I typically relinquish PIC authority before the wheels get close to the ground.
 
This problem seems to be over thought. Nobody mentioned another means to get night current. Simulator.
Awhile back, my night currency lapsed and I wanted to get current again. The trouble was it was the middle of summer when the days were longest. My current assignment had a "no take offs more than thirty minutes before sun rise" rule. Also had to be on the ground by sunset. The 14 hour duty time limitation prevented hanging around to do three traffic patterns after the commercial flying was done.
But I was scheduled for recurrent training at Flight Safety. In the sim. I asked the sim instructor to include night currency in my training record. The instructor was a pilot that I had known for years and we had flown together a lot. The session always included lots of T.O.s & landings day and night.
After all the required stuff was done, Norm asked me if I was ready for the three night landings. A little puzzled. Co pilot and I had already done plenty.
Norm set us up on the ILS at KIAH about 20 miles out. He dialed in midnight, wx zero obscured, RVR 1400 in rain. Then he blew up an engine and set me on fire. Repeated it twice more with different emergencies and I was night current.
 
Jim K said:
So how do most people handle it in the real world? I've flown as safety pilot a few times at the request of the owner/ pilot. On all cases it would have been perfectly legal for me to fly the airplane solo, and I logged as pic all the time the pilot was under the hood.

In all of these cases, I never said "I am the pic in charge of safety for this flight. In your airplane. That you're flying. And paying for." I also never touched the controls. I am quite sure the pilot/ owner logged the entire flight as pic. The way I read the letters, I should only have logged sic time. Is that correct? Is it customary for safety pilots to take pic authority when they don't do any of the flying?

Then bring insurance into the mix. If I'm acting as pic so we can both log pic time, and for example the gear collapses, will insurance deny the claim because the acting pic didn't meet the open pilot warranty? Obviously they couldn't prove it.... unless you logged it as pic....

I still find the whole thing confusing and stupid. I suspect 99% of pilots aren't doing it "right".
Click to expand...

If there is not a designation as PIC, then you can't log PIC. You can't just assume that you are PIC. Therefore without the two pilot agreeing, then you can only log SIC.

Gear up, unless the landing was done under the hood, the requirement for a second crewmember expired, and you cannot log that time at all, as you are no longer PIC of an aircraft requiring more than one crew member nor are you sole manipulator of the controls. A safety pilot cannot legally log the entire time of flight, only that time the other pilot is under the hood.

If you are actually flying during the gear up, the insurance will pay the owner, but then may go after you for the money.
 
Any time you have more than one pilot on board, it behooves you to get together and decide what your roles are going to be.
 
I agree with FlyingRon. Whenever I fly with another CFI, we decide prior to departure who is the acting PIC. When I fly with another pilot who is not a CFI, I ask them to agree that I am the PIC. And I recall one time when I had an instructor in the right seat as a passenger (not instructing) during a very challenging crosswind landing in my airplane, he said, "For the record, you are the PIC."
 
I picked up CapnRon (aka PoaDeleted2 or something like that) when he dropped his plane off for avionics work once. He hops in and says "I can be an instructor, a copilot or a passenger" or something like that. "You decide now."
\
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top