Safety pilot in IMC

read his post again, he never said Actual (in the clouds) IFR and IMC are getting intertwined I believe.:


Even if its not actual, im pretty sure you cant fly below vfr minimums (excluding SVFR, and class G), without being on an IFR flight plan, and you cant be on an IFR flight plan without an IR.



Well, his post need to be more clear, first he said he logged PIC in IMC, then he goes on to make it sound like he was in VMC. Cant be in IMC and VMC at the same time.

I understand the whole thing about not having to be in the clouds for it to be considered IMC, but that doesnt change the definition of IMC.

The very first sentence- "I've logged PIC in IMC without an IR" That's illegal.

The second part is fine, yes, you can maneuver solely by instruments in VMC and not bust regs, but thats not what he said he did. He said he was IMC. And just because its legal doesn't mean its a good idea. If I was under VFR by myself, staring at the instruments, whos watching for traffic?
 
Even if its not actual, im pretty sure you cant fly below vfr minimums (excluding SVFR, and class G), without being on an IFR flight plan, and you cant be on an IFR flight plan without an IR.



Well, his post need to be more clear, first he said he logged PIC in IMC, then he goes on to make it sound like he was in VMC. Cant be in IMC and VMC at the same time.

I understand the whole thing about not having to be in the clouds for it to be considered IMC, but that doesnt change the definition of IMC.

The very first sentence- "I've logged PIC in IMC without an IR" That's illegal.

The second part is fine, yes, you can maneuver solely by instruments in VMC and not bust regs, but thats not what he said he did. He said he was IMC. And just because its legal doesn't mean its a good idea. If I was under VFR by myself, staring at the instruments, whos watching for traffic?

IFR - Instrument Flight Rules
VFR - Visual Flight Rules

IMC - Instrument Meteorological Conditions
VMC - Visual Meteorological Conditions

You are twisting terms.


" And just because its legal doesn't mean its a good idea. "

You can be flying under Visual Flight Rules in Instrument Meteorological Conditions = over water, desert, no horizon.....at night.
 
You can be flying under Visual Flight Rules in Instrument Meteorological Conditions = over water, desert, no horizon.....at night.
I think this time you messed up a bit on the definitions. "IMC" and "VMC" both refer to "Meteorological conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling..." that either do or do not meet the legal minimums for flight under VFR. "IMC" is less than 3 miles, clear of clouds in class B, but you are in "IMC" when 900' below the clouds in otherwise CAVU conditions if you are cruising along above 10,000 msl.

I have a hunch beagle is talking about flight in "actual" instrument conditions, which the FAA uses to mean conditions that require you to use the instruments to keep the right side up. The weather might be VMC; but outside conditions make the use of the instruments necessary.

Like in this famous FAA Legal opinion:

==============================
November 7, 1984
Mr. Joseph P. Carr

Dear Mr. Carr:
This is in response to your letter asking questions about instrument flight time.
First, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.51(c)(4) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) regarding the logging of instrument flight time. You ask whether, for instance, a flight over the ocean on a moonless night without a discernible horizon could be logged as actual instrument flight time.

[unrelated portion snipped]

As you know, Section 61.51(c)(4) provides rules for the logging of instrument flight time which may be used to meet the requirements of a certificate or rating, or to meet the recent flight experience requirements of Part 61. That section provides in part, that a pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he or she operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual (instrument meteorological conditions (imc)) or simulated instrument flight conditions. "Simulated" instrument conditions occur when the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally restricted, such as by a hood or goggles. "Actual" instrument flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these conditions involve adverse weather conditions.

To answer your first question, actual instrument conditions may occur in the case you described a moonless night over the ocean with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. The determination as to whether flight by reference to instruments is necessary is somewhat subjective and based in part on the sound judgment of the pilot. Note that, under Section 61.51(b)(3), the pilot must log the conditions of the flight. The log should include the reasons for determining that the flight was under actual instrument conditions in case the pilot later would be called on to prove that the actual instrument flight time logged was legitimate.

[unrelated portion snipped]

Sincerely,
/s/
John H. Cassady
Assistant Chief counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
==============================
 
The very first sentence- "I've logged PIC in IMC without an IR" That's illegal.
Might be the confusion between "actual" and "IMC" (which is why I tend to be a bit picky about those terms - hard to communicate when everyone is using their own personal definitions instead of the FAA's)

Or, could be that someone else was acting as PIC on those flights. He said, "I've logged PIC in IMC without an IR", not "I've acted as PIC in IMC without an IR." The second would be illegal in controlled airspace; the first would not if someone else were acting as PIC.
 
