Log PIC as a private pilot in IFR?

excessthrust said:
Which part? 6 questions I posted replies to.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, only those which are based on the erroneous premise that
If you're not rated to ACT as PIC in the conditions you are flying in, you can not LOG PIC.
Click to expand...
I can't tell about the ones about CFIIs and countable instruction. Despite your tagline, I couldn't follow it. I couldn't tell whether you were using the word certificate and the word rating as synonymous (they are not).

(That was =not= meant as a flame. We all get finger-tied at times).

So for example, it's pretty clear that a CFII with no aircraft (ASE, AME) rating on her CFI certificate may give dual that counts toward an aircraft rating.

What tends to get tossed about, though, is whether a CFII with no aircraft rating (ASE, AME) on her CFI certificate may give dual that counts toward an instrument rating so long as as (1) the "student" already has the appropriate aircraft ratings and (2) she has the appropriate aircraft rating on her commercial pilot certificate. A straight reading of the regulations would say, "No." There's also an Eastern Regional FAA Legal opinion that says, "No," but historical FAA policy has been to permit it and the GA Operations Inspectors Handbook contains a very clear "Yes." (FAA Order 8710.1, Vol 2, Chapter 11, Section 1, Para 8).
 
I definitely agree that CERTIFICATE and RATING are totally different things.

You earn a certificate.

Ratings placed ON that certificate allow you to act and log PIC time when performing operations for which your specific ratings are required.

Can a Student pilot log PIC time when they are with an instructor?
Nope.
They do not have a rating that allows it.

Same thing for an instructor teaching a pilot without an Instrument Rating. If you are in a situation that requires an instrument rating, the pilot cannot log it as PIC if you don't have the privilege.

As far as a CFII-only rated instructor giving training for initial instrument training, As long as the instructor has the appropriate category and class on their PILOT certificate, they can give instrument training to a student as long as any class-specific (failing engines, etc) training is not given.

When you are a CFII-only your certificate says "Instrument - Airplane" Not single-engine instrument or multi-engine instrument.

I have personally trained and recommended 7 applicants for an initial instructor certificate as CFII. All 7 were asked a similar question to this. All 7 were taught the same way. All 7 passed first attempt and I received comments from most when debreifing with the DPE (from 3 different FSDO's) that "MR/MS XYZ is one of the few applicants that has thoroughly understood their privileges as an initial CFII"
 
excessthrust said:
Can a Student pilot log PIC time when they are with an instructor?
Nope.
They do not have a rating that allows it.
Click to expand...
Nope. It is quite true that a student pilot does not have any aircraft ratings. But that's not why a student pilot may not log PIC when flying with an instructor. A student pilot may not log PIC when flying with an instructor because the only time the universal rule of logging time (FAR 61.51) says a student may log PIC is when the student pilot

==============================
(i) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft or is performing the duties of pilot of command of an airship requiring more than one pilot flight crewmember;
(ii) Has a current solo flight endorsement as required under § 61.87 of this part; and
(iii) Is undergoing training for a pilot certificate or rating.
==============================

The lack of a rating never enters the regulatory picture.If they added rating for student pilots tomorrow, without a change to 61.51, a student pilot would still not be able to log PIC except when solo.

I think you may simply be making the very common error of believing that logging PIC =must= logically be related to the ability to act as PIC and are imposing that view on words that say nothing of the kind.
 
Can a student pilot log PIC if they are dual? No - they are not rated.
Can a student pilot log PIC? Yes, under special circumstances (those you mentioned) because they could not without an aircraft rating otherwise.

61.51(e)(1) Specifically states that for pilot certificates other than ATP, you must have the appropriate rating to log PIC.

Appropriate rating to fly in IMC = Instrument
 
excessthrust said:
61.51(e)(1) Specifically states that for pilot certificates other than ATP, you must have the appropriate rating to log PIC.
Click to expand...

