P1/s????

[Spamcan defender]

Hi, just a quick one!!
Went up for a club check out the other day with an instructor as i've not been up in a while :( :( . Question is do I log this as P1, P1/S or Pu/t??
An easy one, I know, but it IS Monday :confused: :confused:

[FormationFlyer]

If the instructor is logging P1 then you must log DUAL or P/UT.

If I fly with people as an instructor I am considered to be in anyway in command then I log P1 and they must log DUAL - that means ppl/cpl/atpl on a club check or a student on a course such as IMC, NIGHT etc...

PIC U/S or P1S is ONLY available as the result of a SUCCESSFUL flight test with an examiner unless PREVIOUSLY agreed with the CAA.

As no-one I have ever known has this agreement any flight where the instructor is logging P1 means you must log DUAL.

The CAA guidelines are VERY clear on this. Used to be in CAP53, GID44 and now LASORS. It has ALWAYS been the same.

Excuse the tone but it really annoys me that I get PPLs argue with me about this - and worse still a LOT of instructors get this wrong too...the documentation is quite clear....

Anyway..hope this helps clear it up.

[tomahawk1673]

I also went up for a check yesterday. (successfull!!) My instructor did my log book for me, she put her name as Captain, P1/s, and under "in command" the length of time, then signed it.

Is this correct?

[FormationFlyer]

Nope.

The instructor is WRONG.

Check out LASORS, GID 44 and CAP53 if you have it hanging around.

Trust me - I have even clarified this one with the CAA. PIC U/S is ONLY loggable for a successful flight test - and that means a flight test as recognised by the CAA with an approved examiner.

Hope this helps.

[BlueLine]

LASORS page 52 Item J

Pilot undergoing any form of flight test may log P1S for successful test, signed by P1 to be valid.

There is nothing that says it must be a CAA Flight test. A check out is a form of test and meets the description. If the instructor considers that you have passed the club check you can log P1S. I and many others, have done it for years with no objection.

[essouira]

I understood that P1/S was only for a flight test. For check flights, I work on the principle that if I don't need to touch the controls and it all goes well then the PPL can log it P1. If I need to fly/demonstrate etc, then I ask them to log it PU/T. This seems fair to me. What do other people think ?

[C.A.]

Exactly right Esouria,
If the student has flown the a/c the whole time and all you have effectively done is "checked" them, then it makes sense that they log command. Same as instrument renewal really, if the chief pilot or chief instructor hasnt done anything all flight and you are within the 12 months of your renewal, why shouldnt you log command. It is after all, a "CHECK" flight because you are already licenced do do the flight.
I actually think that the rules on this are written to allow for a bit of leeway. Common sense SHOULD prevail and i really dont think the powers that be, will worry about arguing over it.

Mind you if they want to argue, send them my way. Ive got little to do at the moment and i like a challenge!
CA

[BEagle]

The Examiner or Instructor is there to direct the conduct of the flight. It is a mandatory test. He/she is the Commander; the other pilot most certainly is not. If the test is successful, the other pilot is P1/S so long as the FE/FI signs the logbook to that effect. Otherwise he/she is Pu/t.

I cannot understand how anyone could possibly imagine that a pilot under any form of check could conceivably log 'command'. Sure, they may be the 'sole manipulator of the controls', but they're being TOLD WHAT TO DO by someone else! E.g. "Show me a steep turn to the left, recovering back onto this heading". That is a lawful order issued by the checking pilot; he/she has told the pilot what to do, that pilot is acting under their SUPERVISION.

Why all the grief over this in any case? Only a few hours are logged as P1/S in this way; if you 'need' more command time, then hire an ac and go 'command' it as you wish!

[Whirlybird]

BEagle,

Thanks for a commonsense reply. I've had discussions with instructors on this after checkrides, and everyone seems to be interpreting it differently. I've now taken the view that I'll do whatever they tell me to save hassle - it's so few hours anyway, so who cares.

