Ok check this out...I I graduated from from my 141 school with my CFI. I was also lucky enough to land an internship with a buisness that the school was able to hookup. Now there operation consists of King Airs(C90B), and Aero Commander, and a Citation. Now the internship pretty much has me doing office work along with being a back up Co-pilot. As we all know, King Air C90's are a single pilot airplane, but with there operation, they require a SIC, in all of there airplanes. they have designated Captains as well as hired Co-pilots. Now I had a discussion with a friend of mine. He told me that since I am mutli rated, anytime I am flying the airplanes as in hands on the controls, Commander or King Air, I need to be logging PIC even though I am not. The guy in the left seat is the PIC. What I do log is SIC since their operation requires that there be present on any flight a SIC. I take care of the duties that are required by the job title along with flying when the PIC allows me to. I log the time as Mutli, SIC and Turbine. Now I am wrong for how I am logging it, or should I be loggin PIC when I physically control it? Personally, I do not want to log PIC, for one reason. I graduated from flight school less then a month ago. How am i going to start loggin PIC in a King Air when THE PIC is sitting right next to me. I know the argument, you are rated in it, blah blah blah, but how am I going to justify 20 hours of PIC in a King Air? To me to log PIC time like that means that I am completely familiar with all systems and everything associated with the airplane which I am still learning. I mean I can take over if the PIC should somehow be rendered incapable to fly the airplane, but I will only if HE lets me fly or he can't. I would like you all's opinion on the matter though and feel free to speak freely...
Ok, I would really like everyone who can answer this question to reply...
- Thread starter WEAPON
- Start date
JDMcFly
New Member
Just because you are at the controls of the A/C doesn't mean you are PIC (the best example would be flight training!).
The PIC has responsibility and final say in the matters, as well as making the judgement decisions. If he's letting you take the bird for a whirl at the controls, he is still the pilot in command. I don't know the rules for logging SIC time in planes like that, so I can't say much more than that.
If you are only taking controls when the other pilot says it's okay to do, he is PIC and I don't think you can log PIC time.
The PIC has responsibility and final say in the matters, as well as making the judgement decisions. If he's letting you take the bird for a whirl at the controls, he is still the pilot in command. I don't know the rules for logging SIC time in planes like that, so I can't say much more than that.
If you are only taking controls when the other pilot says it's okay to do, he is PIC and I don't think you can log PIC time.
chrisdahut1
Well-Known Member
As far as I'm aware, there are only two legal ways that two pilots can both log PIC time: 1) One pilot is a CFI and signs the other off for dual time (assuming you are already rated in the aircraft) or 2) One pilot sits under the hood while the other acts as safety pilot. Neither case seems to apply to you.
As for logging SIC time, what kind of operation is it? I'm assuming 135 (or 121) since you said "since their operation requires that there be present on any flight a SIC". In that case, have you taken and passed an SIC checkride with an in house examiner or FAA inspector? If not, not only are you logging time improperly, but the whole flight operation may be illegal (non qualified pilot taking the right seat).
As for logging SIC time, what kind of operation is it? I'm assuming 135 (or 121) since you said "since their operation requires that there be present on any flight a SIC". In that case, have you taken and passed an SIC checkride with an in house examiner or FAA inspector? If not, not only are you logging time improperly, but the whole flight operation may be illegal (non qualified pilot taking the right seat).
EatSleepFly
Well-Known Member
Chrisdahut speaks the truth as far as I know. One thing I might add is that if you do not have a high altitude signoff, logging PIC time in anything pressurized is a no-no. (You'd also need a high performance signoff, but I'm assuming you probably have that).
davetheflyer
New Member
PIC means that you are the Pilot in Command. To log PIC in a turbine a/c, you also have to have a type rating. If you are the SIC, then you can log it as SIC since the company's operating manual requires it.
If you have a type rating in the airplane, as in the case of two captains flying together, then you can log the time that you are the pilot flying as PIC. I have heard that some airlines only count the PIC time that you log from the left seat, however. (Although I don't know how they would distinguish it.)
If you have a type rating in the airplane, as in the case of two captains flying together, then you can log the time that you are the pilot flying as PIC. I have heard that some airlines only count the PIC time that you log from the left seat, however. (Although I don't know how they would distinguish it.)
The operation I am with is Part 91...I will say this though. I am logging the time a SIC and all, but one of there co-pilots who performs the same duties as I do only he is an employee and I am an intern, he was hired by a regional logging the time that way as well...So who is really right?
