P1 s?

[vectis lady]

sorry if this has been asked before but im a bit confused

i had a checkout with a new club on a new type recently and the instuctor told me to log it as p1s didnt think about it at the time but now not sure what it means, its only 1hr and im not joining the club anyway but just wanted to know for curiosity

i thought p1 s is for ppl holders on test for higher licences say a cpl test, (pls correct me if im wrong)

thanx

[S-Works]

Nope you are totally correct and the instructor is wrong.

There will be no doubt a huge argument about this but if it was a class i.e SEP and a type you are current on and the club was just checking to make you sure you were safe then you are perfectly entitled to log P1 and the instructor nothing.

If it is a new type to you or you are not current then the Instructor should be P1 and you PUT. Again technically if you are current on SEP you could be P1 but if you are on a new type then you should be learning something?

This is how I do checkouts.

If it was 1hr then log it as PUT and get him to sign it, you can then use t he flight for your 1hr flight with an Instructor for renewal.

[Lister Noble]

I normally fly a Cub, but last weekend I had some spin training in a Citabria at the club where I leaned to fly.
I was with my original very experienced instructor, and he logged me as P1(s) ,type familiarisation .
Lister:)

[jamestkirk]

bose-x is correct.

LASORS page 43 case J - has the absolute definition but generally we instructors (not examining) doing 1 hr experience for SEP/dual checks/spinning etc. cannot sign you off as P1(S).

Anyway, I have jsut put what bose-x has put so i won't rattle on any longer.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Lister, then your FI was wrong. As Bose has said, there is no latitude on this, unless you are on a flight test with an examiner, then you can only be P/UT if an instructor logs a flight as P1.

P1/S has a specific definition and your flight did not fall into it.

[Dave Gittins]

Had the same argument after a check-out in a Warrior a couple of months back at a club new to me not a million miles from "Vectis". CFI / Owner absolutely adamant that I book and have signed off P1 / S - Club Checkout. No amount of arguing (and there was some) was going to change her mind.

From my point of view I was P1 and if putting an "S" next to it got the hour in the right column, I was not going to get too upset.

The opinion cast was that whenever an instructor is on board, irrespective of the status of the person in the LH seat they (unless firmly trussed up) were the ultimate authority (with ultimate responibility) if it all went to r@t sh't.

This is one that just never goes away.

:ugh: :ok:

[S-Works]

An Instructor gives Instruction if a pilot is current on type and having a flight to demonstrate that they are safe then they are not recieving Instruction and so they are P1 and Instructor is just an observer and should log nothing.

If the pilot requires Instruction during the flight on an aspect of the flight then they are being given Instruction.

When I check someone out current on type I state at the start of the flight they are in command and I am just there to observe they are safe to meet the insurance requirements. If I see anything during the flight that is unsafe then I will state I have control and that I become pilot in command, the flight then becomes a training flight.

If I am checking someone out who is current on class but is new to type then I would hope I am teaching them something specific to that aircraft and then it a training flight and they are PUT.

[Dave Gittins]

That's two of us on the same hymn sheet ...... I am afraid like anything else in this world ..... lots of others seem to have a deeply ingrained, unshakable incorrect opinion.

Life's too short .....

:ok:

[vectis lady]

Dave Gittins - im with you on this at least it was in the right column i would have paid more attention at the time if i was losing P1 not gaining,

is anyone ever likely to query this/ask me what it was as its logged wrongly or do i just ignore it as its only 1hr?

[hobbit1983]

Vectis Lady - judging by the amount of times that the question gets asked here on Pprune, I would guess that there is no definte answer.

I had a check at a new club, and I've logged it in the P1 column as P1/S...If the authorities call me on it I'll change it! Otherwise I'm not too bothered.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Hobbit, there is a definitive answer, just look at LASORS it is very clearly laid down in there.

For the seven hundredth time.

P/UT- any time you fly with an FI who logs the flight as P1.
P1/S- ONLY when you fly with an examiner on a successful flight test. A checkout doesn't count.
P1- When you are PIC.

There can only be one P1 logged on a single flight, why does it matter anyway? You may aswell do it properly.

[hobbit1983]

No worries - fair one, didn't know that. Thanks - although in my defence, my logbook has been sent off to the CAA & perused by other instructors since, none of which made any comment! Ah well.

[jamestkirk]

Page 43 - Case J

[S-Works]

J Pilot undergoing any form of
flight test with a JAA or CAA
Authorised Examiner (other
than case K).
N/A PIC U/S for successful
test
P/UT for unsuccessful
test
Enter time in ‘P1’ column
and have it certified by
aircraft commander.
Enter time in ‘Dual’ column

[Final 3 Greens]

The LASORS definition makes sense to me and my logbook reflects the taxaonomy.

However, LASORS is not air law.

Does anyone know if this definition is found in any legislation?

[BEagle]

vectis lady - you should log the time as PU/T - I assume the other pilot was actually a FI? It would indeed be a good idea to have him/her sign your logbook column for rating revalidation purposes.

