Logging Flight Time w/out a Takeoff?

I am a bit confused here.

[Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing;
Click to expand...

To me, this is a two prong test. Both A. and B. need to be satisfied.

A. Intention to fly
B. Flight has to take place and aircraft has to "come to rest after landing"

I read through the interpretation letter @Blackhawk posted, but maybe I missed it. I am pretty sense, so can someone explain to me why only you need the intention to fly, but don't actually have to "come to rest after landing" for it to be considered flight time?
 
Both A and B don't need to be satisfied. Only A.
Again, what someone logs for their personal log book is their own business and as long as you don't over count your time the FAA does not care.
The FAA does care about under counting flight time when pilot flight time limits under an FAR and airframe times are under counted.
I have had flights where, due to de-ice and taxi time my ground taxi time has been over an hour. The FAA most certainly wants this time counted for my FAR 117 time limits, even if we have to return to the gate. This has become so complex that the company has a 117 calculator that is constantly updated with my times that I can view on line to see where I stand. Before every flight the first thing o have to do is initialize the ACARS and acknowledge the flight and duty times I have left.
 
mojo6911 said:
I am a bit confused here.



To me, this is a two prong test. Both A. and B. need to be satisfied.

A. Intention to fly
B. Flight has to take place and aircraft has to "come to rest after landing"

I read through the interpretation letter @Blackhawk posted, but maybe I missed it. I am pretty sense, so can someone explain to me why only you need the intention to fly, but don't actually have to "come to rest after landing" for it to be considered flight time?
Click to expand...
Blackhawk is confusing, or trying to impose commercial operation duty time and aircraft time limitations onto private part 91 operations where no such duty time or aircraft time exists.
For private part 91 flights, "flight" must occur to have a landing.
 
nosehair said:
Blackhawk is confusing, or trying to impose commercial operation duty time and aircraft time limitations onto private part 91 operations where no such duty time or aircraft time exists.
For private part 91 flights, "flight" must occur to have a landing.
Click to expand...
No I'm not and made it clear that the FAA does not care if you under report flight time in your personal log book as long as you keep duty and aircraft time limits IAW FAR 1. So no confusion on my part. Much confusion on your part.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
You still haven't explained why you're so adamant to deny yourself flight time that the FAA says you're entitled to.
Click to expand...
With apologies for overstepping, I'm going to take a shot at this. Nosehair and I have discussed many regulatory issues on a number of forums. While he and I disagree on a number of them, I respect his views. And they are often based on regulatory language. Nosehair has personal views on the logging of flight time that don't coincide with the FAA's. He sees logged flight as something that should be a record of real experience, not merely a regulatory device to show the FAA you meet qualification and currency minimums.

His view of logging without a takeoff is completely consistent and, although official interpretations make it clear that no takeoff is required for flight time to be recorded, the source is the reg itself.
Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing; (emphasis added)​
We (and the FAA) tend to look at the first half of the equation - moving under its ow power for the purpose of flight (as opposed to taxiing for maintenance or to find a new parking space on the ramp). Nosehair is looking at the second half - coming to rest "after landing" and comes to the conclusion that if there is no landing, there is no end to the flight. Therefore no flight time.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
With apologies for overstepping, I'm going to take a shot at this. Nosehair and I have discussed many regulatory issues on a number of forums. While he and I disagree on a number of them, I respect his views. And they are often based on regulatory language. Nosehair has personal views on the logging of flight time that don't coincide with the FAA's. He sees logged flight as something that should be a record of real experience, not merely a regulatory device to show the FAA you meet qualification and currency minimums.

His view of logging without a takeoff is completely consistent and, although official interpretations make it clear that no takeoff is required for flight time to be recorded, the source is the reg itself.
Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing; (emphasis added)​
We (and the FAA) tend to look at the first half of the equation - moving under its ow power for the purpose of flight (as opposed to taxiing for maintenance or to find a new parking space on the ramp). Nosehair is looking at the second half - coming to rest "after landing" and comes to the conclusion that if there is no landing, there is no end to the flight. Therefore no flight time.
Click to expand...
That is where my confusion lies. How can you have flight time when you haven't satisfied both parts of the equation? How can you have something that starts, but never ends?
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
With apologies for overstepping, I'm going to take a shot at this. Nosehair and I have discussed many regulatory issues on a number of forums. While he and I disagree on a number of them, I respect his views. And they are often based on regulatory language. Nosehair has personal views on the logging of flight time that don't coincide with the FAA's. He sees logged flight as something that should be a record of real experience, not merely a regulatory device to show the FAA you meet qualification and currency minimums.

His view of logging without a takeoff is completely consistent and, although official interpretations make it clear that no takeoff is required for flight time to be recorded, the source is the reg itself.
Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing; (emphasis added)​
We (and the FAA) tend to look at the first half of the equation - moving under its ow power for the purpose of flight (as opposed to taxiing for maintenance or to find a new parking space on the ramp). Nosehair is looking at the second half - coming to rest "after landing" and comes to the conclusion that if there is no landing, there is no end to the flight. Therefore no flight time.
Click to expand...

mojo6911 said:
That is where my confusion lies. How can you have flight time when you haven't satisfied both parts of the equation? How can you have something that starts, but never ends?
Click to expand...

