Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Specifically 135 in a single pilot aircraft. Count towards total time/cross country time/etc? Or just make a separate column for 135 flight checks given?
Logging IOE given
- Thread starter Roger Roger
- Start date
Dan208B
Well-Known Member
Aren't you technically PIC while conducting IOE? I would log it as a normal flight with you as PIC, maybe putting in notes that you were conducting IOE. Logbooks are your personal record so you can do whatever you wish, I just always try to remember that if someone was looking at it in an interview I should be able to explain it. In your case the IOE check airman is the PIC.
RRPower
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I'm 121 not 135, but even in 135 don't you have to designate who is PIC or "responsible" for the flight? It's not as simple as 91 and a guy having to do three bounces and that's it, you actually are required to be there for X amount of time. I would log it as you normally do and maybe put that it was IOE for your company.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
That was my thought.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
And here I thought there were no good unanswered logging questions anymore. I'm not aware of a good answer to this one. The three closest 61.51 "boxes" are
• 61.51(e)(3) which allows instruction given to be logged as PIC time, but the reg specifically says it's for a "certified flight instructor" not the more generic "authorized instructor."
• 61.51(e)(1)(iii), acting as PIC in a operation that the FAA requires have more than one pilot; and
• 61.51(e)(2), and ATP acting as PIC in a operation that the FAA requires the PIC to have an ATP.
But I don't know enough about your Part 135 IOE program so I'm not sure if any of those are really applicable to your situation. It's certainly possible your situation falls through one of the weird cracks in the logging rules, like the instrument rated pilot who acts as PIC but allows his non-instrument rated friend to be the sole manipulator under IFR (the PIC can't legitimately log FAA PIC time).
I kinda like @Dan208B 's answer, although I can't agree with the "Logbooks are your personal record so you can do whatever you wish" part.
• 61.51(e)(3) which allows instruction given to be logged as PIC time, but the reg specifically says it's for a "certified flight instructor" not the more generic "authorized instructor."
• 61.51(e)(1)(iii), acting as PIC in a operation that the FAA requires have more than one pilot; and
• 61.51(e)(2), and ATP acting as PIC in a operation that the FAA requires the PIC to have an ATP.
But I don't know enough about your Part 135 IOE program so I'm not sure if any of those are really applicable to your situation. It's certainly possible your situation falls through one of the weird cracks in the logging rules, like the instrument rated pilot who acts as PIC but allows his non-instrument rated friend to be the sole manipulator under IFR (the PIC can't legitimately log FAA PIC time).
I kinda like @Dan208B 's answer, although I can't agree with the "Logbooks are your personal record so you can do whatever you wish" part.
Dan208B
Well-Known Member
@MidlifeFlyer I don't mean to sound too relaxed with it. There are absolutely regulations about "loggability" such as some of the ones you listed. However if you want to add or remove columns or whatever you want it doesn't really matter since it is your own record. But you do need to be able to show things like currency and have a legal, accurate record if you are job seeking, applying for an additional rating, or have some sort of incident that might involve looking into your logs. I have to say that recently I've come across more than one person that expressed unhappiness with their lack of understanding of logbooks and entries and that they were never taught anything about it other than what their instructor wrote in the logs. This is unacceptable, it's an instructor's responsibility to clearly explain it.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
My thought is it has to count at least as total time, as I am a required crewmember during IOE. I have been logging it as dual given, which I'm fairly certain is NOT directly applicable, but works as a placeholder.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
I've only given OE in 121, so we were always a two pilot airplane. I'm only chiming in for perspective, as I would have figured more 135 guys would have weighed in.
If your OE is like 121, you, as the instructor, are signing for the aircraft. As far as I'm concerned, that meets the definition of PIC. Unless the FAR changed, there was a definition that the designated PIC for the flight was the PIC.
As much as the technocrats would like to argue grey areas and distill each definition down, when scrutinizing a logbook for an interview or a rating and the applicant was never a PIC on the aircraft and logged as "sole-manipulator" PIC time in a two-pilot AC, it would strongly smell of bovine fecal material. /rant
Anyway, when I gave OE and other related duties, I kept a "Line check airman" column in my logbook as record of hours as a check airman. When I would give a Line check from the jumpseat, I didn't record TT, just hours as a check airman. I also kept a copy of my FAA letter as correlation to the logged times.
As OE is "operating experience", and not true instruction, I kept that separate because the assumption of dual given is stalls and step turns in bug smashers.
Further, as a SIM instructor, I don't log anything related to that.
Have you checked what the 8900 days in regards to your OE time?
If your OE is like 121, you, as the instructor, are signing for the aircraft. As far as I'm concerned, that meets the definition of PIC. Unless the FAR changed, there was a definition that the designated PIC for the flight was the PIC.
As much as the technocrats would like to argue grey areas and distill each definition down, when scrutinizing a logbook for an interview or a rating and the applicant was never a PIC on the aircraft and logged as "sole-manipulator" PIC time in a two-pilot AC, it would strongly smell of bovine fecal material. /rant
Anyway, when I gave OE and other related duties, I kept a "Line check airman" column in my logbook as record of hours as a check airman. When I would give a Line check from the jumpseat, I didn't record TT, just hours as a check airman. I also kept a copy of my FAA letter as correlation to the logged times.
As OE is "operating experience", and not true instruction, I kept that separate because the assumption of dual given is stalls and step turns in bug smashers.
Further, as a SIM instructor, I don't log anything related to that.
Have you checked what the 8900 days in regards to your OE time?
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
It hasn't changed at all. The problem is that from an FAR standpoint, just as there are situations where one who is not acting as PIC is entitled to log PIC time, there are situations in which one who is acting as PIC can't log it as such.
