safety pilot

roundout

roundout

VNAV monitor
i posted this on another (*gasp* i know) forum, but i would like all the input i can find.
-----
here's a question for the masses. two, actually. i went up and did 2 approaches on saturday under the hood with my girlfriend (PP-ASEL) as the safety pilot. the aircraft was a PA-28R-201, which is complex.

91.109 says: (b) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless—

(1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown.

first question - she doesn't have a complex endorsement. this shouldn't be a problem, right? she is certificated under the requirements here - PP with the appropriate category and class, ASEL. my take on this reg is that the safety pilot needs to be someone who has the training to recognize a dangerous situation and take a swift and proper action to correct it. it's not trying to make it difficult to find a qualified safety pilot.

now...she mentioned to her instructor (career instructor, i'm very humbled by his experience and knowledge) that she acted as my safety pilot over the weekend and he told her she needs to sign my logbook. i disagree. all i have to do is put her name in the logbook as safety pilot, right? anyone ever heard of it being "better" for her to sign it? i've acted as safety pilot for people before and i've never signed anything.

61.51(b)(1)(v) says: The name of a safety pilot, if required by §91.109(b) of this chapter.
61.51(g)(3)(ii) says: The name of the safety pilot, if required.

if the FAA had doubts about the authenticity of my approaches and holding, wouldn't it be easier for them to look her up by her name rather than by trying to decipher her signature?
 
Congrats on meeting a girl who is a pilot-I'm still looking!

Your method of documentation sounds OK to me, I have never had anyone sign my logbook when acting as a SP for me. I just do what the FARs say to do.

The lack of a complex endorsement is a grey area. She meets the requirements of the FARs to act as safety pilot, but without the endorsement she is technically not able to act as PIC. In terms of liability, I think it's more about how she logs the time as a safety pilot than how you log the time. I can see issues later if during a checkride (CFI, etc with the FAA) she had some complex PIC time logged before she had a complex endorsement.
 
She does not need the complex endorsement as long as you have it. The same would hold true for tailwheel, HP, or High Alt aircraft.

There's no requirement or reason for her to sign your logbook. Her name in your logbook is all that's required. If you really wanna go above and beyond you can put her certificate number in there as well.
 
Grant, who is your girlfriend? Does she go here? I dated a pilot (I told you the story at your place I think) but it ended up going south.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Grant, who is your girlfriend? Does she go here? I dated a pilot (I told you the story at your place I think) but it ended up going south.

[/ QUOTE ]

she went here last year and hated it, so she transferred. she came up for the weekend.
 
[ QUOTE ]
first question - she doesn't have a complex endorsement. this shouldn't be a problem, right? she is certificated under the requirements here - PP with the appropriate category and class, ASEL. my take on this reg is that the safety pilot needs to be someone who has the training to recognize a dangerous situation and take a swift and proper action to correct it. it's not trying to make it difficult to find a qualified safety pilot.

[/ QUOTE ]Your take is essentially correct. As you quoted, the regulation says
==============================
a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown.
==============================
"category and class" have very specific meanings in the FAR and "endorsements" is =not= one of them.

As you may know, there are two ways in which the safety pilot may long time. One is as PIC and the other as SIC. In order to take advantage being able to write numbers in the PIC column of her logbook, your girlfriend would have to be "acting" as pilot in command of the flight, something she can't do without the proper endorsements. So, if she logs it at all, she may only log it as SIC.
[ QUOTE ]
he told her she needs to sign my logbook. I disagree. all I have to do is put her name in the logbook as safety pilot, right?

[/ QUOTE ]You are correct.
[ QUOTE ]
anyone ever heard of it being "better" for her to sign it?

[/ QUOTE ] No.
 
I was also thinking that she would have to log the time as SIC time because she wouldn't be able to exercises the privilages of PIC because of her lack of a complex endorsement. If she couldn't log the PIC time on her own, then I don't think she would be able to log it with you. SIC time on the other hand, would be possible because she's acting as a required crew member but not as the one responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft.

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 
[ QUOTE ]
I was also thinking that she would have to log the time as SIC time because she wouldn't be able to exercises the privilages of PIC because of her lack of a complex endorsement. If she couldn't log the PIC time on her own, then I don't think she would be able to log it with you. SIC time on the other hand, would be possible because she's acting as a required crew member but not as the one responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft.

[/ QUOTE ]

All she has to do is be rated category and class. Complex is not part of that. This is how someone can log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls while being taught how to fly complex airplanes.

This is how I understand it, if I am wrong, someone please correct me.
 
thanks, Mark. i knew that you'd come to the rescue on one board or the other
wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was also thinking that she would have to log the time as SIC time because she wouldn't be able to exercises the privilages of PIC because of her lack of a complex endorsement. If she couldn't log the PIC time on her own, then I don't think she would be able to log it with you. SIC time on the other hand, would be possible because she's acting as a required crew member but not as the one responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft.