You are misreading that statement. It actually says "Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;" Note it says aircraft the pilot is rated for, not conditions of flight.

Anyway, the FAA General Counsel's Office disagrees with your opinion. As follows:


April 6, 1983
Harlan V. Elliott

Dear Mr. Elliott:

This is in reply to your December 10, 1982, letter questioning the accuracy of an interpretation appearing in the September/October 1982 issue of FAA General Aviation News (GA News) (found on page 15). GA News addressed the following question:
When I am taking instruction for an instrument rating, can I log it as pilot in command time in actual instrument conditions when I am the sole manipulator of the controls in IFR conditions?
​
This question was answered as follows:
No. A pilot receiving instrument instruction in actual instrument conditions must be rated and current in the aircraft and already possess an instrument rating, in order to log pilot in command time for such conditions.
​
You note that the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) do not specifically permit a pilot to log pilot in command (PIC) tine in actual instrument conditions without an instrument rating, but neither do they specifically prohibit logging this time.

As you indicated in your letter, there are a number of FARs which bear on this. Section 61.51(c)(2) provides in part that a private or commercial pilot may log as pilot in command time flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated. Section 61.51(c)(4) provides in part that a pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions. Section
61.65(e)(2) requires that an applicant for an instrument rating must have at least 40 hours of simulated or actual instrument time as a pilot, and Section 61.65(e)(3) requires the applicant to have at least 15 hours of instrument flight instruction by an authorized flight instructor. You offer your opinion that the remaining 25 hours required in Section 61.65(e)(2) which is not "dual" instruction under Section 61.65(e)(3), could be flown
with a "watch pilot" and must be pilot in command time under Section 61.51(c)(2) and instrument time under Section 61.51(c)(4).

The only limitations on the PIC time which may be logged by a private or commercial pilot are those found in Section 61.51(c)(2), including the provision that PIC time may be logged when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he or she is rated.

Please note that Section 61.51(c)(2) and the other sections cited above are only provisions for logging flight time. Section 61.3(e)(1) provides in part that no person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under instrument flight rules, or in weather conditions less than VFR minimums unless that person holds an instrument rating. A non-instrument rated pilot who is taking instrument instruction in IFR conditions may log that as PIC time, but may not actually serve as the PIC. The other pilot must be the PIC, and is not merely a "watch pilot." We are informing GA News of our interpretation. I hope this answers your questions.

Sincerely,
/s/
John H. Cassady
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
 
I won't quote 61.51 again cause its been quoted, highlited, bolded and italisized about 500 times already in this thread, but bottom line is if you are rated to fly the aircraft, you can log PIC when your hands are on the controlls. It does not matter if you are fully qualified to ACT as PIC. A private pilot without instrument rating cannot ACT as PIC on an IFR flight plan in either VMC or IMC conditions, but he can LOG PIC. A pilot rated in an aircraft, but who does not have a current medical can not ACT as PIC but can LOG PIC. A pilot rated in an aircraft, but who does not have a current flight review cannot ACT as PIC but can LOG PIC. A pilot rated in an aircraft, but who is not properly endorsed for the aircraft (tailwheel/complex/high performance/high altitude) cannot ACT as PIC but can LOG PIC. If you don't want to believe it that's fine, keep logging it your way, but if the FARs are written exactly the way the FAA wanted them to be. If the FAA intended only qualified PICs to log PIC then 61.51 would read "sole manipulator of the flight controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privelages and is fully qualifed to act as PIC of such aircraft" but it dosn't. And that is not a mistake on the part of the FAA. It says what it says and that's it, end of discussion.

Here's a typical argument that I regularly have with pilots who think private pilots without instrument ratings can not log PIC in actual.

Other pilot: A private pilot without an instrument rating can not log PIC in IMC

Me: Really? Why not?

Other pilot: Because he's not rated to fly in IMC?

Me: Okay, so did you log PIC on your IFR cross countries for your instrument rating

Other pilot: Yeah, but only for the time I was in VMC

Me: Were you on an IFR flight plan during those cross countries?