Dont quote me, but i am under the impression that in order for two pilots to log pic time (other than the instructor/dual given,received scenario) the a/c must require more than one pilot under its type certificate or the regs under which the flight is conducted. To log sic time the a/c must(other than the safety pilot scenario) also require more than one crewmember under its type, or under the regs under which the flight is conducted. In either case it seems like you need to receive a checkout from a company airman or an faa guy. Also be sure you have the hi-alt endorsement. I would refer to FAR61.51 (e) & (f). If your an AOPA member call them up and ask one of them.
averyrm
Well-Known Member
You can't log SIC. (The plane doesn't need an SIC, INSURANCE needs an SIC - only if it's part 135 and the Op. Specs require an SIC can you log the time as SIC in an aircraft that doesn't need one.)
You can techincally log PIC, if you both agree that you're the PIC. (You're rated for the plane and since it's a 90 it doesn't require a type rating because the GTOW is under 12.5k)
I'd be weary about logging PIC if you don't know the aircraft inside and out - if you interview for another company in the future, be prepared to be asked about the systems.
You can techincally log PIC, if you both agree that you're the PIC. (You're rated for the plane and since it's a 90 it doesn't require a type rating because the GTOW is under 12.5k)
I'd be weary about logging PIC if you don't know the aircraft inside and out - if you interview for another company in the future, be prepared to be asked about the systems.
averyrm
Well-Known Member
It has turboprops, not turbojets.
§61.31 Type rating requirements, additional training, and authorization requirements.
(a) Type ratings required. A person who acts as a pilot in command of any of the following aircraft must hold a type rating for that aircraft:
(1) Large aircraft (except lighter-than-air).
(2) Turbojet-powered airplanes.
(3) Other aircraft specified by the Administrator through aircraft type certificate procedures.
**Emphasis mine
§61.31 Type rating requirements, additional training, and authorization requirements.
(a) Type ratings required. A person who acts as a pilot in command of any of the following aircraft must hold a type rating for that aircraft:
(1) Large aircraft (except lighter-than-air).
(2) Turbojet-powered airplanes.
(3) Other aircraft specified by the Administrator through aircraft type certificate procedures.
**Emphasis mine
CaliforniaSurfer
Well-Known Member
C90 does NOT need a type
The only time that you can log SIC is if the airplane is type certificated for more than one pilot, or more than one pilot is required under the regulations. The King Air C90 is single pilot, and if the Ops Specs don't require an SIC, then you cannot legally log SIC. Since it's a Part 91 operation, it's probably the insurance company which requires two pilots, not the FAA. But because it is Part 91 , and you have the appropriate category and class ratings you can legally log PIC when you are the sole manipulator of the controls. This gets into the whole logging PIC versus acting as PIC argument. The captain will always be acting as PIC, as defined in FAR Part 1. Logging of PIC is covered under Part 61.51. It says that if you are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you are rated you can log PIC. You do not even need your high performance or high altitude endorsements to log PIC. You only need those if you are acting as PIC. The FARs say that you need the appropriate category and class rating to log PIC, and it says nothing about endorsements in regards to logging PIC. Just be sure that you are able to explain how you logged this time if they ever question it during an interview, but it is perfectly legal. Hope this helps.
ananoman
New Member
If the other pilot is a CFI you can log the flight as dual received and PIC, assuming you have your high altitude and high performance signoffs. If you don't and the other pilot is a CFI, he can give you these too. If you do this, you shoulden't have 1000 hours of dual in your logbook as it looks cheesy. You could also fly under the hood and get some instrument time. After a number of hours you should feel more confident in the aircraft.
Either way, since the aircraft does not require a type rating and is being operated under Part 91, it is legitimate for you to log PIC if you are actually manipulating the controls, are current, and have the required signoffs. However, you shouldn't be logging the entire flight as PIC unless you are the one flying the entire time.
As others have said, you should be reading the manuals for the aircraft and learning the systems, limitations and emergency procedures as these are all legitimate questions in interviews. It is just smart to know what everything is and how it works anyway.
Either way, since the aircraft does not require a type rating and is being operated under Part 91, it is legitimate for you to log PIC if you are actually manipulating the controls, are current, and have the required signoffs. However, you shouldn't be logging the entire flight as PIC unless you are the one flying the entire time.
As others have said, you should be reading the manuals for the aircraft and learning the systems, limitations and emergency procedures as these are all legitimate questions in interviews. It is just smart to know what everything is and how it works anyway.
First of all, you CAN log PIC time for that time which you are the sole manipulator of the controls(61.51e). However, you must have your high altitude endorsement to log PIC time in any pressurized aircraft(61.31g). Furthermore, you may NOT log SIC time unless that aircraft is type certificated for more than one pilot(61.51f). I know the C90 is not type rated for two pilots, not sure about the others. If the plane is, you must then be qualified in accordance with 61.55 in order to log SIC time.