It seems the answer to that discussion hinges on what the FAA considers a "landing." I know what I consider a landing, and I know what common sense considers a landing, but I have been told that FSIMS says as long as you get within 50 feet of the runway it counts. While that last part is immaterial to this discussion, it shows that "landing" may not be so simple as "you hit the ground on the runway and didn't break the plane."

In a quick search, I didn't find an easy answer to what the FAA considers a landing. Granted, the FAA doesn't always define such things.
 
mojo6911 said:
Where? I didn't see it specifically addressed in the opinion letter Blackhawk posted.
Click to expand...
You are right. A taxi back to the gate without ever taking off is not even one of the scenarios in the earlier opinion the one Blackhawk quoted either. And, of course, without that specific scenario being mentioned, it's difficult to predict. But consider that what the FAA ultimately does is interpret the regulations and one of the goals of interpretation is consistency. So try this scenario:

Flight 101 with a planned 3 hour flight taxis to the dei-icing area. On the way to deice, a snow squall comes through the airport and causes a 45 minute suspension of all flight operations. Then the airline continues to the de-ice area, which is behind due to the temporary suspension. When the airline is finally ready to go, the captain's flight duty limitations will be exceeded if the flight is continued and the taxi-delay-deice period is counted.

We know from the Silverberg letter and its predecessors that if the flight continues, there will be a violation.

Are you ready to argue that if the flight is cancelled, the captain can simply be assigned to another flight without exceeding his duty time limitations?
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
You are right. A taxi back to the gate without ever taking off is not even one of the scenarios in the earlier opinion the one Blackhawk quoted either. And, of course, without that specific scenario being mentioned, it's difficult to predict. But consider that what the FAA ultimately does is interpret the regulations and one of the goals of interpretation is consistency. So try this scenario:

Flight 101 with a planned 3 hour flight taxis to the dei-icing area. On the way to deice, a snow squall comes through the airport and causes a 45 minute suspension of all flight operations. Then the airline continues to the de-ice area, which is behind due to the temporary suspension. When the airline is finally ready to go, the captain's flight duty limitations will be exceeded if the flight is continued and the taxi-delay-deice period is counted.

We know from the Silverberg letter and its predecessors that if the flight continues, there will be a violation.

Are you ready to argue that if the flight is cancelled, the captain can simply be assigned to another flight without exceeding his duty time limitations?
Click to expand...
First, I am not ready to argue anything, just trying to wrap my head around what seemingly is fairly cut and dry, in my own mind.

I am not familiar with 121 ops, but under your scenario, isn't that delay outside of the operator's control, and thus, allowed, if they have already taxied out of the gate for deice?

A flight crewmember is not considered to be scheduled for flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned are scheduled and normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the scheduled time.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to help me try to understand this better.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
You still haven't explained why you're so adamant to deny yourself flight time that the FAA says you're entitled to.
Click to expand...
I am not denying myself anything I do not earn.
My point is that flight must occur to log flight time.
Also, my point is training. Once a person is trained and proficient, it doesn't matter how he/she logs.
In training, I am speaking for the student.
40 hours of flight time should be,..well, ..you know, ..40 hours of actual flight time practice.
I have known a flight school at a busy airport where the typical 1.5 hobbs time was .5 taxi/ wait time, making 40 hours hobbs time like 25 hours actual flight time.
That's a rip-off to the potential student.
Logging .1 or .2 per 1.5 flight is acceptable.
But come on, taxing back after a maintenance or wx no/go and still logging a flight?
That is logbook falsification.
 
nosehair said:
But come on, taxing back after a maintenance or wx no/go and still logging a flight?
That is logbook falsification.
Click to expand...

Not according to the FAA. And no offense, but their opinion is the only one that matters.

P.S. Telling a student that he can't log something that the FAA says he can log is what's ripping him off. Most student pilots can barely afford to build time towards ratings as it is. Having their CFI rip them off by only allowing them to log 1.0 when they're being charged 1.5 from the Hobbs is downright criminal.
 
A lot of lessons in ADM could be learned during one of those wx cancel situations. Either way, if all of these flights (or non-flights depending upon which side of the fence you're on) add up to more than a trivial amount of hours in your logbook, you're doing it wrong!
 
SO, can the guys in these Piper Cubs that were forced into the air by a microburst last April log the time? They weren't moving under their own power with the intention of flight as far as I can tell, but I bet they landed. :stir:

 
nosehair said:
Charging 1.5 for a 1 hour flight is what is criminal.
Click to expand...
I agree.
Charging 1.5 for a 1.5 hour flight as defined by FAR 1 is not, however.
1. The airplane owner is paying for the taxi time and should be fairly compensated. Not doing so is perpetrating fraud against the airplane owner.
2. Any half descent CFI is going to charge the same for flight and ground anyway, so there is no cost saving for the student.
 
I don't know about you guys but I've got thousands of hours logged sitting in the fbo with a coffee, pen and writing down tail numbers that taxi past. Unlike mike I am desperate for time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top