Logging Hours

[cheechm]

I searched and found a few topics, but haven't found a concrete answer.

I record all hours by Hobbs time, which is engine on to engine off. A few days ago, I started up, taxied for power checks, and had to return for mx after power checks. The flight was 0.1 on the Hobbs. Should I/Am I legally required to log that?

Thanks

[Genghis the Engineer]

Firstly you are required to log brakes-off to brakes-on. Hobbs time logging is not correct or legal because you are logging time the engine is running but the aeroplane either hasn't started moving yet, or has stopped. If you are being charged by Hobbs, live with it, you still can't log all of that time.

Secondly, legally a flight is from brakes off WITH THE INTENTION OF FLIGHT. However, in reality if the flight didn't happen, most people won't, and nobody really expects you to.

G

[cheechm]

I think the way it's seen at the flight school is that you start the engine and then off you go. The first ATC contact is once you've taxied to the edge of the ramp, done your power check and contacted ATC. So for arguments sake, the different between brakes on and hobbs on is no more than 2 minutes, which shouldn't matter as the Hobbs time is in 6 minute blocks anyway.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I think the way it's seen at the flight school is that you start the engine and then off you go

Gosh ! Makes me wonder what I've been doing wasting all that time warming my engine up and checking the avionics all these years. Not to mention all those time-wasting shutdown checks I've been mucking about with.

G

[RTN11]

However you are charged should be built into the price. Some will charge hobbs, but the hourly rate may be less than a school which charges brakes off to brakes on, or even Take off to Land plus 10 or 12 mins. This allows for the time you have the engine running on the ground which you cannot log.

This does make it difficult to make a proper comparison of hiring charges, but that's life.

Unless you actually took to the air, there is nothing to log. If you did an extended ground run, this may be worth entering in the engine logbook, but certainly nothing for airframe, prop or pilot.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I'd actually make a logbook entry for any such non-flight because there's almost certainly some learning point there to remember, but not log the time.

G

[mary meagher]

Hmm. Logbook entry for a non-flight, which certainly did provide a learning point to remember....

With Warwick Brady, as my instructor, in a Wycombe Air Centre 152, long long ago - I think it was 1984.... Had a bit of trouble trying to start the engine, so Warwick gave it a few positive pumps on the prime, and the engine caught on fire! He grabbed the extinguisher, jumped out and began to squirt, I shut down and made a sharp exit....Warwick said go tell them in the office, quick! So I moved calmly - keep calm! don't panic! into the building and remarked "We seem to have an engine fire...." Well, it was like stirring up a nest of ants, everyone began rushing about in all directions. The Cessna sat there, sulking, fire extinguished, still puffing a wisp of smoke. The Chief Engineer took the situation in hand, we decided to fly in something else.

In the Red Baron at lunchtime, Dave Rich said "Don't worry about it, Mary, it was only a Cessna, there's plenty more where that came from!"

Learning point, don't overprime a balky engine.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Learning point, don't overprime a balky engine
You need to know the individual engine ... some won't start at all unless you do prime them rather more than it says in the club checklist ...

[foxmoth]

Learning point, don't overprime a balky engine

I thought the learning point was - don't be bothered about a Cessna:}

[B47]

Genghis,

Quote: Firstly you are required to log brakes-off to brakes-on. Hobbs time logging is not correct or legal because you are logging time the engine is running but the aeroplane either hasn't started moving yet, or has stopped. If you are being charged by Hobbs, live with it, you still can't log all of that time.

That's a very confident statement on a perennial topic. Required by who? If there is any formal CAA guidance on this, I'd like to know. Many log Hobbs time as you are under control of the aircraft with the engine running. I think you'll find most hour builders with commercial ambitions will log Hobbs, especially if they're paying for Hobbs time.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I think you'll find most hour builders with commercial ambitions will log Hobbs

Then they are committing fraud. Sorry, that's just how it is.

As for formal guidance, it's easy to look up:-

From the ANO 2010:

Personal flying log book
79 (1) Every member of the flight crew of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom and
every person who engages in flying for the purpose of qualifying for the grant or
renewal of a licence under this Order must keep a personal flying log book in which
the following information must be recorded:
(a) the name and address of the holder of the log book;
(b) detailed information about the holder's licence (if any) to act as a member of the
flight crew of an aircraft; and
(c) the name and address of the holder's employer (if any).

(2) Detailed information about each flight during which the holder of the log book acted
either as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft or for the purpose of qualifying for
the grant or renewal of a licence under this Order must be recorded in the log book
as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of each flight.

(3) The information recorded in accordance with paragraph (2) must include:
(a) the date, the places at which the holder of the log book embarked on and
disembarked from the aircraft and the time spent during the course of a flight
when the holder was acting in either capacity;
(b) the type and registration marks of the aircraft;
(c) the capacity in which the holder acted in flight;
(d) information about any special conditions under which the flight was conducted,
including night flying and instrument flying; and
(e) information about any test or examination undertaken by the holder of the log
book whilst in flight.