[FormationFlyer]

BlueLine
LASORS page 52 Item J
Pilot undergoing any form of flight test may log P1S for successful test, signed by P1 to be valid.

There is nothing that says it must be a CAA Flight test. A check out is a form of test and meets the description. If the instructor considers that you have passed the club check you can log P1S. I and many others, have done it for years with no objection.
Just because you have done it for many years doesn't make it right.
Just becuase no-one complained doesn't make it right.

I can think of a number of instances where pilots have flown without valid licences for years without anyone raising objectsions...were they right? Of course not...

I believe your interpretation is a bending of the rules....and I believe you are stretching the term 'flight test' beyond its recognised meaning.

Club checks are not flight tests; the biennial flight with an instructor is NOT a flight test...why? because the rules for revalidation merely require a 'dual flight with a flight instructor' - not a test - if it really were a test then it would require an examiner.

Lets face it - unless you are flying with an examiner its not really a flight test is it? Come on....it has to be a flight test as recognised by the authority - not because some instructor says its a flight test - if you interpret it like that then you need to prove your authority to make the descision about what is or isn't a flight test - certainly being an instructor does NOT confer such a privilege on us.

If you take this to its logical conclusion it means that in group aircraft a PPL doing a 'club/group check' on another PPL could call it a flight test and one log PIC and the other PIC US....which is most certainly NOT allowed.

Indeed if you read further on you can see really what the CAA are getting at...

LASORS page 54....

'Flight Time as PIC US, apart from as specifically provided for under Case J above, will only be allowable for the holder of a PPL subject to the terms of a prior agreement with the CAA.'.

Which kinda shows how the CAA are getting fed up with PIC US being logged by PPLs because this is not included in JAR IEM FCL 1.080.

As I said - no-one I know has this prior agreement.

With regard to the biennial flight with an instructor...lets examine that AIC shall we...
127(W378)/99

Single Engine Piston Aeroplane Class Rating Content of the Dual Flight with a Flight Instructor

Aha....notice the wording 'DUAL FLIGHT with a Flight Instructor'.

Reading further on....
1.3 b (ii) complete a training flight of at least 1 hours duration ...blah blah....This flight may be replaced by any other proficiency check or skill test for a class or type rating or by a flight test for an IMC rating.
Again its getting quite clear such a flight is NOT a flight test...although it talks about signing the log book if a satisfactory standard is reached it is VERY CAREFUL to indicate that this is not a flight test....Indeed when did a flight test allow for instruction to be carried out until a satisfactory standard was achieved?

Like I said - I clarified the situation with the CAA themselves. Feel free to do so if you wish...but anyone flying with me where I am in my capacity as an instructor, check ride or not, I log P1 and they log DUAL (P U/T). Thats my advice - if they choose to do otherwise then that is up to them but my nose is clean and I advised them in such a way that there is no doubt that I am operating within the rules. If you operate such that they log PIC U/S then you operating based on an interpretation which may be right or wrong....I know which side of the line I like to operate on.

As an interesting point - if an accident occured on such a flight - who do you think theyll be dragging through the mire? Do you really think that saying 'well the other pilot was P1' will in anyway mean you avoid responsibility? No. 'Well he was PIC US'...it just becomes meaningless...

And thats how I reason P1...if the buck stops with me - I log P1. If I will be held accountable for the flight...I log P1. Because that is precisely what being 'PIC' is. Moving on from that - you can see from my reasoning above why I therefore say the other pilot is to log DUAL or PUT.

[FormationFlyer]

essouira
I understood that P1/S was only for a flight test. For check flights, I work on the principle that if I don't need to touch the controls and it all goes well then the PPL can log it P1. If I need to fly/demonstrate etc, then I ask them to log it PU/T. This seems fair to me. What do other people think ?

So of out curiosity - if you dont need to touch the controls - then do you still log the flight time - or not?

Interestingly enough if the 'student' is outside the 90 day rule and logs it as P1 then the flight is technically illegal because his licence is not valid for the carriage of passengers.

Im curious now....

