Safety pilot with no medical

DesertNomad

DesertNomad

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
2,464
Location
Northern NV
Display Name
Display name:
DesertNomad
I am working on my Instrument Rating. A friend has a CPL and instrument rating, but is not current and has no medical. Can he be a safety pilot for me while in simulated instrument conditions in my airplane? The way I read it is that as long as we are not in actual conditions, it is ok.
 
DesertNomad said:
I am working on my Instrument Rating. A friend has a CPL and instrument rating, but is not current and has no medical. Can he be a safety pilot for me while in simulated instrument conditions in my airplane? The way I read it is that as long as we are not in actual conditions, it is ok.
Click to expand...

You read it wrong. He's a required crew member when you're under the hood and needs at least a current third class medical. He doesn't need a current flight review as long as he isn't the actual PIC for the flight.
 
Last edited:
Yeah that makes sense after re-reading it. :( I don't think he will go get a medical because of the time and cost, not to mention all the hassle it would involve.
 
DesertNomad said:
Yeah that makes sense after re-reading it. :( I don't think he will go get a medical because of the time and cost, not to mention all the hassle it would involve.
Click to expand...

It might save you $ in the long term to fund his medical. And you could help nudge a friend flying again. :D Of course time and hassle can't be avoided...
 
Why would anyone need a safety pilot in IMC?
 
He is a required crew member so he must have a current medical
 
DesertNomad said:
I am working on my Instrument Rating. A friend has a CPL and instrument rating, but is not current and has no medical. Can he be a safety pilot for me while in simulated instrument conditions in my airplane? The way I read it is that as long as we are not in actual conditions, it is ok.
Click to expand...

Again, why would anyone need a safety pilot in actual IMC? I get it wasn't the main question.
 
I guess I worded it wrong. In actually conditions obviously I would not have a hood on and the guy in the right seat would be a CFII. We rarely get IFR conditions here that are flyable - in real IFR there is often icing or thunderstorms here.
 
He needs to have a medical. Your trying to split hairs to build time for free.and your friend wants to go for the ride.
 
frfly172 said:
He needs to have a medical. Your trying to split hairs to build time for free.and your friend wants to go for the ride.
Click to expand...

Nope - I have several friends who are private pilots (with medicals), one of whom is older and does not have a medical. I just wasn't sure if it would work to have him be a safety pilot. With the others, a few of them are working on their IRs and also have their own planes so it is easy to trade being a safety pilot.

I have acted as a safety pilot in the past, but I also had a medical.

In any case, it is hardly building time for free when I own the airplane and pay for all of its costs. My friend without the medical doesn't care about building time and hasn't logged time in years.
 
Last edited:
Safety pilots need a medical.
Instructors don't unless they are either providing the safety pilot role or they have to be PIC because the student isn't qualified.
 
JCranford said:
Because he doesnt have an Instrument Rating?
Click to expand...

IMC has squat to do with whether you need a safety pilot or not.

A safety pilot is required for "simulated instrument flight" which means the pilot flying is wearing a view limiting device. It matters not if it's CAVU or half a mile of visibility. Put it this way, how does the hooded pilot know he's in IMC if he has the hood on?
 
Captain said:
Again, why would anyone need a safety pilot in actual IMC? I get it wasn't the main question.
Click to expand...

flyingron said:
IMC has squat to do with whether you need a safety pilot or not.

A safety pilot is required for "simulated instrument flight" which means the pilot flying is wearing a view limiting device. It matters not if it's CAVU or half a mile of visibility. Put it this way, how does the hooded pilot know he's in IMC if he has the hood on?
Click to expand...

You both seem to be breezing right past the fact that without an Instrument Rating he's not gonna be flying, safety pilot or not, if he wants to be legal. Only way to be legal there is with a CFII and that wasn't part of the question.
 
StinkBug said:
You both seem to be breezing right past the fact that without an Instrument Rating he's not gonna be flying, safety pilot or not, if he wants to be legal. Only way to be legal there is with a CFII and that wasn't part of the question.
Click to expand...

I'm not 'breezing past' anything. Post #1 the OP brought it up.

DesertNomad said:
I am working on my Instrument Rating. A friend has a CPL and instrument rating, but is not current and has no medical. Can he be a safety pilot for me while in simulated instrument conditions in my airplane? The way I read it is that as long as we are not in actual conditions, it is ok.
Click to expand...
 