A300Capt
Freight Dawg
WEAPON,
Let me just add this. I'm not as up to speed as some others here when it comes to low time pilots logging PIC time in high performance aircraft. In my world things are much more black and white so I won't get into the FAR's on the legalities.
I can tell you that when you interview for an airline or corporate job in the future, if that's your goal, the interviewer won't be up to speed on the minute "In's and out's" of logging PIC time on the lower scale either. However, when he/she sees "PIC" time for turbine or jet equipment in your logbook their impression is that you signed for and were responsible for that aircraft. They also assume you have been through the specific ground/flight training for that aircraft and you are solely responsible for the safe outcome of the flight and it's passengers.
If they start asking questions about your background and determine that you were logging PIC in a turbine aircraft in which you really had no formal training and really weren't required to be there but just "warming" the right seat, you'll have a lot of explaining to do. They're not going to buy the argument that you briefly had your hands on the controls from the right seat and therefore were technically "PIC" for a brief period of time. You'll be quickly shuffled out the door and hopefully that potential employer doesn't call the local FAA. That's the real world of logging time.
Regardless of the FAR's, common sense dictates that if you're gonna log PIC in turbine equipment, you better be the PIC of the entire flight. You can split hairs with the FAR's over legality but you will be called to do a rug dance someday and the potential employer may have a different interpretation on what is and isn't PIC time.
Let me just add this. I'm not as up to speed as some others here when it comes to low time pilots logging PIC time in high performance aircraft. In my world things are much more black and white so I won't get into the FAR's on the legalities.
I can tell you that when you interview for an airline or corporate job in the future, if that's your goal, the interviewer won't be up to speed on the minute "In's and out's" of logging PIC time on the lower scale either. However, when he/she sees "PIC" time for turbine or jet equipment in your logbook their impression is that you signed for and were responsible for that aircraft. They also assume you have been through the specific ground/flight training for that aircraft and you are solely responsible for the safe outcome of the flight and it's passengers.
If they start asking questions about your background and determine that you were logging PIC in a turbine aircraft in which you really had no formal training and really weren't required to be there but just "warming" the right seat, you'll have a lot of explaining to do. They're not going to buy the argument that you briefly had your hands on the controls from the right seat and therefore were technically "PIC" for a brief period of time. You'll be quickly shuffled out the door and hopefully that potential employer doesn't call the local FAA. That's the real world of logging time.
Regardless of the FAR's, common sense dictates that if you're gonna log PIC in turbine equipment, you better be the PIC of the entire flight. You can split hairs with the FAR's over legality but you will be called to do a rug dance someday and the potential employer may have a different interpretation on what is and isn't PIC time.
I have to respectfully disagree with A300Capt on this one. Only because I have personal experience with it.
First let me say there is a difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC. The FARs spell it out, and as long as you remember the difference, it is pretty clear. I don't have the regs in front of me, but I believe that you may not ACT as PIC of an aircraft requiring a high altitude endorsement with out one, but you may LOG it as long as you are sole manipulator of the controls and are rated in the category and class.
My personal experience with this comes from flying in the right seat of a PC-12, which is a single pilot aircraft. I only have logged that time which I was sole manipulator of the controls. I ended up loggin about 120 hours in the airplane. Now I went with this time in the logbook to two airline interviews. Of course I was asked about the time. I explained exactly how it worked and why I was logging it the way I did. I pointed out the FARs and the difference between acting as PIC and logging of PIC. To make a long story short, I was not "quickly shuffled out the door", and nobody called the FAA (because it was legally logged time). I was offered both jobs and the interviewers were both commmented on how proficient I was with the understanding of the applicable FARs.
For the record, there were several right seat pilots from this operator who have gone on to airline jobs as well, and none of them had any trouble with this either.
I think most regional airlines view time like this as a step up. Even if you were a seat warmer, just by being there you have been exposed to higher performance systems and operating in a more advanced environment. If you are of reasonable intelligence and had any ammount of time, you had to have learned something. And what you picked up will only help you in transitioning to a bigger aircraft. All of that is a plus to a regional airline (at least the two I interviewed with) which is about to spend a lot of money transitioning you to a higher performance aircraft and operating in a more advanced environment.
Anyway, that is my experience with it.
First let me say there is a difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC. The FARs spell it out, and as long as you remember the difference, it is pretty clear. I don't have the regs in front of me, but I believe that you may not ACT as PIC of an aircraft requiring a high altitude endorsement with out one, but you may LOG it as long as you are sole manipulator of the controls and are rated in the category and class.