[Stampe]

As an examiner of 20 years when I,m presented with a logbook with P1/s in it I treat it as P/ut for licensing purposes unless it was a successfull flight test with an examiner or as co-pilot but handling pilot of a certificated multi-crew aircraft .The CAA are quite clear on this and have been for many years.I was checked out on a friends homebuilt biplane recently and quite happily entered it as P/ut .I,ve got 14000 hours and am still learning every time I go flying!!.Really this is all about egos, having gained a licence some people just can,t bear to admit there is anything left to learn.Most of the time P1/s entries are irrelevant as they can just be treated as being part of the dual allowance however if you were tight on hours it might just tip you over the edge.This one will run and run but P1/s doesn,t get past me when it matters.Fortunately aircraft fly because of the laws of physics and finance not the semantics of aviation legislation!!.:p

[Tee]

Another interesting one............I understand that the 28-day club check may be taken with a person who is authorised and competent, but not the holder of a current Instructor Rating. In that case, there is no doubt - the person being supervised can log P1 and the person doing the supervising logs nothing.

[slim_slag]

BEagle

I cannot understand how anyone could possibly imagine that a pilot under any form of check could conceivably log 'command'.

Let me give you an example :)

Sure, they may be the 'sole manipulator of the controls', but they're being TOLD WHAT TO DO by someone else! E.g. "Show me a steep turn to the left, recovering back onto this heading". That is a lawful order issued by the checking pilot; he/she has told the pilot what to do, that pilot is acting under their SUPERVISION.

Maybe Approach Controllers should be able to log PIC when they are vectoring you around in IMC in the terminal area.

So I need my biennial review, taken in my plane, and the only instructor around is a spotty kid who has no real clue, but he is available and needs the money.

I tell him in advance I am taking responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight, if anything goes wrong I will make the decisions, and maybe even tell him he has to sit in the back :D :D

I demonstrate to boy wonder that I can control the plane, and he signs me off, and maybe even learns something :)

I cannot understand how anyone could possibly imagine that a pilot giving that form of check could conceivably log 'command'.

:D

The only time I think an instructor is totally right in logging command is when he has somebody not rated in that plane manipulating the controls. Other times it is a grey area, but quite often an instructor is only along for the ride, even when he is giving instruction. Often they are only evaluating you, the same as an examiner is, and when you would agree you can log PIC.

It seems to me that you log what the regulations permit you to, everybody knows the game, and who ever said the regulations made sense?

[essouira]

Formation Flyer - good questions

1) I don't log the time if I tell the pilot to log it P1 (only one captain and all that ..... )
2) I only tell them to log it as P1 if they are legal, within check etc - ie we are checking them for their suitability as hirers not conducting a CAA flight test

[BEagle]

Very simply, if you are qualified to fly the ac and you are doing so under the supervision of even a 'spotty kid who needs the money'(sic) then you should log it as P1S. The 'spotty kid' who happens to be qualified as a Flight Instructor is the Commander and logs P1 - and he/she directs the content of the flight. You do not.

Anyway - does it really b£oody matter?

I will - as Formation Flyer will shortly find out - be standardising the matter for anyone who flies from my RF. If they don't like it, byeeeeeee.......

[slim_slag]

BEagle
With all due respect, you are simply quoting the regs. I know what you 'should log', this thread is discussing whether they make sense. IMO, directing the content of a flight does not automatically make you Commander. Lots of people not touching the controls get to direct the content of a flight. Some of them are not even pilots, some are pilots and not instructors.

The person ultimately responsible for the safe completion of the flight is Commander. Somebody telling the pilot to 'turn left' is not necessarily that person.

The regs make allowance (concessions may be a better word) for others to log PIC. Does it matter, who cares? Everybody, that's why you log dual received, dual given, and PIC (as defined by The Authority) in different columns.

