Can a safety pilot log flight time?

[santan17]

I was recently flying in Portugal with a friend (both of us have IRs). The portuguese insisted that if we do a VFR flight but the PF uses foggles or screens to simulate IFR then he can log that time as instrument time while the safety pilot (keeping a visual lookout) can log the time as visual flight time. Is that correct? Or is it just the PF that can log the time?

Any help would be appreciated

Santan

[Bomber Harris]

Best to ask your own licensing authority. However, my understandng is that you are a required crew member if acting as a safety pilot for an IFR flight if foggles are worn therefore you can log it. Obviously you must be licensed to fly that aircraft. Also you are P1 as the PF cannot be in command if he cannot see out the window. The rules are quite clear about looking out the window when on an IFR flight plan in VMC to aid in collision avoidance. This function MUST be carried out making it a requirement to have a safety pilot. Also, in your case (VFR flight plan) then it is unquestionable that a qualified pilot remains on the lookout. Again this makes him P1 as the PF is 'unable' to maintain separation from other aircraft and IMC conditions, thus mking him/her incapable of bing P1. The PF must log it as P1/S (under supervision). I will probably be contradicted on this by everyone....so as I say...ask you license issuing authority....hope this helps

Cheers....Bomber

[englishal]

I don't think JAR make any allowance for logging time as a safety pilot. However the FAA do.

Under the FARs the PF is entitled to log PIC, becasue they are manipulating the controls but under the hood, and the safety pilot is entitled to log PIC as they are required to look out and conduct the flight safely. The PF would also log SIT.

The exception to this would be if the PF was not instrument rated, the safety pilot was and the flight entered IMC. Now only the SP could log PIC [as the PF is not rated to be there]. Of course all the "qualified and current" stuff still applies.

Rgds
EA:D

[Thrifty van Rental]

Englishal

I agree with most of your answer, but our interpretations depart from one another towards the end.

From an FAA point of view, a non-IR pilot should not be flying with a hood on, unless accompanied by an instructor. Under these circumstances, the pilot in command is the instructor. If a non-IR pilot elects to put a hood on, then he is breaking the FARs unless his co-pilot is licensed and current to take over command of the flight immediately, and does so.

An IR pilot who has lost his 6-month currency can fly with a safety pilot to regain currency, but this pilot does not have to have an IR. Such flights will be conducted according to VFR and the safety pilot will also be responsible for ensuring that the flight remains outside clouds.

It is only in England with your IMC rating that the edges start to get blurred.:cool:

[tmmorris]

On first glance it would seem that the safety pilot can log P2, as he is a required member of the flight crew for that operation. However I seem to remember the CAA squashed that idea.

Best ring them and ask.

Tim

[santan17]

Yeah Ill give them a ring tomorrow

thanks

santan

[StrateandLevel]

A safety pilot operating on a UK licence can only log flight time if they have to assume control of the aircraft.

In the case of IF training you are there as a lookout, not a crew member and cannot log the flight. In the case of a pilot with a restricted medical requiring another pilot to be carried, again you can only log the flight time if the other pilot becomes incapacitated and you have to take over.

You can only log P2 in an aircraft certified for two pilots or where JAR-OPS requires a second pilot to be carried for public transport operations.

[englishal]

From an FAA point of view, a non-IR pilot should not be flying with a hood on, unless accompanied by an instructor. Under these circumstances, the pilot in command is the instructor.

As far as the FARs go [no pun intended:D], as long as you're rated on type, eg. you're flying a SE aircraft and you hold a SEP rating but under the hood, then you are also entitled to log PIC. The Safety Pilot must be qualified and current on type, and ready to take the controls. Obviously a non IR'd SP cannot allow the flight to enter IMC but as long as the flight remains in VMC then everything is perfectly legal, and both Sole manipulator of the controls and Safety Pilot can log PIC.

Cheers
EA:D

[foghorn]

There are lots of myths and urban legends regarding logging of time. However most are wrong according to the JARs.

