logging SIC time
- Thread starter tommyk
- Start date
pscraig
Well-Known Member
My point, which I practice myself, is to not log anything that might be misunderstood or have to be explained or defended in an interview situation. I agree that's not ideal, but it's true. My interview at NWA saw a couple people sent home because of issues like this. Is it fair? Maybe, maybe not.
Sure, some SIC in a jet would be easy to explain (esp. in the above examples) but SIC in a 172, for example, is going to be a hard sell regardless of what the regs say. In an interview situation you often do not even have the opportunity to explain entries in a logbook-time is often short-and the limited time allotted would be better spent by us discussing your experiences and us asking questions than getting corrected by the interviewee on the finer parts of 61.51. And you are right-I don't think most pilot interviewers (and certainly not the HR people) know the nuances of part 61.51. Scary? Possibly, but that's the reality.
Sure, some SIC in a jet would be easy to explain (esp. in the above examples) but SIC in a 172, for example, is going to be a hard sell regardless of what the regs say. In an interview situation you often do not even have the opportunity to explain entries in a logbook-time is often short-and the limited time allotted would be better spent by us discussing your experiences and us asking questions than getting corrected by the interviewee on the finer parts of 61.51. And you are right-I don't think most pilot interviewers (and certainly not the HR people) know the nuances of part 61.51. Scary? Possibly, but that's the reality.
You would think so eh? If I log legitimate time in an airplane under part 135, in say a BE350 or a CJ2, both single pilot type certified, I shouldn't have to defend it in an interview. It shouldn't even be a question that gets asked. A 172, I can see, but a even a PA31 or C402 shouldn't even get asked. Use your head and think for a nano second why it was logged as SIC. It's not rocket science. It bothers me that the airlines are so suspect of people lying about things. Maybe this has trickled up to management, or trickled down. Who knows the direction, but it defiantly has one.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Problem is that there are way too many people out there to predict what any given interviewer might not "like" to keep official records in any way other than following the official rules.
"Sorry, I don't think solo student pilots should log PIC. Since you counted it in your PIC totals, get out of here!"
alright so logging it as SIC is not going to work out in my situation here but I believe the time I have spent in the right seat has been very very beneficial. From jet experience and systems, FMS programming, autopilot work, high altitudes, flying into airports like ORD, TEB, PHL, PIT it just seems like it will go to waste if I dont log this time some how. Would logging it has dual received work or is that just going to open up a whole nother can of worms? Obviously if the Captain is a MEI.
Thanks
Thanks
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
The can of worms is going back to something that was not treated as instruction at the time and morphing it into somehting that was. Also, if the amount of time was substantial, you could end up in one of those scenarios like the two pilots who gave each other "instruction" on every flight to build their PIC multi time. A simple incident led to a review of their logbooks and the revocation of all of their certificates and associated ratings for falsifying their logbooks.
I think someone said that the airlines would be interested in that time even if not fitting into an official FAA category. That makes sense - the flip side of not being interested in someone's "legal" SIC time in a 152 is being very interested in "real" but not officially logable SIC time in somehting more substantial.
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
Trained by (s) type (chief pilot) then flew with non (s) type. It was a small part 91 flight department. So training records are sort of hard to check up on. Not like my old 135 outfit. I also have about 600 hours of time that I can't really log. Only because the Cj2 did not have a functioning CVR. So just marinate on that for a second. There was a CVR but the CB was pulled if the CB was not pulled then I could log the time. Also our company op spec had the tail number as single pilot. The FAA is was out of date on this issue. I still learned a lot during this 600 hours. It isn't like I just sat there and played with an iPhone or something. I would have been bitch slapped pretty hardcore. I was an important part of a crew and I learned a lot.
Regardless of everyone and their opinion. Likely I will not apply at an airline. I do I have plenty of time to use if I did. I don't need to use SIC time in an aircraft that is certified to fly as a two crew OR single pilot. I have plenty of other SIC time to "use" in Citation 2's and 5's and plenty of single pilot time flying as captain of a single pilot twin turbine. So it isn't a big deal.
I would say that my time in the Cj1 Cj2 and Cj3 were some of the most important steps in becoming a good charter pilot. I learned from really experienced guys who cared about my development as a pilot. This was the most important part of the experience, the fact I wasn't just sitting there as an insurance requirement. I was an important part of a crew and there was good CRM etc. I have shown up at flight safety and it is nice to hear wow you fly much better than a guy who has XXXX hours. Then I'm rolling my eyes and thinking "if I told you about my SIC time you would tell me it was worthless." So it is all about value and what you want with your career. IMHO experience is what you make of it. Who cares what the FAA says. Just don't put yourself in a position where you can be labeled as a lair or a cheat. It's a small small world and there are plenty of haters in this business. They think they are the only ones who have paid their dues and they will try as hard as they can to squish you like a bug. So be careful and use multiple logbooks - you'll never know when your experience will count.
wrxpilot
New Member
I don't follow you, despite you "quoting yourself". The 525 series (that is what we're talking about here) is certified for single pilot operations under specific circumstances, or a crew of two pilots. That ABSOLUTELY does not mean that a pilot with a 525S (single pilot) rating cannot fly with a SIC that is legally logging the time. To say otherwise demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the FARs.
So, what does a SIC need to be able to log time in a CJ legally?
1)Captain has a 525 or 525S rating.
2)Captain with a current 61.58 check.
3)Co-pilot must meet 61.55 requirements.
4)Installed and operable CVR if the airplane has 6 or more passenger seats (91.609).
I have about 500 hours as an SIC in a CJ3 (just recently upgraded to PIC), and have been through several airline interviews and received offers/class dates from each one of them. My flight time has NEVER been questioned.
I'm just astounded at the dis-information in this thread, but I'm not surprised either considering how often the King Air SIC stuff shows up around here.
Maurus
The Great Gazoo
Yes there is a time you may log SIC and have a 525S captain. The only time that is possible is if the regulations you operate under require the SIC or the type certificate downgrades to a two crew aircraft as a result of losing the required equipment for the single pilot certification. If everything works on the aircraft, then it is a single pilot certificated aircraft and an SIC may not log SIC time with a 525S captain. Read the LOI posted earlier. They explain it better than I can.