The totals at the base of the three columns, and some quick mental arithmetic, gives a better idea of what somebody has really done :)

As I said, it's all a game. An instructor never gives 'instruction' for the whole flight, and it's not always that the student is 'sole manipulator of the controls' for the whole flight. People just log the whole flight as if it was a single 'experience'. Maybe you are correct, who does care? When I get snotty remarks from UK instructors because I logged PIC in my FAA logbook after being checked out in the UK, I certainly don't care :D :D

[BlueLine]

Formation Flyer

This subject has been raised a number of times and produces similar arguments. Quite why people get so hung up over such trivia I can't imagine.

Why do we log hours in the first place? To ensure we have the minimum experience for licence issue and revalidation. If we are professional pilots its also a check we do not exceed the maximum, but for private pilots, hours over the minimums are of no consequence.

The CAA are simply not interested in how you log it unless its to meet the minimum requirements for licensing purposes.

Don't confuse a test for licensing purposes with one for club purposes. If you take a student up and refuse him an aeroplane on the grounds of his flying ability, its a test. Whilst you can't legally stop him flying, because you don't have the authority, you can still deny him your club aeroplane. As for bending the rules, any test means exactly that; the CAA have indicated they are quite happy, or more to the point, it does not concern them! The various tables they provide are only for guidance. The CAA is a Safety Regulator not a Nanny telling you what to do and okaying every minor move, as many would seem to wish.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Interestingly enough if the 'student' is outside the 90 day rule and logs it as P1 then the flight is technically illegal because his licence is not valid for the carriage of passengers."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not at all, The pilot is legally rated to fly the aeroplane, he can fly with an instructor, who by definition is not a passenger, and log it as PIS. The instructor being PIC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The only time I think an instructor is totally right in logging command is when he has somebody not rated in that plane manipulating the controls"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAR-FCL 1.080 The holder of a flight instructor rating may log as PIC all flight time during which he acts as an instructor.


Remember, the log book is just a personal record of what you did; ART 28 tells you what you must legally record; The CAA tell you what they want for licence issue and revalidation, after that, its down to YOU! All you have to do is use a bit of common sense.

[FormationFlyer]

BEAgle

Excellent. Standardisation is great. It makes it clear - no arguments. Im all for that - and as ever I abide by club rules.

BlueLine

Fair comment.

The problem is a 'generous interpretation' of the rules is used by a lot of low hours pilots are trying to up their P1 time....given that P1 time is important up to ATPL issue its a question of trying to cheat the system - and for the CAA purposes P1S may be counted as PIC for licence issue.

But when it comes down to it you need to log your flight time honestly and with a clear conscience.

I ensure that all my flights I log with another instructor (where he is in command) are dual (put) unless I am on a flight test (examiner) where (assuming success) I log P1S.

I agree that for club checks it makes sense for the pilot being checked to log P1S.....Im sure we all agree on that....but my question is - is that acceptable to the authority and where is it written that it is acceptable.

Ill dig up the e-mail I received back from the CAA sometime ago when I attempted to clarify the issue...

[Spamcan defender]

OOPS, seemed to have opened a can of worms :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
At least PPrune can never be called dull :D :D

[BlueLine]

More to the point, it is not written anywhere that its not acceptable? Be positive!

[FormationFlyer]

If only the tax man used the same logic! :D

[kabz]

Here's a cracking link to how we do this in the FAA ...

http://www.awp.faa.gov/new/fsdo/las_vegas/art_pilot.htm

FYI, both my flight tests (glider / airplane) were written up by the respective examiners as PIC for me.

[kabz]

Even better, the following seems to explain how the instructor I checked out with at a local school logged my time as PIC in the two hour checkout (sole manipulator of controls).



Logging PIC time ... (Private and Commercial Pilots)

1. When the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated.

Logging PIC time (Instructors and Others)

A flight instructor may log PIC "while acting as a authorized instructor". No change to previous regulations.

A student pilot can now log PIC. That’s new, and since there is no restriction, your logbook can be updated so that all student solo time prior to August 4, 1997 may be logged as PIC. When an instructor is aboard, since the student is not rated in the aircraft, flight instruction is still logged as dual not PIC.