A private pilot working on their instrument rating needs a safety pilot. The safety pilot is a current instrument rated private pilot. Can they go IMC and both log PIC?


No. The guy without the IR cannot log any PIC time if he is not instrument rated and the flight is conducted in IMC.
 
You guys are all making waaaaay to much out of all this.

Its pretty damn simple. If you are not instrument rated and are in IMC conditions, you CANNOT be PIC. It doesnt matter how long your hands were on the controls.

Even if the safety guy was a CFII, the non instrument rated Private pilot couldnt log PIC time if he/she was in the clouds because he/she is not instrument rated yet.

Its a different story now if it is just Simulated instrument conditions.( hood). Now, both guys can log the PIC time while the one guy has the hood on.

Got it now??????
 
You guys are all making waaaaay to much out of all this.

Its pretty damn simple. If you are not instrument rated and are in IMC conditions, you CANNOT be PIC. It doesnt matter how long your hands were on the controls.

Even if the safety guy was a CFII, the non instrument rated Private pilot couldnt log PIC time if he/she was in the clouds because he/she is not instrument rated yet.

Its a different story now if it is just Simulated instrument conditions.( hood). Now, both guys can log the PIC time while the one guy has the hood on.

Got it now??????

But he can log PIC even if he isn't acting PIC.

Here's some info that might help:
http://www.midlifeflight.com/faq/faq.php?s=1
 
You guys are all making waaaaay to much out of all this.

Its pretty damn simple. If you are not instrument rated and are in IMC conditions, you cannot BE PIC. It doesnt matter how long your hands were on the controls.
Correct. But I changed the emphasis because as we'll see below, it makes a difference.

Even if the safety guy was a CFII, the non instrument rated Private pilot couldnt log PIC time if he/she was in the clouds because he/she is not instrument rated yet.
This is incorrect. And the reason its in correct has to do with the word I bolded in the first quote. There is a difference between being PIC and logging PIC. FAR 61.51(e) tells us who may log PIC time and there is nothing in there which would prevent a non-IR private pilot from logging PIC in the scenerio above. The private pilot could and should log it and it is perfectly legal to do so.
 
Or, could be that someone else was acting as PIC on those flights. He said, "I've logged PIC in IMC without an IR", not "I've acted as PIC in IMC without an IR." The second would be illegal in controlled airspace; the first would not if someone else were acting as PIC.

However, the acting PIC can not log PIC, only the pilot flying can, because the acting PIC, while required to be on a IFR clearance, is not required by the regs, unless the pilot flying is under the hood, even if in IMC conditions. Correct?

I see how that makes sense regulation wise, but in practice, I think both should be able to log it. After all, regardless of whos hands are on the controls, it is still the acting PIC who will take the hit if any regs are broken.
 
Correct. But I changed the emphasis because as we'll see below, it makes a difference.

This is incorrect. And the reason its in correct has to do with the word I bolded in the first quote. There is a difference between being PIC and logging PIC. FAR 61.51(e) tells us who may log PIC time and there is nothing in there which would prevent a non-IR private pilot from logging PIC in the scenerio above. The private pilot could and should log it and it is perfectly legal to do so.

There isnt?????

Im sorry but you are wrong.. 61.51(e)(i) ....you have to have instrument
privileges on your pilot certificate( i.e. instrument rating) in order to LOG PIC in IMC.
As I said in an earlier post, if the flight is conducted in VISUAL conditions
then both people can log IC time.

This argument that is being forwarded here that a non-instrument rated pilot can log PIC time in Instrument weather is ridiculous. its like saying that if I am a non multi-engine rated pilot "manipulating the controls" of
a multi-engine airplane, I can log PIC time because I was the sole manipulator of the controls. Come on!!

A rating is a rating.. whether it is instrument or multi-engine or whatever.
You need to have that rating on your certificate in order to log PIC time in that aircraft or under the required conditions.
 
There isnt?????

Im sorry but you are wrong.. 61.51(e)(i) ....you have to have instrument
privileges on your pilot certificate( i.e. instrument rating) in order to LOG PIC in IMC.
Ho hum. This has been beaten to death many times before, but lets do it one more time.

Let's look at exactly what 61.51(e)(i) says shall we?
e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person—
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;
It says is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges;

Note that it does not say 'and has privileges'. No no, it clearly says 'or has privileges'.

That means if I'm flying a single engine land airplane, and I am sole manipulator of the controls, and I hold pilot certificate which says ASEL on it, then I can stop reading right there and log PIC no matter what comes after the word 'or'. If you don't believe me, call your friendly local regional counsel office and ask them. Don't call the FSDO. Half the time they don't what it means either and what they tell you won't hold up against an enforcement action so it's not the final word anyway. Call the regional counsel and talk to them. What they say goes. When you ask them, they are likely to tell you that the 'or has privileges' line was added when the sport pilot cert came online because sport pilots are not issued certificate with a category/class on them. Know what that means? It means that it ain't got nutn' to do with whether or not a pilot has an instrument rating.