DesertNomad said:
I am working on my Instrument Rating. A friend has a CPL and instrument rating, but is not current and has no medical. Can he be a safety pilot for me while in simulated instrument conditions in my airplane? The way I read it is that as long as we are not in actual conditions, it is ok.
Click to expand...

Figured with all the confusing back and forth, I'd toss this in even though the answer appears in the thread.

Your safety pilot requires a medical certificate.

In simulated instrument conditions, 91.109 requires a safety pilot who is at least a private pilot. That makes the safety pilot a required crewmember. Under 61.23, a required crewmember who is exercising private privileges in an airplane requires a medical.

That's for simulated instruments under VFR. As you point out, if you were in actual instrument conditions or just on a IFR ckearance, he would also need to be acting as pic and subject to all rules on pic qualifications.
 
Last edited:
StinkBug said:
You both seem to be breezing right past the fact that without an Instrument Rating he's not gonna be flying, safety pilot or not, if he wants to be legal. Only way to be legal there is with a CFII and that wasn't part of the question.
Click to expand...

I'm not missing anything. And CFII or not, IMC or not, if he's got a hood on he needs a safety pilot.
 
StinkBug said:
Only way to be legal there is with a CFII and that wasn't part of the question.
Click to expand...
That's not accurate. It would be completely legal under IFR if the person in the other seat is a private pilot with an instrument rating who was current and willing to act as PIC for the flight.
 
And it's a little odd that instrument rated pilots would consider a whole flight to be either in IMC or in VMC. It's entirely possible to be in IMC for only a few minutes. It's a way of life at the coast in summer, where marine layer tops out far below local MEAs.

I did do one instrument practice flight with a safety pilot, where that pilot needed to assume PIC to get an instrument clearance, due to unforecast marine layer. Several lessons with the CFII as well, almost including a night pop up (we found a big hole, and it was right before the SJC curfew, so a clearance would have been tough).
 
MAKG1 said:
And it's a little odd that instrument rated pilots would consider a whole flight to be either in IMC or in VMC. It's entirely possible to be in IMC for only a few minutes. It's a way of life at the coast in summer, where marine layer tops out far below local MEAs.
Click to expand...
Good point. It's a way of life everywhere. Clouds tend to be broken and not in a solid mass and one is, probably in the vast majority of "actual" flights in and out of visual conditions. And, if the conditions are visual, see and avoid obligations apply.

That's why the definition of "simulated instrument flight" and the need for a safety pilot don't depend on the weather conditions, just the existence of a device limiting the flying pilot's view.
 
midlifeflyer said:
That's not accurate. It would be completely legal under IFR if the person in the other seat is a private pilot with an instrument rating who was current and willing to act as PIC for the flight.
Click to expand...

I knew someone would bring that up. Problem there is that his time under the hood wouldn't do him much good if some other instrument rated pilot was acting as PIC. I'm pretty sure if you want to log time towards the Instrument rating you need to be PIC, and the only way to be PIC in IMC when not rated is to be with a CFII, at least that's my understanding.
 
StinkBug said:
I knew someone would bring that up. Problem there is that his time under the hood wouldn't do him much good if some other instrument rated pilot was acting as PIC. I'm pretty sure if you want to log time towards the Instrument rating you need to be PIC, and the only way to be PIC in IMC when not rated is to be with a CFII, at least that's my understanding.
Click to expand...
Again, no. To log instrument time as PIC all you need is to be

  1. the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft you are rated for (the requirement for logging PIC time toward certificates, rating and currency) [61.51(e)(1)]; and
  2. be in either simulated or actual instrument conditions. [61.51(g)]
That's not my understanding. It's the FAA Chief Counsel's understanding. See the 2011 Walker Letter, which is pretty much a rehash of consistent FAA policy over the past 35 years.

Same old same old - "logging PIC" time toward certificates and ratings has nothing to do with "acting as PIC."
 
Last edited:
StinkBug said:
I knew someone would bring that up. Problem there is that his time under the hood wouldn't do him much good if some other instrument rated pilot was acting as PIC. I'm pretty sure if you want to log time towards the Instrument rating you need to be PIC, and the only way to be PIC in IMC when not rated is to be with a CFII, at least that's my understanding.
Click to expand...