Other pilot: Of course

Me: Is it legal for a pilot who is not instrument rated to act as PIC while on an IFR flight plan?

Other pilot:.......well...ummm......no

Me: How much of that IFR cross country time did you count toward your 50 hours of PIC cross country required for your instrument rating?

Other pilot:.....ummm....well.....hmmm.....

Me: Hope the FAA dosn't find out.
 
30-40 hours PIC while training doesn't mean much when you have a couple thousand. Total time and Turbine PIC are really all that matters
 
excessthrust said:
I didn't log any of my Instrument training as PIC. Honestly in the long run, it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
I think this is way of conceeding the argument without acutally admitting he was wrong, but he is correct. It really dons't matter when you get to the point where he is now. Especially since when an airline application asks for PIC time they usually don't want to see any dual recived included in that. But however, when the 8710 asks for how much PIC time you have, and you have to go out and pay for a bunch of flight time because you refuse to log any dual recieved as PIC, it can make a pretty big difference to your wallet.
 
excessthrust said:
But if we go by Midlife's theory, I'm gonna log PIC in a DC-3 on floats because I ride up front with a guy who has his Commercial Multi-engine Sea (I don't), and my Instructor ticket says "Airplane Multi-engine"
I'm not rated, so I can't
Click to expand...

You are correct because you are not rated for the aircraft as a dozen people have already stated here since your ticket does not say Airplane Multi- Engine Sea which is part of the category and class of the aircraft rating.

excessthrust said:
Your must be instrument RATED to be PIC in Instrument conditions. 61.3(e)
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody was disputing that fact. What we're saying is that you can log PIC. Once again, there is a difference.

excessthrust said:
I agree 100% with the letter from Mr. Faberman.
Click to expand...

Aparently you don't. The letter spells it out pretty clear in the section Midlife bolded plus the following.

From the letter:

"Rating" as used in that section refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates.
Click to expand...

If you look in 61.5 under paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) and (b)(7), the sections that cover category, class, and types, there is no mention of instrument rating. We're referring only to aircraft ratings here, which, according to the letter, which you claim to agree with 100%, is all that matters for logging PIC.

excessthrust said:
30-40 hours PIC while training doesn't mean much when you have a couple thousand. Total time and Turbine PIC are really all that matters
Click to expand...

You're correct; 30-40 hours isn't going to make or break you. The point is the incorrect interpretation of the regulations.
 
61.5 DOES mention instrument rating...

61.5(b)(8) Instrument ratings
Each of those ratings is aircraft category specific.

At any rate, I can see that chasing down interpretations is like one horse on a carousel chasing down another. Different interpretations from the FAA from different parts of the country apparently make for interesting discussion. If you're that stressed to get the extra .5 actual instrument PIC, you're probably low enough time that it doesn't make a difference. I guess I don't feel you should log PIC if you are not acting as one. If an instructor is the only person qualified to fly into a certain situation (IMC, high altitude, high performance, etc) they should be the only one who is PIC.

That's my interpretation based on those people I have talked to and discussed with.

The country's filled with liberals and conservatives...oh and those that go with the best thing they've heard in the past 24 hours.

I'm obviously a little more conservative about the flight time.
 
excessthrust said:
I don't feel you should log PIC if you are not acting as one. If an instructor is the only person qualified to fly into a certain situation (IMC, high altitude, high performance, etc) they should be the only one who is PIC.

That's my interpretation based on those people I have talked to and discussed with.

The country's filled with liberals and conservatives...oh and those that go with the best thing they've heard in the past 24 hours.

I'm obviously a little more conservative about the flight time.
Click to expand...

I feel your pain, ExTee. I, too, feel a loss of communal integrity since I have come to understand 'today's' way of logging PIC time. It is a very strict (narrow, tunnel-minded) interpretation which is obviously (to me) not what was intended.

