crazynut52
New Member
Private Pilot student decides to take some tail-wheel training, is this training (before he is signed off) PIC time? I say yes, because as a Private he is ASEL rated.
Tailwheel PIC
- Thread starter crazynut52
- Start date
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Still yes 
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Here I go again...
Look closely at the regulation which allows logging PIC when recieving instruction: 61.51(e).
Most tricycle pilots are not sole manipulator during the first few take-offs and landings in a tailwheel.
Don't fall into the trap of logging the entire instructional flight as 'sole manipulator'.
Most tricycle pilots cannot even taxi as sole manipulator.
Your milage may vary, of course; I am only pointing out a commonly mis-understood practice in the aviation time logging community of reading this regulation as though it says: "You may log all the time you fly in any aircraft category or class which is typed on your pilot certificate, and you touch the controls, as PIC."
That's how the time-building community wants to interpret it.
But it says "sole manipulator".
Going from a 152 to a 172, the difference would be negligible.
But a tailwheel is definitely going to require some instructor help on the controls. Only the instructor can determine that difference.
Look closely at the regulation which allows logging PIC when recieving instruction: 61.51(e).
Most tricycle pilots are not sole manipulator during the first few take-offs and landings in a tailwheel.
Don't fall into the trap of logging the entire instructional flight as 'sole manipulator'.
Most tricycle pilots cannot even taxi as sole manipulator.
Your milage may vary, of course; I am only pointing out a commonly mis-understood practice in the aviation time logging community of reading this regulation as though it says: "You may log all the time you fly in any aircraft category or class which is typed on your pilot certificate, and you touch the controls, as PIC."
That's how the time-building community wants to interpret it.
But it says "sole manipulator".
Going from a 152 to a 172, the difference would be negligible.
But a tailwheel is definitely going to require some instructor help on the controls. Only the instructor can determine that difference.
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
Here I go again...
Look closely at the regulation which allows logging PIC when recieving instruction: 61.51(e).
Most tricycle pilots are not sole manipulator during the first few take-offs and landings in a tailwheel.
Don't fall into the trap of logging the entire instructional flight as 'sole manipulator'.
Most tricycle pilots cannot even taxi as sole manipulator.
Your milage may vary, of course; I am only pointing out a commonly mis-understood practice in the aviation time logging community of reading this regulation as though it says: "You may log all the time you fly in any aircraft category or class which is typed on your pilot certificate, and you touch the controls, as PIC."
That's how the time-building community wants to interpret it.
But it says "sole manipulator".
Going from a 152 to a 172, the difference would be negligible.
But a tailwheel is definitely going to require some instructor help on the controls. Only the instructor can determine that difference.
if there's an instructor in the airplane, i log it for the student as dual-received only, even if they do touch the controls without me. as long as i'm inside, i log it dual only, same as if i were with a student pilot and they may be the only one 'flying' most of the flight session. as soon as they're the sole occupant, fully endorsed - or given a 'solo endorsement' prior to receiving 'tailwheel endorsement' - they may log the time as pic. that's how i've handled this one since the mid-90's with no problems or questions. :bandit:
I think you're reading that regulation a little too closely.Here I go again...
So the instructor bumps the controls to move the plane back onto the taxiway center line. You now must subtract 2 seconds from the student's PIC time. Then, a minute later, the instructor applies a little brake pressure to slow the plane down, since the student is not used to the brake pressure of that certain plane. Better subtract another 5 seconds from the PIC time. Then what do you do when you're doing the run-up? Who is the sole manipulator then? Are you going to subtract the 3 minutes it takes to do the runup from the student's PIC time too? And how do you expect them to keep track of all of this? A chess timer?
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I can tell you are one of those 'time-builders' who is anal about logging all of your time as PIC by an interprtation of convenience to you.
Go ahead, you're not gonna listen to reason. Reason says that PIC time should be when the student is reasonably doing PIC control inputs.
I am holding the brakes during run-up to be sure. I am on the rudder pedals and probably the stick with the student during the first few landings. I am not "bumping the pedals" 2 seconds once in a while.
And I don't expect any student to keep track of that time, mostly he doesn't even know it is happening, but it is, at first.
Are you a tailwheel instructor?
CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
butt is right. How much are you really controlling the airplane as the instructor, with a private pilot? Like he said, MAYBE small corrections here and there, but I would think it isn't anywhere near the 6 minutes required to even be .1 on the hobbs.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
It's been handled your way for a long time, but that's because most CFIs were not brought up to understand 61.51 (the official interpretations go back more than 25 years). Then there are those, who despite understanding the rule decide that they have the right to control legitimate logging by their students (I wonder how many of those tell their students that the rule permits the logging).