My personal experience with this comes from flying in the right seat of a PC-12, which is a single pilot aircraft. I only have logged that time which I was sole manipulator of the controls. I ended up loggin about 120 hours in the airplane. Now I went with this time in the logbook to two airline interviews. Of course I was asked about the time. I explained exactly how it worked and why I was logging it the way I did. I pointed out the FARs and the difference between acting as PIC and logging of PIC. To make a long story short, I was not "quickly shuffled out the door", and nobody called the FAA (because it was legally logged time). I was offered both jobs and the interviewers were both commmented on how proficient I was with the understanding of the applicable FARs.
For the record, there were several right seat pilots from this operator who have gone on to airline jobs as well, and none of them had any trouble with this either.
I think most regional airlines view time like this as a step up. Even if you were a seat warmer, just by being there you have been exposed to higher performance systems and operating in a more advanced environment. If you are of reasonable intelligence and had any ammount of time, you had to have learned something. And what you picked up will only help you in transitioning to a bigger aircraft. All of that is a plus to a regional airline (at least the two I interviewed with) which is about to spend a lot of money transitioning you to a higher performance aircraft and operating in a more advanced environment.
Anyway, that is my experience with it.
A300Capt
Freight Dawg
[ QUOTE ]
First let me say there is a difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC. The FARs spell it out, and as long as you remember the difference, it is pretty clear
[/ QUOTE ]
Androol,
Nothing wrong with a little disagreement. Like I said, I'm not up to speed on the different nuances in logging PIC time since mine has been pretty cut and dry for some 20 years now.
I guess I'm just a little too much "old school" where there shouldn't be a difference between "logging" and "acting" of PIC time. The KISS principle tells me you're either the PIC and logging it as such or you're not and shouldn't.
The FAR's can be a little vague with regard to meaning and intent somtimes. However, I believe most airlines consider PIC time as that time where you are legally responsible for the aircraft and not just manipulating the controls under the supervision of the person who did sign for it.
Anywho, let me just say that if I were on an interview board, I'm not BTW, and came across someone logging turbine PIC time the way WEAPON described, it wouldn't sit very well with me and the interview would probably be over. Legal or not it smells fishy...that's all. If someone is comfortable logging time as described and confident in his ability explaining it in an interview, then have at it.
First let me say there is a difference between logging PIC and acting as PIC. The FARs spell it out, and as long as you remember the difference, it is pretty clear
[/ QUOTE ]
Androol,
Nothing wrong with a little disagreement. Like I said, I'm not up to speed on the different nuances in logging PIC time since mine has been pretty cut and dry for some 20 years now.
I guess I'm just a little too much "old school" where there shouldn't be a difference between "logging" and "acting" of PIC time. The KISS principle tells me you're either the PIC and logging it as such or you're not and shouldn't.
The FAR's can be a little vague with regard to meaning and intent somtimes. However, I believe most airlines consider PIC time as that time where you are legally responsible for the aircraft and not just manipulating the controls under the supervision of the person who did sign for it.
Anywho, let me just say that if I were on an interview board, I'm not BTW, and came across someone logging turbine PIC time the way WEAPON described, it wouldn't sit very well with me and the interview would probably be over. Legal or not it smells fishy...that's all. If someone is comfortable logging time as described and confident in his ability explaining it in an interview, then have at it.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just making a blanket, targetless statement here:
The thing to remember that most people with experience in interviewing pilots are going to be on the look-out for "Parker Pen" time and questionable "grey area" experience. They probably see it on a daily basis during interview cycles. It probably won't score you too many points if he asks how you were able to land a position flying a King Air as PIC with 500 hours and who on earth insured you with only a few hours in type.
Now if someone is giving you an opportunity to fly with them, jump on the opportunity by all means. However, be very careful on how you log the flight time because it can come back and bite you in the buttocks.
One of my good friends said it like this, "...companies only want to see PIC time in which you had to 'sign' for the aircraft and were truly legally and solely responsible for the safe operation of it..." I don't know if he's right or not, but I thought it was good advice.
The thing to remember that most people with experience in interviewing pilots are going to be on the look-out for "Parker Pen" time and questionable "grey area" experience. They probably see it on a daily basis during interview cycles. It probably won't score you too many points if he asks how you were able to land a position flying a King Air as PIC with 500 hours and who on earth insured you with only a few hours in type.
Now if someone is giving you an opportunity to fly with them, jump on the opportunity by all means. However, be very careful on how you log the flight time because it can come back and bite you in the buttocks.
One of my good friends said it like this, "...companies only want to see PIC time in which you had to 'sign' for the aircraft and were truly legally and solely responsible for the safe operation of it..." I don't know if he's right or not, but I thought it was good advice.