Dual Given

[element94]

The "student" was a rated private pilot. He wanted to go on a cross-country at night, under IFR. He does not hold an instrument rating, and could not act as PIC during the flight. Thus, that's why I was there.

It's an easily fixed issue, like I said, I know the guy well. He has no issue with me signing his logbook. But obviously, if I was neither acting as safety pilot or as a flight instructor, I can't log that flight time.

 

[gotWXdagain]

Show me in the FARs where it says that you must sign a students log book to write something in your logbook? or that he must have your endorsement if you were required to be there?

Ok:

(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) When the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or has sport pilot privileges for that category and class of aircraft, if the aircraft class rating is appropriate;

(ii) When the pilot is the sole occupant in the aircraft;

(iii) When the pilot, except for a holder of a sport or recreational pilot certificate, acts as pilot in command of an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted; or

(iv) When the pilot performs the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a qualified pilot in command provided—

(A) The pilot performing the duties of pilot in command holds a commercial or airline transport pilot certificate and aircraft rating that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft being flown, if a class rating is appropriate;

(B) The pilot performing the duties of pilot in command is undergoing an approved pilot in command training program that includes ground and flight training on the following areas of operation—

( 1 ) Preflight preparation;

( 2 ) Preflight procedures;

( 3 ) Takeoff and departure;

( 4 ) In-flight maneuvers;

( 5 ) Instrument procedures;

( 6 ) Landings and approaches to landings;

( 7 ) Normal and abnormal procedures;

( 8 ) Emergency procedures; and

( 9 ) Postflight procedures;

(C) The supervising pilot in command holds—

( 1 ) A commercial pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate, and aircraft rating that is appropriate to the category, class, and type of aircraft being flown, if a class or type rating is required; or

( 2 ) An airline transport pilot certificate and aircraft rating that is appropriate to the category, class, and type of aircraft being flown, if a class or type rating is required; and

(D) The supervising pilot in command logs the pilot in command training in the pilot's logbook, certifies the pilot in command training in the pilot's logbook and attests to that certification with his or her signature, and flight instructor certificate number.

_____

(h) Logging training time. (1) A person may log training time when that person receives training from an authorized instructor in an aircraft, flight simulator, or flight training device.

(2) The training time must be logged in a logbook and must:

(i) Be endorsed in a legible manner by the authorized instructor; and

(ii) Include a description of the training given, the length of the training lesson, and the authorized instructor's signature, certificate number, and certificate expiration date.

§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.

(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.

 

[Mike H]

is this another one of those "doesn't want his regular CFI to know he's cheating on him" threads?

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Ok:

I'm not sure of your point.

I think ppragman was posing a scenario in which two pilots, one instrument rated and one not (no one acting acting as an instructor) go for an IFR flight with the non-rated pilot being the sole manipulator of the controls.

The instrument-rated pilot is required to be there as acting PIC to make the flight legal. But I don't see anything in what you quoted that requires his signature. It's not an instructional flight nor is the flight part of an "approved PIC training program."

 

[gotWXdagain]

I'm not sure of your point.

I think ppragman was posing a scenario in which two pilots, one instrument rated and one not (no one acting acting as an instructor) go for an IFR flight with the non-rated pilot being the sole manipulator of the controls.

The instrument-rated pilot is required to be there as acting PIC to make the flight legal. But I don't see anything in what you quoted that requires his signature. It's not an instructional flight nor is the flight part of an "approved PIC training program."

I don't see how you aren't acting as an instructor on the flight. If its an IFR flight and the guy is VFR only, are you not providing instruction? Is learning not occurring? Approved (as in part 141) PDPIC isn't occurring here I suppose, but I fail to see how training is not being conducted- even "you're doing everything right" is training.

Lets say this cross country was going to be used to meet the requirements of 61.65(d), which says 50 hours XC PIC, 40 hours instrument training (15 with a CFII), and that instrument training must include the IFR cross country. Doesn't specifically say that the IFR cross country needs to be a part of the 15 hours from an authorized instructor, but would you endorse a candidate for a practical test for instrument-airplane if that candidate had just gone on an IFR cross country with any instrument pilot?

I'm not saying that this student we're talking about here is going on for their instrument practical, for all we've been told the weather was probably less than VFR and they wanted to go somewhere. That, or they wanted to build experience in the IFR environment. Is an instrument rated (non-CFII) pilot authorized to give flight instruction? No. And here's my (and my last CFI's) take on this:

Any time you take a VFR rated pilot into the IFR environment (on an IFR flight plan, regardless of VMC or IMC), an authorized CFII must be present, because, especially if IMC is encountered, flight instruction and therefore flight training are going to occur, and therefore an instrument rated pilot without CFII privileges would be acting outside their privileges and limitations. Is it technically legal? Yes, if you aren't going to endorse the logbook or use the time to meet rating requirements. Is it something you'd put up your CFII for when it came time to put the person in question in for their instrument rating? I wouldn't take that bet.