According to the JARs, only one pilot can log P1 at a time in a Single Pilot Aircraft. It's simple:

Single Pilot = One person in command = One person logging P1.

The only exception to this is succesful tests with a Flight Examiner, where the Examiner logs P1, the candidate P1/S.

As StrateandLevel points out, P2 can only be logged in aircraft that require two crew members.

[mad_jock]

I don't think you have to be qualified on the class or type of SPA which your are a safety pilot on.

Your job is only to alert the PIC of traffic / terrian while flying under VFR if they are under the hood.

I think foghorn has it right.

[Flyin'Dutch']

Mad_Jock a safety pilot is not just a lookout. It is someone appropriately rated for the machine that is flown to take over if the P1 becomes incapacitated. (I should ad for a single crew aircraft)

JAR/CAA: One P1 only in Single crew aircraft unless the aforementioned examiner example

FAA: 2x P1 possible as EA states:

Under the FARs the PF is entitled to log PIC, becasue they are manipulating the controls but under the hood, and the safety pilot is entitled to log PIC as they are required to look out and conduct the flight safely.

A PPL can never log P2 (unless there is a multicrew aircraft that can be flown by PPLs, did not think there is one)

FD

[chrisN]

I asked the CAA about safety pilots in 2000, and was told that they did not have to be qualified to be a PIC for practice IFR, nor did they need to be P1. They simply had to be competent to warn the PF of possible conflict in VFR.

Safety pilots carried for medical reasosns had to be qualified to be PIC, but need not be P1.

I got this over the phone, not in writing, from Rod Dean, and used it in a report commissioned by the BGA.

At the time, I needed to ask some other questions too. Following discussions elsewhere earlier this year, in February I wrote to the CAA asking about some other P1 issues. Apart from asking me what my qualifications are, they didn't reply. I chased them on 25th March and still have no answer,

Too difficult for them?

Chris N.

[I wrote: 1. There is a widespread impression in General Aviation circles that
it
> is possible for two suitably qualified pilots, flying an aircraft
> intended for one pilot at the controls but having two seats from which
> the controls can be manipulated (i.e. a typical light aircraft or
glider
> with two seats having dual controls), for the pilots to agree to
change
> from one being P1 to the other, in flight, e.g. after completing one
leg
> of out-and-return flight to a turning point without landing.
>
> I had a conversation with Rod Dean on 24th January 2000, when he was
> deputy head of the GA section of SRG, and I had been commissioned by
the
> British Gliding Association to investigate and report upon various
> different circumstances of pilots in command and safety pilots. I
> understood from that conversation that it was NOT permitted for
P1/Pilot
> in Command (PIC) to change from one to another during flight, only in
> between flights after a landing had taken place. He emphasised that
the
> P1/PIC did not have to remain at the controls, of course, if another
> pilot of suitable competence or properly under instruction were
> manipulating the controls.
>
> Can you please advise if it is, or is not, permitted for P1/PIC to
> change from one to another by agreement, prior or otherwise, in
flight.
> Can you also please advise where I can find definitive legislation on
> this - I cannot find it in the ANO.
>
> 2. There is a current discussion going on about whether a PPL holder,
> not currently meeting the 90-day rule of landings/take-offs for
carrying
> passengers, can regain a degree of currency by flying as a "passenger"
> with a P1/PIC PPL holder (not an instructor) who can supervise the
> out-of-check pilot while he conducts enough circuits to be able to
> perform satisfactorily; after which the In-check PPL pilot can vacate
> the aircraft, and leave the out-of-90 day pilot to conduct enough
> take-offs and landings solo to regain the 90-day condition. It is
> believed by many that a current PPL holder can allow anybody, not just
> an out-of-90 day PPL but even any passenger, to handle the controls,
> subject always of course to the P1/PIC being legally and in every
other
> way responsible for the safe conduct of the flight.
>
> I am interested in the gliding parallels for this belief - whether any
> solo glider pilot, not being an instructor, could allow a passenger to
> handle the controls during take-of or landing, or indeed at any other
> stage of a flight. (For example, a glider pilot in command of a
> two-seater having dual controls, may want to allow a current PPL SEP
to
> try the glider controls during a flight, and the issue arises that he
> may feel that such a degree of competence is demonstrated that it
would
> be safe to let the PPL holder undertake a glider landing.)
>
> It seems to me that the ANO section 1/46 seems to be relevant:
>
> "Pilots to remain at controls
>
> "41 (1) (a) The commander of a flying machine or glider registered in
> the United Kingdom shall cause one pilot to remain at the controls at
> all times while it is in flight."
>
> Can a passenger be a "pilot"? Can you therefore please advise if it
is,
> or is not, permitted for non-instructor pilot, PPL SEP or glider
pilot,
> to allow a person not so qualified to manipulate the controls of an
SEP
> or glider respectively during flight, and/or during take off or
landing.
> Again, can you also please advise where I can find definitive
> legislation on this - is the section of the ANO quoted above the last
> word on the subject, or could a "pilot" remaining at the controls in
> that context include a person who may not be qualified to be a P1/PiC?
>
> Chris J Nicholas (BGA Regional Safety Officer, East Anglia)
------------------------------
I have received no reply yet to my questions. Are they too hard to
answer, too trivial, or you have sent an answer but it got lost somehow
before I received it?
----------------------------------------------
Chris N.

