Logging and Acting as PIC

[Callador]

I know this topic has been beaten to death, but I just wanted to get some opinions from other 121/135 guys about my current situation. I know that I can legally log PIC on the legs I am flying, since I am rated in the aircraft and sole manipulator of the controls. I also know that I am not acting PIC since I am not the captain.

So for you guys that are in the same situation, do you log your flying as PIC instead of SIC when it is your leg? I have just been logging it SIC currently, but I was wondering if many companies frown down upon logging that time as PIC. Is this something can get you into trouble down the road with specific companies?

Again, I know the topic has been talked about ad nauseum, so I really don't want this thread to focus on the legality of logging it a certain way, but rather I wanted to see what your current or other companies that you know of think about this.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Callador]

One more thing to add, I know a lot of companies nowadays get around this by giving the SIC a SIC type rating. Then it is pretty cut and dry since they aren't rated.

I was talking with my Dad who flew for TWE way back in the day. They gave the FO's a PIC type right off the bat. His company wanted them to log it PIC/SIC depending on what they were doing. And of course the Captain logs PIC the whole time. So for those with PIC types flying SIC or if you are flying non-typed (2 crew required, by either company or aircraft requirment), what sayest thou?

 

[SteveC]

I added another column in my logbook and labeled it "61 PIC". That way I can add the time to whichever column (PIC or SIC) is appropriate depending upon what I'm using it for. Some employers would laugh me out of an interview if I called it PIC time and they ask for Part 1 PIC time only. Other companies allow the use of 'sole manipulator' time towards PIC because their insurance company allows it and it makes it easier to hire pilots that meet those needs.

 

[Callador]

I added another column in my logbook and labeled it "61 PIC". That way I can add the time to whichever column (PIC or SIC) is appropriate depending upon what I'm using it for. Some employers would laugh me out of an interview if I called it PIC time and they ask for Part 1 PIC time only. Other companies allow the use of 'sole manipulator' time towards PIC because their insurance company allows it and it makes it easier to hire pilots that meet those needs.

That is an awesome idea! That way I am covered both ways. Thanks for the advice. So when/if you send a resume to a company, do you get the insider info on which type they want to see, or do you separate them on the resume itself. Thanks in advance.

 

[wrxpilot]

When I was flying King Airs (part 135 charter), I logged the time like SteveC suggested. Right now I only have a SIC type, so I log SIC regardless of whether or not I'm PF in our citation.

I'm supposedly going to school in a couple of months for a PIC type, and have been told that I'll be the PIC for a majority of the flights afterwards so that I can start building TPIC time for the insurance company. I'll be in the left seat and expected to make all of the PIC decisions. The other pilot is going to log SIC time, so there's not really a question of legitimacy for that case IMO.

 

[SteveC]

... So when/if you send a resume to a company, do you get the insider info on which type they want to see, or do you separate them on the resume itself.

I haven't done much active job hunting in a while so I might not be the best one to ask. That won't stop me from taking a shot at answering anyway.

My understanding is that the airlines, almost across the board, only accept PIC time as that in which the candidate has 'signed' for the aircraft. They typically don't accept 'sole manipulator' time, and if I understand correctly their applications will pretty well spell that out for you.

If the application doesn't specify I would tend to err on the side of caution and NOT include Part 61 PIC in your PIC totals unless you can get a clear go ahead from the company. The relatively few places that WILL accept it as legitimate PIC time for their purposes will tend to let you know that up front.

Hopefully others with more recent job hunting experience (specifically 91/135 because that is where you might be able to use this as opposed to 121 operators) will chime in as well.

 

[Callador]

I haven't done much active job hunting in a while so I might not be the best one to ask. That won't stop me from taking a shot at answering anyway.

My understanding is that the airlines, almost across the board, only accept PIC time as that in which the candidate has 'signed' for the aircraft. They typically don't accept 'sole manipulator' time, and if I understand correctly their applications will pretty well spell that out for you.

If the application doesn't specify I would tend to err on the side of caution and NOT include Part 61 PIC in your PIC totals unless you can get a clear go ahead from the company. The relatively few places that WILL accept it as legitimate PIC time for their purposes will tend to let you know that up front.

Hopefully others with more recent job hunting experience (specifically 91/135 because that is where you might be able to use this as opposed to 121 operators) will chime in as well.

Thanks again!

 

[NJA_Capt]

One more thing to add, I know a lot of companies nowadays get around this by giving the SIC a SIC type rating. Then it is pretty cut and dry since they aren't rated.

Unless an SIC under 135 has a .293, .297, AND .299, they are not rated either. Generally, only the PIC has the .299.
Many people log the 91 legs of 135 flts as PIC.

 

[SteveC]

Unless an SIC under 135 has a .293, .297, AND .299, they are not rated either. Generally, only the PIC has the .299.
Many people log the 91 legs of 135 flts as PIC.

Good point.

edit to add:
Wait a minute. Not having a 299 line check would mean that they are not current to ACT as PIC, but they could still LOG PIC as sole manipulator as long as they have the appropriate type rating, no?