This argument that is being forwarded here that a non-instrument rated pilot can log PIC time in Instrument weather is ridiculous. its like saying that if I am a non multi-engine rated pilot "manipulating the controls" of
a multi-engine airplane, I can log PIC time because I was the sole manipulator of the controls. Come on!!
No, you're wrong again. This is not apples to apples. Multi-engine is a category and class of airplane. You need a multi engine on your cert to log PIC. The instrument rating is not a category and class of airplane and therefore has no bearing on logging PIC as sole manipulator as defined by 61.51(e)(i).

A rating is a rating.. whether it is instrument or multi-engine or whatever.
You need to have that rating on your certificate in order to log PIC time in that aircraft or under the required conditions.
I'm not kidding here, if you're a CFI, call your regional counsel office and go over this with them until you understand it. I cannot count the number of CFI's that I've met who still don't understand what 61.51(e)(i) really means and what it doesn't mean. And then you pass your missinformation on to your students and the cycle continues. Make the call, break the cycle.
 
There isnt?????

Im sorry but you are wrong.. 61.51(e)(i) ....you have to have instrument
privileges on your pilot certificate( i.e. instrument rating) in order to LOG PIC in IMC.
As I said in an earlier post, if the flight is conducted in VISUAL conditions
then both people can log IC time.

No, you don't. You have to have the rating to ACT as PIC. Not the same thing. MidlifeFlight's FAQ answers it pretty well, did you read the link I gave? Here it is again:

http://www.midlifeflight.com/faq/faq.php?s=1

...as well as the pertinent paragraph:

Rule 1. If you are a recreational, private or commercial pilot, you may log PIC any time you are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft you are rated for. [61.51(e)(1)(i)] "Rated" means the category and class (and type, if a type rating is necessary for the aircraft) that is listed on the back of your pilot certificate. Nothing else matters. Not instrument ratings. Not endorsements for high performance, complex, or tailwheel aircraft. Not medical currency. Not flight reviews. Not night currency. Nothing. There are no known exceptions.
 
However, the acting PIC can not log PIC, only the pilot flying can, because the acting PIC, while required to be on a IFR clearance, is not required by the regs, unless the pilot flying is under the hood, even if in IMC conditions. Correct?
Yup.

I see how that makes sense regulation wise, but in practice, I think both should be able to log it. After all, regardless of whos hands are on the controls, it is still the acting PIC who will take the hit if any regs are broken.
"Taking the hit" during a one-pilot-required operation is, so far, not one of the bases in 61.51 for logging time, although I tend to agree with you in principle.

Just a WAG, but I think the application of the "sole manipulator" part of logging PIC for an "unqualified" pilot was probably intended for instructional situations. The earliest FAA Legal opinion I know on the subject (about 30 years old) deals with it in the instructional scenario and there is a very good argument based on the language of the regs that it should be limited to instruction. But nothing I've seen suggests that it has ever been limited that way.
 
There isnt?????

Im sorry but you are wrong.. 61.51(e)(i) ....you have to have instrument
privileges on your pilot certificate( i.e. instrument rating) in order to LOG PIC in IMC.
As I said in an earlier post, if the flight is conducted in VISUAL conditions
then both people can log IC time.

This argument that is being forwarded here that a non-instrument rated pilot can log PIC time in Instrument weather is ridiculous. its like saying that if I am a non multi-engine rated pilot "manipulating the controls" of
a multi-engine airplane, I can log PIC time because I was the sole manipulator of the controls. Come on!!

A rating is a rating.. whether it is instrument or multi-engine or whatever.
You need to have that rating on your certificate in order to log PIC time in that aircraft or under the required conditions.
You're making the argument that, for time immemorial, has been made by pilots new to the way the FAA has interpreted the sole manipulator clause in 61.51 - and the FAA's unfortunate but complete separation of the concepts of "logging" and "acting" as PIC.

The ratings referred to in the reg are aircraft ratings, not condition ratings - "an aircraft for which the pilot is rated." Not conditions ratings such as the IR.

You also appear to have picked up the newest English language problem - picking up on the word "privileges" (which actually applies to sport pilot, who do not have aircraft ratings) and completely disregarding the work "or" that precedes it.