 

[pwttogfk]

Any time you take a VFR rated pilot into the IFR environment (on an IFR flight plan, regardless of VMC or IMC), an authorized CFII must be present, because, especially if IMC is encountered, flight instruction and therefore flight training are going to occur, and therefore an instrument rated pilot without CFII privileges would be acting outside their privileges and limitations.

Then how can a VFR-only PPL act as safety pilot for an IFR pilot? It's legal for a pilot with category/class ratings to LOG PIC time in IMC as long as there's an appropriately rated pilot who can ACT as PIC on the IFR flight plan. It's not a 100% given that instruction will occur during the flight.

 

[element94]

Lets say this cross country was going to be used to meet the requirements of 61.65(d), which says 50 hours XC PIC, 40 hours instrument training (15 with a CFII), and that instrument training must include the IFR cross country. Doesn't specifically say that the IFR cross country needs to be a part of the 15 hours from an authorized instructor, but would you endorse a candidate for a practical test for instrument-airplane if that candidate had just gone on an IFR cross country with any instrument pilot?

Not correct. The IFR cross-country needs to be with a CFII. See 14 C.F.R. § 61.65(d)(2)(ii).

Any time you take a VFR rated pilot into the IFR environment (on an IFR flight plan, regardless of VMC or IMC), an authorized CFII must be present, because, especially if IMC is encountered, flight instruction and therefore flight training are going to occur, and therefore an instrument rated pilot without CFII privileges would be acting outside their privileges and limitations. Is it technically legal? Yes, if you aren't going to endorse the logbook or use the time to meet rating requirements. Is it something you'd put up your CFII for when it came time to put the person in question in for their instrument rating? I wouldn't take that bet.

Also incorrect...You can log PIC flight time anytime you are sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you're rated, regardless of conditions. The person acting as PIC need only be properly rated and authorized to conduct the flight (in the case of IFR, instrument rated and current).

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2009/Speranza.pdf

 

[gotWXdagain]

Then how can a VFR-only PPL act as safety pilot for an IFR pilot? It's legal for a pilot with category/class ratings to LOG PIC time in IMC as long as there's an appropriately rated pilot who can ACT as PIC on the IFR flight plan. It's not a 100% given that instruction will occur during the flight.

A VFR-only PPL can only log the PIC in that situation if either the flight is conducted under VFR and being done for the purpose of gaining/keeping currency or to meet the requirements under 61.65 (where the pilot flying, under the hood, is also not instrument rated), or, the flight could be conducted under IFR and the Pilot Flying (under the hood) is already instrument rated and is conducting the flight to meet currency requirements. For example, I'm instrument rated and you're not (hypothetically): "hey, I need to go grab a couple of approaches to keep my currency up for next month, wanna come along i'll pay for the ride?" Thats free PIC for you as the safety pilot, under IFR, but i'm acting PIC.

...But wait, you're logging PIC as a private pilot and paying less than pro-rata share, how is that legal?

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft.

---

(c) A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees.

You are logging, but you're not acting.

Not correct. The IFR cross-country needs to be with a CFII. See 14 C.F.R. § 61.65(d)(2)(ii).

You're right, my bad there.

Also incorrect...You can log PIC flight time anytime you are sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you're rated, regardless of conditions. The person acting as PIC need only be properly rated and authorized to conduct the flight (in the case of IFR, instrument rated and current).

True and I can't argue otherwise, but if I was in the OPs shoes, as a CFII I would be considering it giving instruction, especially if that is what I was asked to do in the beginning. Its also true that (unless its that 61.65 cross country) you aren't necessarily required to be there, but the point is that you were there, so you have to ask yourself: "Was I providing instruction?" If so, its your responsibility to log it as such, or at least if he wants the PIC time and was sole manipulator throughout the flight, sign that "REMARKS" section in his logbook to say that there was instruction given. At the same time, if it was an IFR cross country that could meet the requirements of 61.65, you might as well log it as dual received in their logbook so the guy doesn't have to go out and spend his money again.

 

[Nihon_Ni]

Personally, there wouldn't be a "next time" if he insisted on keeping my signature out of his logbook. This is a cut and dry responsibility for dual given.

Says who?

§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.

(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.

must 1 (m

st) v.
v.aux. 1. To be obliged or required by morality, law, or custom: Citizens must register in order to vote.
2. To be compelled, as by a physical necessity or requirement: Plants must have oxygen in order to live.
3. Used to express a command or admonition: You must not go there alone. You simply must be careful.
4. To be determined to; have as a fixed resolve: If you must leave, do it quietly.
5. a. Used to indicate inevitability or certainty: We all must die.
b. Used to indicate logical probability or presumptive certainty: If the lights were on, they must have been at home.


v.intr. Archaic To be required or obliged to go: "I must from hence" (Shakespeare).

n. Something that is absolutely required or indispensable: Promptness on the job is a must. Comfortable boots are a must when going on a hike.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

A VFR-only PPL can only log the PIC in that situation if either the flight is conducted under VFR and being done for the purpose of gaining/keeping currency or to meet the requirements under 61.65 (where the pilot flying, under the hood, is also not instrument rated), or, the flight could be conducted under IFR and the Pilot Flying (under the hood) is already instrument rated and is conducting the flight to meet currency requirements.