Then there are some unusual situations which occur. A private pilot flying with his friend (a CFI or ATP) aboard as a passenger. What is the status of the CFI or ATP who is obviously a more senior pilot with more experience than the private pilot? The regulations don’t address this situation, but the courts may find that the more senior pilot has some or all the responsibility for the operation or safety of the flight.

In summary, the person who is pilot-in-command may log PIC, others may also log PIC depending in the circumstances.

[BEagle]

Only in America..........

[AltHold]

Very intersting discussion, but having been an instructor, examiner and commercial pilot for 20 years I was under the impression that the only person that was legally allowed to log P1 was the pilot that signed the tech log to accept the aircraft. In the case of a check flight if the instructor signs for the aircraft then he is legally in command and if the person being checked signs for it then he is the Captain and therefore allowed to log P1, the question to be asked is on a check flight (not a test where the examiner is always the Captain) who has to sign for the aircraft and therefore be in command. Maybe the CAA could answer that one and make thing a little more clear.

[FormationFlyer]

Aha...found my reply from the CAA...date 29.Jan.2002

Re: logging P1S for club checks (not licence related).



Thank you for your email dated 05 January 2002, firstly can I apologise for
the delay in responding to your enquiry.

[snip]

Officially you can only count time as Pilot in Command (PIC) or
Pilot under Training (PUT) in a single pilot aeroplane. However, recently
pilots under going test or checks have logged Pilot in Command under
Supervision for things like IMC Flight Tests, LPC and PPL(A) Skill Tests.
JAR-FCL 1.080 details the logging of flight time, can I refer you and your
flying school to this for a definitive answer.

I trust the above has clarified the current requirements. If you have any
further questions relating to this email please visit our website or
alternatively, please contact your Customer Service Team on 01293 573700.

Yours sincerely

Justin Willcocks
Licensing Operations


When his says checks he means LPC - not club checks as clarified above. Club checks fall fall under the first part of the statement.

It still stands that the dual training flight requirement must obviously be logged as put because otherwise it is not a 'dual training flight' by definition.

[BEagle]

Typical unhelpful CAA reply.

When will that bunch in the Belgrano learn to answer a question clearly and unambiguously. The reply you received merely said 'We suggest you look in the book'.......

The JAR website contains poorly indexed pdf documents which again are not specific......

[FormationFlyer]

Yeah..re-reading it I guess there it isnt totally clear still is it.

Ho hum...

[martinidoc]

slim slag

From your attitude it seems you believe you have nothing to learn from an instructional flight.

Frankly I am surprised any instructor would want to fly with you in any capacity, let alone "sign you off"!

[slim_slag]

Martini

From your attitude it seems you believe you have nothing to learn from an instructional flight.

Well, that is quite an incorrect summary of my beliefs, so I should explain it better.

I learn something from every flight, be it solo, with an instructor on my right, or a student/certificated pilot on my left. Or behind or in front of me :)


Instructors have several roles, sometimes it to (hopefully) impart some knowledge to the other person, sometimes it's purely to assess the other persons flying ability. It would not be uncommon that during the second kind of flight, I would learn more from the person I am assessing than he/she does from me. It's very common during the first.

Anyway, this thread is about logging practices, not learning practices. I just think that to blindly say an instructor is always in command of a flight is oversimplifying a complex relationship.

Frankly I am surprised any instructor would want to fly with you in any capacity, let alone "sign you off"!

Seeing as you have no idea of my personal situation that is a foolish thing to say. I can put my hand on my heart and promise that you would be totally utterly surprised :)

[imabell]

if you blokes can't even figure out how to log your flying hours honestly and accurately by now you should give the game away.

how can you hold a licence and not know the rules of this basic task.

if these posts are an indication of the jar's and how they work then i can only hope that the rest of the world is not infected with this virulent strain of nonsense.

i will use this thread to demonstrate to our authority how the introduction of any form of the jar's would be detrimental to aviation. :rolleyes:

[luvly jubbly]

Anyone need a check ride?

I need the cash to buy some more spot cream!

LJ