Logbook question...

[TonyC]

. . . ,but I am gonna say you have to have a take-off and a landing to call the time 'flight time'.

If you want to be pedantic, you'll have to admit that only a landing is required, not a takeoff.


If you use logic to argue that a takeoff is required, you must allow logic to prevail in interpreting "for the purpose of flight."


Pick your poison.











.

 

[kellwolf]

Sorry, I just can't let this one get by.

I read the definition in whole to mean that a landing has to occur after a flight. You gotta fly to log flight time. It is my personal opinion that the aircraft moves for the purpose of flight after you do the required mechanical checks to insure that it is ready to fly. That would be when you are moving for the purpose of flight. But I'm not gonna tell you that you have to interpret the rule that way,but I am gonna say you have to have a take-off and a landing to call the time 'flight time'.

It does not matter how you are paid, or how you are charged, that does not enter into the FAA definition at all.

So, do you mark the Hobbs time or whatever after completing all the taxi checks such as making sure the turn coordinator/turn slip coordinator works and the airspeed indicator isn't busted? Or do you just start counting after the runup? I'm intending to fly if I start the engine to taxi to a runway to take off. If there's a mechanical problem on the way, then I'm not intending to fly anymore. I could see saying logging the time on the way BACK wouldn't be proper, but I see nothing wrong logging the time out there.

Also, take an extreme example, here. What if there were an in-flight fire resulting in the airplane breaking up? Could the NTSB actually site it as in-flight since "you have to have a take-off and a landing to call the time 'flight time?'" There wasn't a landing involved, so assuming the poor guy DID get out and parachute to the ground, he can't even LOG it?

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

I see what you are saying, and actually have been persuaded now and agree. I think I remember seeing you post on this before. I think you are the only one that interprets it this way . My Company certainly doesn't.

Neither does the FAA. FAA Legal's written opinions use "block to block" as synonymous with the regulation, such as this snip from 1993:

==============================
FAR 1.1 defines flight time as:

"the time from the moment the aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight until the moment it comes to rest at the next point of landing. ("Block-to-block" time.)
==============================