What an airline is looking for or interested in counting as experience is a separate question.
Last edited:
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with any of what you say in this post. I have a knee-jerk response to the simple statement that "it's your logbook" because it's often interpreted by people as meaning there are no consequences to mis-logging something. It's kind og like saying you can put anything you want in "your" business accounting records. The IRS might have something to say about listing your family vacation as a business expense because you called into the office twice.
There's nothing wrong with logging the time spent in seat 22E as a passenger so long as it's identified in some way as "not" counting. That's silly of course, but the principal is the same as when logging something as PIC "for the airlines" that is no logable for the FAA as such.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
One would think. But that's why it's had to come up with a solid answer without knowing more about the operation. If the check pilot is indeed a required crewmember during an IOE, you would have flight time of some sort, either PIC or SIC. But I think it's been relatively clear for a while that there must be some 61.51 box to fit into in order to log any flight time at all.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
How can one be "sole manipulator" in an aircraft requiring two pilots?
Patrick
Well-Known Member
This (or at least what I think the OP intended it to refer to) refers to the guy who is PIC typed in an airplane, but is an SIC at a 121/ 135 company, and logs the legs he's flown as PIC.
Part 91 is a whole different story, and even if you work for a 135 company, if you want to log a 91 leg as PIC if it's a leg you flew, you can certainly do that as far as the FAA is concerned, but when applying to the next air carrier job, it might be a little suspect if you'v only flown said aircraft under 135, while only being an SIC, yet you have PIC in your logbook.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Wow, you mean when you fly a 2 pilot operation, both of you have your hands on the flight controls (or have primary autopilot duties) all the time? Interesting. Even when I teach I don't do that. Seems to be a silly duplication of effort when there are other flight management tasks that CRM would suggest be divided between the pilots.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
I love purely academic arguments!
If we're going down that rabbit hole, I want to make sure every time we switch controls for a briefing, or physiological break, or any other reason, you are, in fact, exercising your legal right to log PIC.
"So, on 23 MAY 14, I see you logged .2 PIC on a flight with a 2.5 hour duration."
"Yup! The Captain took a piss! I'm at 13.2 PIC in type!"
Even when I'm designated "PIC" when the boss is napping, I've yet to log the first hour of PIC.
Maybe I'm out of touch, or a touch obtuse.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Also, as you love your tittles...
It says "sole manipulator of the controls", not flight controls as you put in your post.
There are lots of controls a non-flying pilot manipulates on a muilti-pilot airplane. One pilot typically controls flight path with the yoke, rudder pedals and throttles, or the autopilot. The other typically moves the gear control, flap control, pack control, apu control.
Autothrust Blue
”…trusting ze process…”
The legality versus reality choo-choo train is frequently delayed at Absurdville Station.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
You are correct. My bad.
Funny. We talk about how silly some rules are. Then you have one that actually works. The PIC of a multi-pilot operation logs PIC based on acting as PIC, while the SIC logs SIC based on acting as SIC (with the option of logging PIC if he is indeed the sole manipulator).
Landing currency, OTOH, does require sole manipulation of the "flight" controls (where my mind probably got it from).
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Here is what 135.244 has to say about it, in case you hadn't looked it up yet.
(a) No certificate holder may use any person, nor may any person serve, as a pilot in command of an aircraft operated in a commuter operation, as defined in part 119 of this chapter, unless that person has completed, prior to designation as pilot in command, on that make and basic model aircraft and in that crewmember position, the following operating experience in each make and basic model of aircraft to be flown:
(1) Aircraft, single engine—10 hours.
(2) Aircraft multiengine, reciprocating engine-powered—15 hours.
(3) Aircraft multiengine, turbine engine-powered—20 hours.
(4) Airplane, turbojet-powered—25 hours.
(b) In acquiring the operating experience, each person must comply with the following:
(1) The operating experience must be acquired after satisfactory completion of the appropriate ground and flight training for the aircraft and crewmember position. Approved provisions for the operating experience must be included in the certificate holder’s training program.
(2) The experience must be acquired in flight during commuter passenger-carrying operations under this part. However, in the case of an aircraft not previously used by the certificate holder in operations under this part, operating experience acquired in the aircraft during proving flights or ferry flights may be used to meet this requirement.
(3) Each person must acquire the operating experience while performing the duties of a pilot in command under the supervision of a qualified check pilot.
(4) The hours of operating experience may be reduced to not less than 50 percent of the hours required by this section by the substitution of one additional takeoff and landing for each hour of flight.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I read it. That's the problem. It doesn't completely solve the FAA logging issue for me.
The IOE needs to be acquired during a commuter flight (with an exception based on whether the aircraft is new to the operation). The "newbie" can't be PIC but is being supervised while "performing the duties" of PIC. So another pilot must be the acting PIC. Unless there's another PIC on board and the check pilot (you) is just evaluating, that means you are the "real" PIC.
But whether that's enough to authorize the check pilot to log PIC is where I get stuck. If the IOE/commuter flight is under IFR, 135.101 makes it into a 2-pilot-required operation, so I don't think it's a problem. But if not.
I can see reasons in the logging regs and they way they've been interpreted to support both a "yes" or a "no" answer. Consider the earlier example of the 172 PIC under IFR who cannot log PIC, even in actual, when the VFR-only pilot is flying the airplane. He can if the flying pilot tosses on a hood!
Personally, I think the answer should be "yes" but I don't make the rules. I'm kind of surprised the question hasn't come up before but maybe that's because at the point where it becomes an issue, logging issues are secondary. I'd suppose logging it for its career experience value would be more important, which is why I liked Dan's earlier post.