There is actually very little point in worrying about P1S time - since all licensing requirements specify PU/T time, PIC time and total time. PICU/S for successful check rides - fine. But although there is logic in recording flight by a pilot with a valid rating flying under the supervision of a FI ot CRI(SPA) as P1 under supervision, it won't actually matter in the big picture.... But it is NOT PIC time unless the other person is flying as a passenger.

A Club I know of was conducting 'check rides' on newly arrived pilots as a requirement they'd dreamt up - even though the pilot might have been current on the aircraft variant. The pilot being checked paid for the flight, logged it as PICU/S and the 'checking' pilot logged the time as P1C. But the 'checking pilot' held neither a FI rating nor CRI(SPA) rating....:rolleyes:

[neilia]

If I see anything during the flight that is unsafe then I will state I have control and that I become pilot in command, the flight then becomes a training flight.

Bose-x, just to play devil's advocate, surely the fact that the option for you to take over exists implies that you were in fact PIC all along? If the engine cut out, for example, would you take control, and if so doesn't this mean that the pilot being checked out was never really in command?

[BEagle]

If the other person was a PPL holder and was down as PIC, bose-x would only be a passenger in the eyes of the law.

Any such 'passenger' taking control from the Commander is very likely to be viewed as carrying out an act of 'unlawful intereference' - if it all turned to rats, the insurance company would have a field day.

The ONLY safe option is for any check-out (except, perhaps, amongst members of private owner syndicate) to be conducted by a FI or CRI(SPA) who will act as PIC.

[S-Works]

Spoken like a true FI....

I have verified the situation with PLD and they see nothing wrong with my method. I am not an hours builder and don't really care about taking hours.

In the even of a problem as an Instructor I am deemed to be able to deal with a situation. Should the P1 be unable to deal with such a situation then I would take over. Otherwise I am perfectly happy to be a passenger.

Everyone is entitled to there view but lets not try and hide behind Insurance companies as usual.

[Say again s l o w l y]

In the 8 years I've been instructing, I can only think of a couple of occasions where it hasn't been necessary to do any instructing whilst doing checkouts.

I always want the pilot I'm flying with to get something out of the flight, after all they are paying for it! So it would be very, very rare that I just sit there. So for me this whole sitting there scenario just doesn't happen!

[S-Works]

Perhaps you are flying with the dirty unwashed or i am giving a little credit where it is due?

Horses for courses and all that.

[Airbus38]

Might I take a controversial approach?

Stick it down as whatever you fancy, if the CAA disagree when you next send off your logbook for an endorsement then they will have to tell you what it should go down as. Then you change it. If they say nothing, it's not a problem. Christ, you pay enough money for that piece of paper, why don't you let them do the donkey work?

Cue all the purists....
A38

[tmmorris]

I must say I make it a rule when I sit in an aircraft with any other qualified pilot to agree in advance who is PIC on that flight - even if the other pilot is an instructor. A lot depends on whether he is hours building or not - most of the instructors I come across are not, so they usually let me be PIC on any checks required by club rather than legal rules.

I absolutely agree that when the engine quits is no time to be arguing about who is in command. Mind you, with an experienced instructor in the RHS I think that would be my cue to say 'you have control...'

Tim

[Say again s l o w l y]

Credit where it's due? That's fine when you fly with someone who's on top of their game, but with most PPL's flying the bare minimum of hours to keep their licence valid, then it's rare that the standard you see initially is any where close to being good enough.

That's not being harsh, it's just what I've seen over the past few thousand hours. Great unwashed? Maybe, but when you fly at smallish clubs, that's what happens. Most PPL's can't afford to fly everyday or even every week.

It doesn't make them any "worse" than those who fly more regularily, they just need a bit more support from people like us.

Airbus38, if you know how something should be done, then why waste other people's time by doing it incorrectly.

I never understand what the fuss about this is. It's laid down clearly and I think it's sensible, so why does everyone seem to want to argue about it? So you can get an extra hour or two into your P1 column? Oh please, as a non professional pilot, nobody gives a monkeys about how many hours you have P1.

[S-Works]

SAS, there we go again, agreeing violently.....

If you read my post I quite clearly state that if they are current and safe and this is an "insurance" check ride then there is nothing for me to do and therefore I am happy for them to be P1 while I watch.

However if they are in need of Instruction then I am commander and it becomes a lesson. You are absolutely right that a lot of pilots require some form of Instruction during something as basic as a check flight. But I also prepared to be flexible and pragmatic enough to give someone who is current and safe the benefit.

I don't know perhaps it's the hundreds of times this has happened (and lack of currency has never been a problem...) to me was the reason I became an Instructor......

[Rod1]

This topic comes up every few months. Who cares if something gets logged p1s when it should have been something else? I recently had my BAFR, the instructor filled in my log P1S, I know this was wrong, but why bother making a fuss. I got the forms signed and sent off, it did not cost me any money and one hour makes no difference to most of us.

Interesting that this topic assumes the instructor will take over in an emergency. In the case of say a PFA two seater the owner may have 100’s of hours on type and the instructor may have never flown anything similar. My friend thoroughly enjoyed this ride with me but had never flown in a Rotax powered aircraft, had no experience with a computer controlled electric c/s prop and was very interested in all the no certified glass. He was very impressed, and wants another go, but it would take a few trips to get him up to speed with the differences.

Rod1