(4) Information about any test or examination undertaken whilst in a flight simulator must
be recorded in the log book, including:
(a) the date of the test or examination;
(b) the type of simulator;
(c) the capacity in which the holder acted; and
(d) the nature of the test or examination.
(5) For the purposes of this article, a helicopter is in flight from the moment the helicopter
first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking off until the rotors are next
stopped.

Meaning of in flight
256 (1) An aircraft is deemed to be in flight:

(a) in the case of a piloted flying machine, from the moment when, after the
embarkation of its crew for the purpose of taking off, it first moves under its
own power, until the moment when it next comes to rest after landing;

(b) in the case of a pilotless flying machine, or a glider, from the moment when it
first moves for the purpose of taking off, until the moment when it next comes
to rest after landing;

(c) in the case of an airship, from the moment when it first becomes detached from
the surface until the moment when it next becomes attached to the surface or
comes to rest on the surface;

(d) in the case of a free balloon, from the moment when the balloon, including the
canopy and basket, becomes separated from the surface until the moment it
next comes to rest on the surface; and

(e) in the case of a captive balloon, from the moment when the balloon, including
the canopy and basket, becomes separated from the surface, apart from a
restraining device attaching it to the surface, until the moment when it next
comes to rest on the surface.
(2) The expressions 'a flight' and 'to fly' are to be construed in accordance with paragraph
(1).

My bold.

I have to correct myself on one point however - the "intention of flight" obviously was dropped at some point. There was a pillock in Stirling around 1997 who after flying an unlicenced microlight in the middle of a public park (and crashing it into a tree) got off an illegal flying charge because he claimed he'd not intended to fly and just got accidentally airborne. Possibly the wording was quietly changed for that reason.

G

[Whopity]

I started up, taxied for power checks, and had to return for mx after power checks.The flight was 0.1 on the Hobbs. Should I/Am I legally required to log that?Is it 1st April? There was no flight. you said so yourself therefore; there is nothing to record! How could you possibly think otherwise?

[madlandrover]

Whopity: I've seen a CPL student in the past log time taxying from/to fuel pumps, on the grounds that he was fuelling with the intention of flying. That took a short sharp debrief :E

[WestWind1950]

a cpl instructor friend of mine once did a training flight with 2 students. He turned to the guy in the back seat, noticed he was noting something in his log book, and asked what he was doing.

The student in the back was putting the flight times when he flew in the back in his log book! :ugh: He felt, he was flying and learning something so it was a logable flight. :{

[mad_jock]

yep its the low hour peeps that it matters to.

You have to keep an eye on FO's as well for fiddling the taxi times.

I have seen one in tears when told that all his club check outs were actually dual not PICUS. Meant his ATPL skills test was invalid and he would have to wait another year.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Nothing wrong with logging pax flights, or "failure to launch" flights of-course, particularly as with that CPL student where he learned something.

It's counting the hours that's a problem.

I have quite a few such flights in my logbook - but I don't include the flight time in any totals, that's all. Where I got an hour in the back of a Yak-52, or abandoned a flight after a nosewheel steering failure - I learned stuff and remember it. But, they're not in my totals, just there as part of my flying memory.

I have seen one in tears when told that all his club check outs were actually dual not PICUS. Meant his ATPL skills test was invalid and he would have to wait another year

Grief, how many checkouts had he done!

G

[WestWind1950]

Genghis, I didn't mean logging a note or something, he was noting the TIME! which is obviously very wrong. I often thought teaching students how to fill out a log book should be part of the curriculum in ground school... but then, probably the instructors don't often know how themselves. :}

[Genghis the Engineer]

Genghis, I didn't mean logging a note or something, he was noting the TIME! which is obviously very wrong. I often thought teaching students how to fill out a log book should be part of the curriculum in ground school... but then, probably the instructors don't often know how themselves. :}

Oh I realised that, I was just making what I hoped was a useful point.

G

[ChriSat]

It’s extremely concerning how many hour builders about to embark on their CPL think they can log P2 or co-pilot time in their log books flying in an Single Pilot SEP. How stupid can you get? Look at this recent example:- http://www.pprune.org/7140954-post893.html

(http://www.pprune.org/7140954-post893.html)
It would be good if school’s aircraft tech log data had to be uploaded to the CAA, and then random spot checks on flights could be done when people send their log books in for licence issuance, perhaps with an acceptable error tolerance of +/-5%. Although this has got me thinking, I've logged a 15 min “taxi” to the holding point, where I had to turn back due to an un-rectifiable 300/400rpm mag drop. I logged it as it was with the intention of flight, and a good experience, but should I cross it out?

[mad_jock]

Chris its pointless bothering with the effort. Its so bloody obvious when folk are on the fiddle its amusing.