Here's how the FAA has interpreted it for about 30 years:

==============================
OCT. 28, 1980

WINSTON SCOTT JONES

Dear Mr. Jones:

This is in response to your letter in which you request an interpretation of Section 61.51(2)(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, regarding logging of pilot-in-command (PIC) flight time.

Specifically, you ask what time may be logged as PIC time when the pilot in the right seat is a certificated flight instructor (CFI) along for the purpose of instruction and is not a required crewmember, and the pilot in the left seat holds either a private or commercial certificate in an aircraft for which he is rated.

Section 61.51 is a flight-time logging regulation, under which PIC time may be logged by one who is not actually the pilot in command (i.e., not "ultimately" responsible for the aircraft) during that time. This is consistent with the purpose of Section 61.51, which as stated in 61.51(a) is to record aeronautical training and experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating, or the recent flight experience requirements of Section 61.

Section 61.51(c)(2)(i) provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as pilot-in-command time only that flight time during which the pilot--

1. Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated; or

2. Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or

3. Acts as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft, or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

Under Section 61.51(c)(2)(iii) a certificated flight instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time during which he or she acts as a flight instructor. Sections 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) provide for logging of flight instruction and instrument flight instruction received.

Accordingly, two or more pilots may each log PIC time for the same flight time. For example, a pilot who is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he or she is rated may log that time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(i) while receiving instruction, and the instructor may log that same time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(iii).

There is no provision in the FAR's for logging of "dual" flight time; however, we assume that you are referring to logging time as instruction received. Section 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) allow flight instruction and instrument instruction received time to be recorded. There is nothing in the FAR's which prevents a pilot from logging the same time as both instruction received and PIC time, as long as each requirement is met. The pilot may also log the same time as instrument instruction. Note, though, that one hour of flight logged both as one hour of PIC and one hour of instruction received still adds up to only one hour total flight time.

You request interpretations of these regulations for situations in which:

1. The purpose of the flight is instruction in advanced maneuvers.

2. The purpose of the flight is simulated instrument instruction in actual VFR conditions.

3. The purpose of the flight is instrument instruction actual IFR conditions.

4. The pilot in the left seat is not current in the aircraft or in the conditions of flight.

5. The purpose of the flight is transition from tricycle to conventional landing gear.

6. The purpose of the flight is obtaining logbook endorsement authorizing operation of a high performance aircraft, as required by FAR 61.31(e).

7. The purpose of the flight is transition to a different type aircraft of the same category and class for which the left seat pilot is rated and a type rating is not required.

In each situation, the CFI may log PIC time for all flight time during which she or he acts as flight instructor. The pilot receiving instruction may also log PIC time in each of these situations, as the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which she or he is rated. Specifically, neither the currency requirements of situation 4 nor the log book endorsement of situation 6 are ratings within the meaning of Section 61.51. "Rating" as used in that section refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates.

We trust that this discussion answers your questions.

Sincerely,

EDWARD P. FABERMAN
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
==============================
 
Different question: does the safety pilot need to be current in category/class? No mention of currency in FAR 91.109. In other words, can a multi-engine airline pilot who hasn't flown a single in years act as safety pilot, assuming he has an ASEL PPL? I suspect the answer is yes, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
 
Different question: does the safety pilot need to be current in category/class? No mention of currency in FAR 91.109. In other words, can a multi-engine airline pilot who hasn't flown a single in years act as safety pilot, assuming he has an ASEL PPL? I suspect the answer is yes, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
Yes. Currency is generally a requirement for acting as PIC (as I recall there are a few SIC currency requirements for certain ops, but they don't apply to safety pilots). So long as the safety pilot is not acting as PIC, they don't apply.

So the safety pilot who is not acting as PIC doesn't not have to be current but the safety pilot who is acting as PIC does (and has to meet all the other requirements for acting as PIC).
 
You're making the argument that, for time immemorial, has been made by pilots new to the way the FAA has interpreted the sole manipulator clause in 61.51 - and the FAA's unfortunate but complete separation of the concepts of "logging" and "acting" as PIC.

The ratings referred to in the reg are aircraft ratings, not condition ratings - "an aircraft for which the pilot is rated." Not conditions ratings such as the IR.

You also appear to have picked up the newest English language problem - picking up on the word "privileges" (which actually applies to sport pilot, who do not have aircraft ratings) and completely disregarding the work "or" that precedes it.

Here's how the FAA has interpreted it for about 30 years:

==============================
OCT. 28, 1980

WINSTON SCOTT JONES

Dear Mr. Jones:

This is in response to your letter in which you request an interpretation of Section 61.51(2)(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, regarding logging of pilot-in-command (PIC) flight time.

