Safety Pilot PIC Time Question

[Ramsey]

The safety pilot cannot log anything until the other pilot is under the hood. Prior to that, the safety pilot is simply a passenger.

As to going under the hood being optional, I guess everything in life is optional. I would opt to log it as PIC.

True - I did not mean to imply the entire flight could be logged by both. Just when the hood comes into play.

 

[Ramsey]

This is your opinion, but check out 91.109:



So, yes, it is optional, but once the person decides to put the hood on, 91.109 makes the other guy a required crewmember.

Which makes the safety pilot the PIC not the pilot under the hood. Sole manipulator rule allows the pilot to also log PIC time at the same time. There is no SIC time to be logged here...

The reason the safety pilot is PIC is because that person's ticket will be on line if the "sole manipulator" does something crazy or if there is a near hit or whatever else...

 

[germb747]

"and more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted."

I'll play devil's advocate...

2 crew members are not required for the type of flight conducted mentioned above.

The Safety pilot is required for the currency of the pilot under the hood but the flight could still be conducted without a second pilot which makes the second pilot not a required crew member.

It's not until the 1st pilot goes under the hood does the 2nd pilot become required and since going under is optional there is no SIC time. The safety pilot is the PIC as soon as the other goes under the hood and since that pilot is the sole manipulator both can log PIC time.

Yes, the second crewmember is required when one pilot is under the hood, it is not optional. And whether or not it's "optional" for one pilot to go under the hood is inmaterial; the fact is that he is under the hood and thus a second crewmember (safety pilot) is required. Therefore, the safety pilot may log PIC time during the time the flying pilot is under the hood if he is appointed, qualified, and agrees to "serve as PIC" for the flight or for that portion of the flight per the Part 1 definition, as the "final authority and responsibility" for the safety of the flight. He may instead log SIC if he is solely acting in the capacity of a safety pilot and is not the "official" PIC. There is no per se "automatic" transfer of command to the safety pilot solely by virtue of the fact the flying pilot is under the hood. In Part 91 private flying where there may not be a flight release or anything officially written down designating the PIC in advance, it's usually decided by mutual agreement between the pilots involved provided it's not otherwise obvious (i.e. only one of them is qualified to ACT as PIC).

Yes, this is the general rule with the exceptions that include safety pilot time.



According the FAA:
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;
(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and
(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight

If the airlines are more concerned with time actually spent as the PIC, then time spent acting as PIC as a safety pilot is more valuable than someone who is just logging PIC as sole manipulator of the controls.

Or is it the other way around? At first glance it would seem the pilot actually flying the airplane would be getting the "better" time.

Yes, that would seem like a correct assumption to me. Since the safety pilot can only log PIC time if he is, in fact, the PIC; therefore, that would appear to be more "valuable" time since you are in command of the flight; the airlines usually only apply that definition (mentioned above) in determining PIC time. With that said, if your logbook is filled up with nothing but safety pilot time, the airline recuiter is probably going to frown upon your resume.

The safety pilot cannot log anything until the other pilot is under the hood. Prior to that, the safety pilot is simply a passenger.

As to going under the hood being optional, I guess everything in life is optional. I would opt to log it as PIC.

Yes.

 

[germb747]

http://www.thecfi.com/pt61FAQ.doc

 

[Ramsey]

I'm actually saying it's okay as well. I thought the question was in regards to logging SIC - which does not apply. As I first stated…both can log PIC while the hood is being used.

 

[germb747]

I'm actually saying it's okay as well. I thought the question was in regards to logging SIC - which does not apply. As I first stated…both can log PIC while the hood is being used.

Okay, we agree both can log PIC (if the guy under the hood is the 'sole manipulator' and the other is the 'serving PIC'). And yes, the question was about logging SIC. The safety pilot may be serving as SIC while the PF is under the hood and thus he'd log SIC time. The safety pilot may, for whatever reason, simply not want the final responsibility and authority for the conduct of the flight and agree to only be SIC. Also, the safety pilot may not be qualified to be PIC (i.e. endorsements, 90-day currency, etc) and he'd log SIC time. This is legit provided the flying pilot IS qualified to act as PIC.

While you're contemplating this, head down to K-town and have a cold one for me!

 

[Ramsey]

While you're contemplating this, head down to K-town and have a cold one for me!

Ha - I'm actually already there!

Oh man it's hot here today as well! As you may know there's no AC in this country and the Army's not paying for it either!

 

[matt152]

There is no SIC time to be logged here...

The reason the safety pilot is PIC is because that person's ticket will be on line if the "sole manipulator" does something crazy or if there is a near hit or whatever else...

This is one reason why the safety pilot would not want to be the PIC. The sole manipulator of the controls retains PIC authority and the safety pilot can log SIC if he chooses.

You are right about the SIC being a red herring. I just kind of added that on to my original reply, not thinking it would blow up like this.

 

[tgrayson]

The reason the safety pilot is PIC is because that person's ticket will be on line if the "sole manipulator" does something crazy or if there is a near hit or whatever else...

The person whose ticket is on the line will be determined by the FAA, with possibly little consideration to the agreed arrangement between the pilot flying and the pilot not flying. Perhaps both of their tickets will be on the line.

 

[aifiji]

Wow! Thanks to everyone for some great responses. Through this discussion there were some gray areas cleared up. My friend and I were flipping through the FAR/AIM and couldn't find a clear answer. That's why this board is such a benefit.
Thanks again!

 

[beechpilot84]

I would never log SIC for that nor would I advise a person to. Maybe it's leagal maybe its not but I don't agree with that. If a saftey pilot is there for saftey, shouldn't they be acting as PIC also...