FAR 1.1 defines the words "pilot in Command" as (1) "the person who has final authority and responsibility...; and...holds appropriate cat & class ratings for the flight."

So, in reading 61.51, if the definition of the words PIC were used as defined above, the interpretation would be as you and I see it; that you would first have to meet those 1.1 requirements to ACT as PIC, and 61.51 tells how to log it.

But we're not lawyers, and so far, no one has challanged the official FAA legal decision, but as I have read them, they could be challenged.

...and what does it matter to you and me? we don't need no stinkin' PIC time.

as one of the poster's in this thread said, they didn't want to have to pay for extra time - that dual that he's logging as PIC time counts for those ratings. That's the main squawk - having to have to actually fly 50 actual PIC hours to get to an instrument rating. and other PIC qualification hours.

so the system is watered down. the 50 PIC XC hours can all be with an instructor coaching you the whole way around. that ain't PIC. so now the airlines are having to have to ask everybody how much ACTUAL PIC you have.

We should start a new PIC column: actual PIC when you meet the 1.1 requirement and and simulated PIC when it is also dual. But even then, the PIC loggable time when dual would be when the instructor decides it is simulated PIC, or in other words, that the student is operating as PIC, that he is demonstrating a level of knowledge and skill that would allow him to act and be the PIC if he were appropriately rated.
 
excessthrust said:
I didn't log any of my Instrument training as PIC. Honestly in the long run, it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but that is a useless comment. I take it that you have thousands of hours of flight time at this point, many in actual IMC, so the accumulation of flight time hours have become meaningless to you (of course, then one has to wonder why you argue so strongly for an interpretation the FAA officially rejected more than 25 years ago).

But some others are still in awe of the wonder of flight. Every tenth of an hour they can legitimately log, especially as PIC, and especially in situations that are non-usual for them, is almost as exciting as first solo.

And still others are at the early stages of their careers, still trying to reach those magic numbers the FAA requires for certificates, ratings and qualifications. It might be the 50 hours of cross country PIC for the instrument rating (part of which may be accomplished in IMC on the required IR dual). Or it might be the the 75 hours of instrument time (50 in an aircraft) needed for that very first Part 135 PIC job under IFR.

Passing along bad information is a disservice to them. And excusing it with, "oh well, it doesn't matter to =me= if I'm right or wrong" is, IMO, worse.

At any rate, I can see that chasing down interpretations is like one horse on a carousel chasing down another. Different interpretations from the FAA from different parts of the country apparently make for interesting discussion.
Click to expand...
Sorry, that's incorrect. Yes, you can get different =personal= views from different FSDOs and inspectors. Call the same FSDO on a different day, get a different inspector, and probably get a different opinion. But there is only one =official= source of FAA regulatory interpretations, and that source has been unwaveringly consistent on the subject of the meaning of FAR 61.51(e).

***Steps off soapbox***
 
excessthrust said:
Don't slip and hit your high horse on the way down
Click to expand...
mfln130l.jpg
 
excessthrust said:
If you're that stressed to get the extra .5 actual instrument PIC, you're probably low enough time that it doesn't make a difference.
Click to expand...
See that's exactly what I was talking about. You people who think you can't log PIC while in the clouds seem to think there is a difference between being on an IFR flight plan in the clouds, and being on an IFR flight plan out of the clouds. A pilot without an instrument rating cannot act as PIC on any IFR flight plan whether its IMC, VMC, or hood. So if we wnat to use your argument, the pilot who chooses not to log the time in actual as PIC should not be logging any flight while on an IFR flight plan. What sense does it make to stop logging PIC for 5 minutes while in the clouds, when you cannot act as PIC during any of the flight? It may not matter to you now, but when you are telling it to someone who is trying to build 50 hrs PIC XC for his instrument or 100 hours total PIC for his commercial, that he cannot count any of the time he was on an IFR flight plan, even if it was all VMC, it makes a pretty big difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top