Sorry, but that's simply incorrect.

==============================
61.51(e)(1)(i) A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-
When the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or has sport pilot privileges for that category and class of aircraft, if the aircraft class rating is appropriate;
==============================

and it means exactly what it says. Despite the wording changes along the way, the FAA has been officially consistent on this for at least 30 years.

It doesn't require that an instructor be on board.

I don't see how you aren't acting as an instructor on the flight.

The OP happens to be one, but what if the acting PIC simply isn't an instructor? Jut a private pilot with an instrument rating.

Is is smart? Well that depends on the pilots. Is is legal? Without a doubt.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.

(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.

And here's one for you - what endorsements and training can a PPL (not CFI) put in a logbook? And can it be logged as dual given?

 

[Matt13C]

Sorry, but that's simply incorrect.

==============================
61.51(e)(1)(i) A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-
When the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or has sport pilot privileges for that category and class of aircraft, if the aircraft class rating is appropriate;
==============================

and it means exactly what it says. Despite the wording changes along the way, the FAA has been officially consistent on this for at least 30 years.

It doesn't require that an instructor be on board.

The OP happens to be one, but what if the acting PIC simply isn't an instructor? Jut a private pilot with an instrument rating.

Is is smart? Well that depends on the pilots. Is is legal? Without a doubt.

This is the part that I am a bit unclear on.

In the situation being discussed, as instrument rated PPL files a flight plan and their friend, a VFR only PPL, does all the flying in actual conditions. Technically the VFR pilot can not be in actual conditions without the instrument rated PPL in the right seat. However, since the pilot flying is rated in category and class they can log the time as PIC under the sole manipulator clause. So the true acting PIC can not log PIC because they are not a required crew member, assuming say a 172, and actual does not require a safety pilot. The true acting PIC cant log any PIC time, but is required to be there and there is no way to not be responsible for the flight. I know its legal, just doesnt make sense to me.

I suppose for anyone who is beyond the time building stage it doesnt matter if they can log the time or not. It just seems to be an odd interpretation.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

In the situation being discussed, as instrument rated PPL files a flight plan and their friend, a VFR only PPL, does all the flying in actual conditions. Technically the VFR pilot can not be in actual conditions without the instrument rated PPL in the right seat. However, since the pilot flying is rated in category and class they can log the time as PIC under the sole manipulator clause. So the true acting PIC can not log PIC because they are not a required crew member, assuming say a 172, and actual does not require a safety pilot. The true acting PIC cant log any PIC time, but is required to be there and there is no way to not be responsible for the flight. I know its legal, just doesnt make sense to me.
interpretation.

All correct, except that I would say the IFR-rated Acting PIC would still be responsible for the flight, even though he can't log it.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

This is the part that I am a bit unclear on.

In the situation being discussed, as instrument rated PPL files a flight plan and their friend, a VFR only PPL, does all the flying in actual conditions. Technically the VFR pilot can not be in actual conditions without the instrument rated PPL in the right seat. However, since the pilot flying is rated in category and class they can log the time as PIC under the sole manipulator clause. So the true acting PIC can not log PIC because they are not a required crew member, assuming say a 172, and actual does not require a safety pilot. The true acting PIC cant log any PIC time, but is required to be there and there is no way to not be responsible for the flight. I know its legal, just doesnt make sense to me.

I suppose for anyone who is beyond the time building stage it doesnt matter if they can log the time or not. It just seems to be an odd interpretation.

A simple fix for the problem is for the VFR only pilot to wear the hood and have the instrument rated pilot be the safety pilot. The conditions of the flight don't change the fact that a safety pilot is required if the pilot flying is flying under the hood.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

I suppose for anyone who is beyond the time building stage it doesnt matter if they can log the time or not. It just seems to be an odd interpretation.

I think it's a little bit odd to everyone. The best policy justification I can come up with is that, unless the operation requires more than one pilot (or is instructional), the FAA simply doesn't want to have a whole bunch of situations where more than one pilot gets to log the time. Maybe concerns with too much potential for abuse. Having historically permitted the sole manipulator to log PIC, that leaves the "real" PIC out.

I thought a bit curious, though, that the Chief Counsel didn't even touch the issue in a fairly recent interpretation, http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org.../interpretations/data/interps/2009/Herman.pdf , the Chief Counsel was presented with the question whether a private pilot may log PIC in a high performance or complex airplane without the endorsements. As expected, the answer was yes. But not one word about whether or not the actual PIC could log the time as the only legal pilot on board.

Now the Chief Counsel's office rarely answers a question not specifically asked but I thought it a bit unusual to not take the opportunity to mention, even in passing, whether or not the acting PIC in the scenario gets to log anything.