If you ran into a mountain, had a near miss or something and lived when the FAA asks the saftey pilot why didn't you say anything, can he just say he was SIC so it wasn't his responsibility? What would be the point of a saftey pilot then?

not a good example but anyways you get what I am trying to say.

 

[germb747]

Keep in mind too that SIC time has limited value towards ATP mins. In fact, I think only half of it is counted towards the 1500 TT requirement.

 

[matt152]

If you ran into a mountain, had a near miss or something and lived when the FAA asks the saftey pilot why didn't you say anything, can he just say he was SIC so it wasn't his responsibility? What would be the point of a saftey pilot then?

not a good example but anyways you get what I am trying to say.

Point taken. Obviously the safety pilot needs to be doing his job whether he's PIC or SIC. Or they could both end up DOA.

 

[Nihon_Ni]

Keep in mind too that SIC time has limited value towards ATP mins. In fact, I think only half of it is counted towards the 1500 TT requirement.

I think you're a little off track here. Look at paragraph (d). If you credit SIC time you will get an endorsement on your certificate, “Holder does not meet the pilot in command aeronautical experience requirements of ICAO,” but you can still count SIC towards the 1,500 hrs as outlined in paragraph (c).

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section, a person who is applying for an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane category and class rating must have at least 1,500 hours of total time as a pilot that includes at least:
(1) 500 hours of cross-country flight time.
(2) 100 hours of night flight time.
(3) 75 hours of instrument flight time, in actual or simulated instrument conditions, subject to the following:
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, an applicant may not receive credit for more than a total of 25 hours of simulated instrument time in a flight simulator or flight training device.
(ii) A maximum of 50 hours of training in a flight simulator or flight training device may be credited toward the instrument flight time requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this section if the training was accomplished in a course conducted by a training center certificated under part 142 of this chapter.
(iii) Training in a flight simulator or flight training device must be accomplished in a flight simulator or flight training device, representing an airplane.
(4) 250 hours of flight time in an airplane as a pilot in command, or as second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command, or any combination thereof, which includes at least—
(i) 100 hours of cross-country flight time; and
(ii) 25 hours of night flight time.
(5) Not more than 100 hours of the total aeronautical experience requirements of paragraph (a) of this section may be obtained in a flight simulator or flight training device that represents an airplane, provided the aeronautical experience was obtained in an approved course conducted by a training center certificated under part 142 of this chapter.

(b) A person who has performed at least 20 night takeoffs and landings to a full stop may substitute each additional night takeoff and landing to a full stop for 1 hour of night flight time to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section; however, not more than 25 hours of night flight time may be credited in this manner.

(c) A commercial pilot may credit the following second-in-command flight time or flight-engineer flight time toward the 1,500 hours of total time as a pilot required by paragraph (a) of this section:
(1) Second-in-command time, provided the time is acquired in an airplane—
(i) Required to have more than one pilot flight crewmember by the airplane's flight manual, type certificate, or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted;
(ii) Engaged in operations under subpart K of part 91, part 121, or part 135 of this chapter for which a second in command is required; or
(iii) That is required by the operating rules of this chapter to have more than one pilot flight crewmember.
(2) Flight-engineer time, provided the time—
(i) Is acquired in an airplane required to have a flight engineer by the airplane's flight manual or type certificate;
(ii) Is acquired while engaged in operations under part 121 of this chapter for which a flight engineer is required;
(iii) Is acquired while the person is participating in a pilot training program approved under part 121 of this chapter; and
(iv) Does not exceed more than 1 hour for each 3 hours of flight engineer flight time for a total credited time of no more than 500 hours.

(d) An applicant may be issued an airline transport pilot certificate with the endorsement, “Holder does not meet the pilot in command aeronautical experience requirements of ICAO,” as prescribed by Article 39 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, if the applicant:
(1) Credits second-in-command or flight-engineer time under paragraph (c) of this section toward the 1,500 hours total flight time requirement of paragraph (a) of this section;
(2) Does not have at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot, including no more than 50 percent of his or her second-in-command time and none of his or her flight-engineer time; and
(3) Otherwise meets the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.

(e) When the applicant specified in paragraph (d) of this section presents satisfactory evidence of the accumulation of 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot including no more than 50 percent of his or her second-in-command flight time and none of his or her flight-engineer time, the applicant is entitled to an airline transport pilot certificate without the endorsement prescribed in that paragraph.

 

[germb747]

I think you're a little off track here. Look at paragraph (d). If you credit SIC time you will get an endorsement on your certificate, “Holder does not meet the pilot in command aeronautical experience requirements of ICAO,”but you can still count SIC towards the 1,500 hrs as outlined in paragraph (c).

Yea, that's what I meant. I should have said, unless you want that "endorsement" that says you don't meet ICAO ATP standards (and hence your ATPL is useless outside the United States, right?), then your SIC time has 50% value.

(2) Does not have at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot, including no more than 50 percent of his or her second-in-command time and none of his or her flight-engineer time; and

Interestingly enough, the FAA Flight Standards Service views this particular provision as invalid (see FAQs that I posted above). This "1200" hours rule is based on the old ICAO requirements of pre-1970s. According to them, the current requirement per the ICAO Convention should make that number 1500 or else you may still wind up with the endorsement, "Holder does not meet the pilot in command aeronautical experience requirements of ICAO." The FAA admits it's a poorly written regulation, and that they instituted a direct final rule project to change it, but I have no idea why it's taken them this long.