You are completely wrong. First, there is NO requirement to be PIC or to even be able to log PIC time for either the instrument rating requirements or for instrument currency. All you need is to be flying the aircraft solely by reference to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions.

For example, I have NO multirating. I can't be PIC, I can't even log PIC (I guess if I got signed off for solo I could), but I can log instrument time.
 
StinkBug said:
I knew someone would bring that up. Problem there is that his time under the hood wouldn't do him much good if some other instrument rated pilot was acting as PIC. I'm pretty sure if you want to log time towards the Instrument rating you need to be PIC, and the only way to be PIC in IMC when not rated is to be with a CFII, at least that's my understanding.
Click to expand...

You'd be wrong.

You can log PIC if you are the sole manipulator of the controls, regardless of the conditions of flight. As long as someone is legal to act as PIC, you're good to go, and the time counts for your instrument rating.

The only thing it doesn't count for is the 15 hours of instrument instruction. It counts for the 40 hours of instrument time, and for the 50 hours of XC time, presuming that the other appropriate conditions are met.
 
Does [61.51(e)(1)] extend to an endorsement, such as retractable gear?

Example: The club has a Bonanza, but I have not yet done any transition training nor do I hold my endorsement for retractable gear. Am I permitted to act as the safety pilot in the Bonanza?
 
AggieMike88 said:
Does [61.51(e)(1)] extend to an endorsement, such as retractable gear?

Example: The club has a Bonanza, but I have not yet done any transition training nor do I hold my endorsement for retractable gear. Am I permitted to act as the safety pilot in the Bonanza?
Click to expand...

Yes, but not as PIC. You can log SIC, but you're not acting as SIC and thus don't need endorsements.
 
JeffDG said:
Yes, but not as PIC. You can log SIC, but you're not acting as SIC and thus don't need endorsements.
Click to expand...

To take that a bit further, the requirement for complex and high performance endorsements forbids you to act as PIC without the endorsements. That's all.

See 14 CFR 61.31 (e) and (f).
 
AggieMike88 said:
Does [61.51(e)(1)] extend to an endorsement, such as retractable gear?

Example: The club has a Bonanza, but I have not yet done any transition training nor do I hold my endorsement for retractable gear. Am I permitted to act as the safety pilot in the Bonanza?
Click to expand...

If you are asking whether the word "rated" in 61.51(e)(1) also means "endorsement"? No it does not.

The FAR refers to "certificates", "ratings", and "endorsements". They all mean something different.

So yes, you may be a safety pilot in the Bonanza because you hold a private pilot "certificate" with an ASEL "rating." But may not act or log PIC time for it since you do not have the required "endorsement" to act as PIC.
 
midlifeflyer said:
If you are asking whether the word "rated" in 61.51(e)(1) also means "endorsement"? No it does not.

The FAR refers to "certificates", "ratings", and "endorsements". They all mean something different.

So yes, you may be a safety pilot in the Bonanza because you hold a private pilot "certificate" with an ASEL "rating." But may not act or log PIC time for it since you do not have the required "endorsement" to act as PIC.
Click to expand...

As for a safety pilot, yes, you are correct. Without the endorsement all the safety pilot can log would be SIC time while he was safety pilot. If, as we mentioned earlier, the safety pilot was not actually doing safety pilot duties, ie. the Acting PIC wasn't under the hood needing a safety pilot, the now passenger in the safety pilot seat, could log PIC time for any time he was the sole manipulator of the controls with PPASEL without the endorsement.
 
Witmo said:
As for a safety pilot, yes, you are correct. Without the endorsement all the safety pilot can log would be SIC time while he was safety pilot. If, as we mentioned earlier, the safety pilot was not actually doing safety pilot duties, ie. the Acting PIC wasn't under the hood needing a safety pilot, the now passenger in the safety pilot seat, could log PIC time for any time he was the sole manipulator of the controls with PPASEL without the endorsement.
Click to expand...
That is of course correct because logging PIC as sole manipulator only requires certificate and rating [61.51(e)]. OTOH logging PIC as a required crewmember in a multi pilot crew (safety pilot) requires the logger be acting as PIC [61.51(f)] which, in turn, requires the endorsement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top