BTW, I don't disagree with nosehair's basic point "sole manipulator" means just that; I just think he sometimes carries it further than it reasonable can be carried.
A question for those who "don't permit it" - do you pay some portion of the flight time? Example: an instrument rating requires 50 hours of cross country PIC and 2 of those are done with you on flights where you don't allow it, do you pay for the extra 2 hours the student has to pay to make up for the time he could have counted?
tgrayson
New Member
Why would there be any problems? The FAA isn't looking at this stuff and some of them are probably confused. You shouldn't take the lack of problems to indicate correctness.
We should all correct errors when they are revealed as such, and those of us who teach others are particularly morally bound to do so. Yes, it gets more painful the more experience we get.
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
i
okay, far 61.51(e)(4) addresses the logging of pic by a student pilot as follows:
a student pilot may log pic time only when the student pilot -
(i) is the sole occupant of the aircraft..
(ii) has a current solo flight endorsement as required under far 61.87; and
(iii) is undergoing training for a pilot certificate or rating
so, no pic for a student pilot with me in the aircraft while receiving dual, period.
what about if already a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot perhaps, rated in category and class?
back to far 61.51(e)(1), logging of pic by a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot..
a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot may log pic 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
(ii) is the sole occupantof the aircraft; or
(iii) except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pic 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 this reg, then, your argument is that non-student pilots may indeed log pic time during sole manipulation, but may not act as pic until having received ground and flight training per far 61.31(i) and received the appropriate endorsement unless he/she has privileges to act as pic as sole occupant? am i understanding you correctly? if so, i can accept this understanding of the reg and have probably 'cheated' a few students over ten years ago out of a few hours of pic..
Why would there be any problems? The FAA isn't looking at this stuff and some of them are probably confused. You shouldn't take the lack of problems to indicate correctness.
We should all correct errors when they are revealed as such, and those of us who teach others are particularly morally bound to do so. Yes, it gets more painful the more experience we get.
okay, far 61.51(e)(4) addresses the logging of pic by a student pilot as follows:
a student pilot may log pic time only when the student pilot -
(i) is the sole occupant of the aircraft..
(ii) has a current solo flight endorsement as required under far 61.87; and
(iii) is undergoing training for a pilot certificate or rating
so, no pic for a student pilot with me in the aircraft while receiving dual, period.
what about if already a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot perhaps, rated in category and class?
back to far 61.51(e)(1), logging of pic by a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot..
a sport, recreational, private or commercial pilot may log pic 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
(ii) is the sole occupantof the aircraft; or
(iii) except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pic 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 this reg, then, your argument is that non-student pilots may indeed log pic time during sole manipulation, but may not act as pic until having received ground and flight training per far 61.31(i) and received the appropriate endorsement unless he/she has privileges to act as pic as sole occupant? am i understanding you correctly? if so, i can accept this understanding of the reg and have probably 'cheated' a few students over ten years ago out of a few hours of pic..
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
speaking for myself, i have always allowed the logging of pic time with dual-received in your above example as sole control manipulator's of an aircraft for which they are indeed rated. this one's clear cut. you do refer to far 61.65(d)(2)(i) & (iii), midlife?
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Yup. That's pretty much it. Separate 61.31 (that talks about authority to act as PIC) from 61.51 (the Universal Rule of Logging Flight Time).i
under this reg, then, your argument is that non-student pilots may indeed log pic time during sole manipulation, but may not act as pic until having received ground and flight training per far 61.31(i) and received the appropriate endorsement unless he/she has privileges to act as pic as sole occupant? am i understanding you correctly? if so, i can accept this understanding of the reg and have probably 'cheated' a few students over ten years ago out of a few hours of pic..
Does the question ask about authority to act as PIC? Start with 61.31.
Does the question ask about authority to write the time in your logbook? Start with 61.51 and (this is the important part) don't go to =any= other reg unless 61.51 sends you there. A good example of "sending you there" is 61.51(e)(1)(iii):
==============================
(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--
(iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting 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.
==============================
In addition to the basic certificate qualification, the rule is asking you to consider two conditions in order to determine whether the pilot may log PIC time: (1) is the pilot =acting= as PIC (which implicates 61.31) and (2) is it an aircraft or operation that requires more than one pilot (which implicates a variety of regs)
Not directly, but a good example. To those hose who believe that you need to be able to act as PIC in order to log PIC, it's just as clear cut in the opposite direction. They would say that since the instrument trainee is not yet instrument rated, any of the time spent on the required cross country training flight that is in actual needs to be excluded from the PIC cross country total.