Specifically, you ask what time may be logged as PIC time when the pilot in the right seat is a certificated flight instructor (CFI) along for the purpose of instruction and is not a required crewmember, and the pilot in the left seat holds either a private or commercial certificate in an aircraft for which he is rated.

Section 61.51 is a flight-time logging regulation, under which PIC time may be logged by one who is not actually the pilot in command (i.e., not "ultimately" responsible for the aircraft) during that time. This is consistent with the purpose of Section 61.51, which as stated in 61.51(a) is to record aeronautical training and experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate or rating, or the recent flight experience requirements of Section 61.

Section 61.51(c)(2)(i) provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as pilot-in-command time only that flight time during which the pilot--

1. Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated; or

2. Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or

3. Acts as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft, or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.

Under Section 61.51(c)(2)(iii) a certificated flight instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time during which he or she acts as a flight instructor. Sections 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) provide for logging of flight instruction and instrument flight instruction received.

Accordingly, two or more pilots may each log PIC time for the same flight time. For example, a pilot who is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he or she is rated may log that time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(i) while receiving instruction, and the instructor may log that same time as PIC time under 61.51(c)(2)(iii).

There is no provision in the FAR's for logging of "dual" flight time; however, we assume that you are referring to logging time as instruction received. Section 61.51(b)(2)(iii) and (iv) allow flight instruction and instrument instruction received time to be recorded. There is nothing in the FAR's which prevents a pilot from logging the same time as both instruction received and PIC time, as long as each requirement is met. The pilot may also log the same time as instrument instruction. Note, though, that one hour of flight logged both as one hour of PIC and one hour of instruction received still adds up to only one hour total flight time.

You request interpretations of these regulations for situations in which:

1. The purpose of the flight is instruction in advanced maneuvers.

2. The purpose of the flight is simulated instrument instruction in actual VFR conditions.

3. The purpose of the flight is instrument instruction actual IFR conditions.

4. The pilot in the left seat is not current in the aircraft or in the conditions of flight.

5. The purpose of the flight is transition from tricycle to conventional landing gear.

6. The purpose of the flight is obtaining logbook endorsement authorizing operation of a high performance aircraft, as required by FAR 61.31(e).

7. The purpose of the flight is transition to a different type aircraft of the same category and class for which the left seat pilot is rated and a type rating is not required.

In each situation, the CFI may log PIC time for all flight time during which she or he acts as flight instructor. The pilot receiving instruction may also log PIC time in each of these situations, as the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which she or he is rated. Specifically, neither the currency requirements of situation 4 nor the log book endorsement of situation 6 are ratings within the meaning of Section 61.51. "Rating" as used in that section refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates.

We trust that this discussion answers your questions.

Sincerely,

EDWARD P. FABERMAN
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
==============================



I ve had enough of arguing over this topic.

I have seen nothing here(on this thread) that changes my mind.
Everything in this post, I agree with. It has to do with receiving flight instruction in Instrument conditions. I agree, that if the person is receiving instruction from a CFII, then I would say, Yes, the non IR Private pilot
can log PIC time.
But I would seriously question ANY student of mine who wasnt instrument rated, went into IMC without an instructor and logged PIC time.

BTW, dont show up at any Airline interview with garbage like that in your logbook. Outside of pinching the interview lady on her rear-end, it would be your quickest exit out the door and a "Thanks but no Thanks" from the pilot board.
 
I ve had enough of arguing over this topic.

I have seen nothing here(on this thread) that changes my mind.
Everything in this post, I agree with. It has to do with receiving flight instruction in Instrument conditions. I agree, that if the person is receiving instruction from a CFII, then I would say, Yes, the non IR Private pilot
can log PIC time.

Why is this different? The pilot isn't acting as PIC when there is a CFI on board, yet he can log PIC. Why would it be any different if the person that IS acting as PIC is not a CFI?


BTW, dont show up at any Airline interview with garbage like that in your logbook. Outside of pinching the interview lady on her rear-end, it would be your quickest exit out the door and a "Thanks but no Thanks" from the pilot board.

I'm sorry, but that is also not correct. It is much more likely that they actually will understand the difference between acting PIC and logging PIC. :(
 
But I would seriously question ANY student of mine who wasnt instrument rated, went into IMC without an instructor and logged PIC time.
Call the regional counsel office and ask them. G'head, I dare you. Then kindly explain to them why they're wrong nad you're right and see if it works. Tape it and put it on youtube. Oughta be fun.

BTW, dont show up at any Airline interview with garbage like that in your logbook. Outside of pinching the interview lady on her rear-end, it would be your quickest exit out the door and a "Thanks but no Thanks" from the pilot board.
Oh puh leeze.
 
Back
Top