[/ QUOTE ]

All she has to do is be rated category and class. Complex is not part of that. This is how someone can log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls while being taught how to fly complex airplanes.

This is how I understand it, if I am wrong, someone please correct me.

[/ QUOTE ]Not quite.

As we know, under certain conditions a safety pilot can log PIC time rather than SIC. First, the SP and FP must agree that the SP will be ACTING PIC. To qualify to be ACTING PIC, you must:
o be rated in the plane as defined by 61.5,
o have a type rating if applicable per 61.31 as well as any other endorsements covered by that provision and applicable to the aircraft,
o must meet the currency requirements of 61.57,
o must have a current and valid medical as required by 61.3 and 61.23, and
o meet the flight review requirements defined by 61.56.

If the SP qualifies to ACT as PIC, then 61.51 allows the SP to LOG PIC time for that period of time during which the FP is wearing the view limiting device, again assuming the SP is qualified to ACT as PIC and both pilots agree that the SP will be ACTING PIC. But again, she needs to have the applicable endorsements in order to ACT as PIC.

Now, the reason why we can LOG PIC time as a certificated PP-ASEL while getting the complex, HP, and/or tailwheel endorsement is because we are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft that we 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. Endorsements don't matter in this regard. As an aside, while training to get any of these endorsements, the instructor is the ACTING PIC. We simply get to LOG PIC because we are the sole manipulators of the control of an aircraft we are rated for (not because we are ACTING PIC) .
 
Up until now I disagreed that the safety pilot logging the time as SIC is legitimate. I found my Jepp FARs Explained book, and it seems that an FAA Chief Counsel opinion on 10/19/99 states that operating under 91.109, the sole manipulator of the controls can log PIC and the safety pilot may log SIC. This is extremely confusing, given the provisions in 61.51(e) for both pilots to log PIC. I have friends who were grilled over such SIC time in airline interviews.

More to the point of the original question, another FAA Chief Counsel opinion on 6/24/91 concerns endorsements required for safety pilots. This particular case concerns a high-performance endorsement, but the FAA determined that the endorsements are not required, just category and class on the cerificate.
 
When I was at a former big school. We asked the FSDO guy about safety pilot deal. He told us that we could log time as a safety pilot only once in the air. He told the easiest way to figure time because you just deduct .2 for each flight. That came for the FAA so take it for what its worth
 
FSDO guys; ain't they great? ............Oh wait, come to think of it, I are one!

I hope no one would 'take my word for it' just because I am 'honored' to represent the FAA. These issues are legal in nature and are addressed be the CFR and appropriate legal interpretations/court decisions. These things are all that matters.

Now, whether it's 'smart' to log or act something is entirely subjective.
 
The school I was at was using the time building when they switched from 141 to 61...long story....But they safety pilot became away for everyone to log time quicker...I still think its a gray area but on my last checkride the DE looked at it said it was fine no problems with time logged..
 
[ QUOTE ]
Up until now I disagreed that the safety pilot logging the time as SIC is legitimate. I found my Jepp FARs Explained book, and it seems that an FAA Chief Counsel opinion on 10/19/99 states that operating under 91.109, the sole manipulator of the controls can log PIC and the safety pilot may log SIC. This is extremely confusing, given the provisions in 61.51(e) for both pilots to log PIC. I have friends who were grilled over such SIC time in airline interviews.

[/ QUOTE ]There's also a 12 year old legal counsel opinion that says the exact same thing.

Let's try to ease the confusion a bit.

91.109 does three things. It establishes the requirement for a safety pilot. It gives the qualifications for the safety pilot to act as that type of "crewmember". And it established the flight as one that requires more than one pilot. Being a rule about flight requirements, it has nothing whatsoever to do with logging. Nor does it have anything to do with which pilot is in command of the flight.

FAR 61.51 which has everything to do with logging gives a safety pilot two options.

1. If the safety pilot is =qualified= to act as PIC and the pilots agree that the safety pilot =will act= as PIC, then the safety pilot may log PIC time. "Qualified" mean everything that is necessary for the pilot to act as PIC: ratings, endorsement, currency - the works.

2. If the safety pilot is =not= qualified to act as PIC or the pilots agree that the flying pilot will be in command of the flight, the safety pilot may log SIC.

The "grilling" is another issue. 61.51 only tells us what the FAA permits a pilot to count for the purposes of meeting the requirements for certificates, ratings, and currency. 61.51 doesn't care about the quality of that time. For Part 61 purposes, being the safety pilot in a CE-152 and in being first officer in a AirBus are equal.

Obviously, they are not equal to a potential employer. Potential employers are interested in the quality of time. The "grilling" may have been an attempt to test the applicant's knowledge of the regulations, or, more likely, an attempt to get to the "quality" issue, something an applicant should really be able to present without prompting.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Do what I do....call it dual as long as you have your CF-II!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Logging SIC as a safety pilot is worthless flighttime anyways, IMO.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Do what I do....call it dual as long as you have your CF-II!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet another reason to be a CFI!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top