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
thanks for the replies, midlife..so much to keep up with you know. great understanding of the above..will keep it in mind for future reference. thanks for the help from you and tgrayson. the instrument question was always clear cut to me,but i do so many of those..guess the tailwheel, not so. fortunately i do tailwheel so rarely..
so, as for the second, same as you, i do not exclude the instrument applicant from the logging of pic or instrument time when in imc. :bandit:
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
this is definitely the clincher that everyone needs to get. i've always read the first part, requiring two pilots, etc. while 'glossing over' the final part of the sentence. last night, reading it at 'half speed', i had that 'ah ha' moment.
have a cigar on me.. :bandit:
nosehair
Well-Known Member
...and I'll ask you the same question...are you a tailwheel instructor?
....aaand if you are, have you instructed in tailwheel airplanes with more than 150 HP?
....aaaaand have you ever tried to "check-out" a military C-130 pilot, or an F-4 pilot in a Cessna 172?
Some of these folks require a bit more than .1 help on the controls.
Practically speaking, I allow logging all the dual time on a "usual" check-out where thare is only a minor bump here and there.
My point is for those folks who cannot control the airplane throughout the take-off and initial climb, or get it aligned and configured for final or initiate a flare or hold it off or keep it aligned with the runway and so on and on and on.
It happens. Do you think they should be allowed to log PIC?
More importantly, for this discussion, do you think they have the capability of determining when they were sole manipulator, and make their own decision as to how to log it?
Their performance is just as a brand-new student who is incapable of holding the airplane in a landing attitude long enough for the instructor to keep his hands or feet off the controls - that's who I'm talking about.
...aaand now that you got me started, I'll say that, in those conditions, where you are constantly having to tell the "student" every little thing, even though he may be the only one "touching" the controls, he is still not the sole manipulator. If you didn't tell him, he wouldn't do it, so you would wind up being on the controls anyway. He's still not the sole manipulator.
Take the case of the autopilot. The PIC "causes" the autopilot to manipulate the controls, so the PIC is able to log that as sole manipulator because he is causing it to happen. So the instructor is causing it to happen - not the student touching the controls. Merly touching the controls, but not making the correct inputs unless told by the instructor is not sole manipulator.
The dictonary defines the word in both ways:
1) To control with the hands.
2) To manage or influence.
We're not robots as CFI's. We are thinking, controlling, influencing, making judgements and decisions about the student's performance, and it should reflect in the records, ie., a logbook.
This is the CFI Corner - I'm addressing CFI responsibilities. It is the responsibility of each instructor to insure adequate instruction is being received by a student - that he is safe and proficient, and skilled.
CFI's are the leaders in Aviation skills and knowledge. Students don't get to make the decision on when he/she can log PIC time, except within the regulations, and clearly, the regulation supports what I am saying.
I have not thought too much about it, but I am now thinking that one of the reasons our pilot population's aircraft control skills has decreased is this mindset that a student can dictate when he is the sole manipulator.
It is a human condition to not see your own mistakes and deficiencies. Humans will think they are better than they really are. It is natural.
It is our (CFI's) responsibility to see the student's deficiencies and make corrections. Just make it clear that they don't get to log PIC until they are capable of making PIC control inputs.
Somebody tell me what's wrong with that?
exleardriver
Well-Known Member
hi nosehair, i can't address the first questions, as they're directed towards another. i'm trying to understand the meaning of the rest of what you're saying. i think you're saying that like i had 'traditionally' done, you logged all tailwheel time for the student as dual-received only with no pic time for them. this was my prior mind-set, but after considering a couple other opinions here regarding the reading of the reg i'm now convinced that an already certificated pilot (not a true non-certificated student pilot in a tailwheel airplane) may log some pic time. i also don't believe this to be a major issue in reality..but i do think it's what the reg actually permits. in my experience, a person may require approximately 10 hours of dual before receiving the endorsement, so we're not talking about an awful lot of pic anyway. but, if they're controlling the aircraft, particularly in flight which is not in the landing phase, the reg says they may log pic - as well as dual - on the basis of 'sole manipulator'. i have no problem with that. sure, in the beginning they're gonna need more instructor input, but require less and less as training time progresses. just how much of this pic time to log is going to be based upon your 'best guess' anyway. hope this helps. if i've misunderstood what you mean to convey, apologies in advance.