And then ask one question and the just dissolve.

[Maoraigh1]

until the moment when it next comes to rest after landing;
I thought I was logging correctly. Apparently not. I've been logging time to finally comes to a stop. Never noted the time when I've stopped as instructed by ATC to give way to something, on my taxi back.

[mad_jock]

until the moment when it next comes to rest after landing;

That can be some days after the event with a Jetstream.

[Genghis the Engineer]

It also points out the daftness of hours as a crude measure of experience.

That chap who failed his ATPL skill test because he had, let's say 1450 hours instead of 1510 - did it really make any real difference. He was an experienced pilot who had passed a skilled test. The hours really should not have mattered to that extent.

But it does.

G

[Pilot.Lyons]

I thought it was common sense not to log it if you didnt leave the ground.... Maybe its just me

[mad_jock]

It was more likely 1495 hours to be honest.

You have to have lines in the sand. Serves him right fiddling it. If he hadn't been so sure he was right he could have done 5 hours in a tommy the week before. ANy way not that it makes much difference there was no way he was getting near the LHS for the next year anyway.

And I agree it should be approaches, if that was the case I would be more experenced than most of emirates :D

[mary meagher]

There is on the fiddle, and there is on the fiddle.....yipes, the year is nearly up, and I have to have ten hours to keep my rating! in this case, a person who wanted to maintain a gliding instructor rating.

I am still pxxx......very very very annoyed about it. In December, no chance of a soaring flight, so he asked the tuggie to tow him to 8,000' in a K8 glider, four times in one day. On the second flight they cooked two cylinders in the towplane

IT WAS MY AEROPLANE! I have never forgotten and I will never forgive until I receive a cheque in the post to cover the cost.....and that will never happen.
Of course each said it was the other one's fault..... and no, they didn't ask my permission, either, I wasn't at the airfield on that occasion.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Probably a combination - approaches, sectors, hours, night, IFR....

Ideally also a handful of emergencies, but that's a little hard to legislate for.

However we have what we have.

G

[patowalker]

Ideally also a handful of emergencies, but that's a little hard to legislate for.

Would self-inflicted emergencies count? If that were the case, someone I know would have got his licence much earlier. :)

[douglasheld]

Amen to this, Genghis.

What I do is have Hobbs start time, takeoff time and landing time, and Hobbs shutdown time entered in the aircraft's technical log. If I don't trust the students' entries, I refer to the TWR logs and replace the takeoff and landing times with what was recorded there.

What I invoice to the customer is /flight/ time, plus ten minutes (or 0.2 hour if they want decimal).

The three times I need to justify as the aircraft owner are:
1. Elapsed calendar time since an engineering event;
2. Engine hours;
3. Airframe flight hours.
1) is a non issue, and 2) and 3) are both available from the Technical Log.

As far as invoicing to the students: flight time plus 10/12 minutes is entirely reasonable, as any other format invariably encourages them to skimp on preflight or after landing checks.

I'm happy to share my Technical Log format for anyone curious who sends me a PM. I keep it as a Google doc spreadsheet, totally easy.

[Dave Gittins]

Hobbs time isn't necessarily the time the engine is running ... the Hobbs can be switched on by various things, the master switch, speed sensing, squat switches etc.

In a 172 I don't know specifically what starts the Hobbs turning but I have been told it only records actual flight time (I suppose whether it measures take off and landing roll or not is rather moot). For all I know it may vary from one aircraft to another (age related or factory related.)

I log start of taxi to end of taxi (movement under own power). I get charged Hobbs + 0.2.

What I log and what I pay seem pretty closely aligned to me so I guess what I say in para 1 . is about right.

I am too old and ugly to be counting hours for another license so I have no reason to try and exagerate.

[cct]

I did once log a non-flight a while back, under the assumption that I intended to fly, but rejected due to rough running during the mag checks. However I had 99 hrs 55 mins after my last flight, so I logged 5 mins to get 100 hrs. I had missed a few flights due to the weather, and wanted that figure - pure vanity I dare say!

My club charges brakes off to brakes on, although they probably didnt really like me adding that to the tech log.

When did they drop the intention to fly bit?

[XiRho]

I am charged Hobbs time, I log Hobbs time. It is started by oil pressure from what I remember. The field I fly at is uncontrolled, and procedure is generally start up, post start up checks, obtain airfield information and then taxi to hold to do power checks (after letting everything warm up). So I might be "stealing" a couple of minutes every flight, but considering I log decimals, this is more often than not, not going to make a difference to log book time.

On a side note, whilst I can't see the "intention of flight" bit anymore, I have copied this from GtE's post:

"in the case of a piloted flying machine, from the moment when, after the
embarkation of its crew for the purpose of taking off, it first moves under its
own power, until the moment when it next comes to rest after landing"

Is "for the purpose of taking off" not essentially the same as "for the intention of flight"?