[FlyingForFun]

The "majority vote" on this thread is correct. If you have an FAA license, you can log P1 if you fly as safety pilot.

If you have a JAR license you can't. You can put it in your logbook, the holder's operating capacity is SNY - supernumary - and the hours don't get added into any of your totals. This is described in GID 44, but since the link I have to GID 44 isn't working any more (anyone have the correct link?) I can't check it.

As for what the Portugese authorities allow you to do, unless they are JAR-compliant (which I don't think they are), I have no idea. The people to ask are the Portugese authorities! I'd be interested to know, though...

FD said: "A PPL can never log P2 (unless there is a multicrew aircraft that can be flown by PPLs, did not think there is one)." That's not true. A PPL can get a type rating on a B747 if he has enough money. I think you need an IR first. And of course you wouldn't be able to be paid for flying the 747, except for cost-sharing as allowed by your PPL. (Anyone remember the maximum number of pax you can cost-share with? It's certainly not going to fill a 747!)

FFF
------------

[santan17]

Right, I just got off the phone with the CAA, On a single pilot aircraft there can only be one P1 and no P2 therefore the safety pilot cannot log the time. The only exception being an instructor or examiner.
As for the safety pilot being current he does not even need to be a pilot.
But the thing I was most surprised about is that they said that as long as you have a valid licence and IR you can simulate IFR with screens on a VFR flight without anybody else on board qualified or not! Now is it just me or does that not make any sense? how are you supposed to avoid other aircraft etc?

AS for the portuguese, although they are part of the JAA I think they have been VERY slow in adopting the JARs hence the different rules.


Santan

[carb]

You can, however, log the time as "super numerary" pilot if I read the CAA's PDF guide to logging time correctly. This is for pilots who are on board an aircraft for which we're qualified to fly, but our presence is not required.

[StrateandLevel]

Satan 17

"But the thing I was most surprised about is that they said that as long as you have a valid licence and IR you can simulate IFR with screens on a VFR flight without anybody else on board qualified or not!"

Clearly the person you spoke to was a Clerk who knows nothing about the Rules of the Air.

Rule 6

Simulated instrument flight
6. An aircraft shall not be flown in simulated instrument flight conditions unless:
(a) the aircraft is fitted with dual controls which are functioning properly;
(b) an additional pilot (in this rule called a "safety pilot") is carried in a second control seat of the aircraft for the purpose of rendering such assistance as may be necessary to the pilot flying the aircraft; and
(c) if the safety pilot's field of vision is not adequate both forward and to each side of the aircraft, a third person, being a competent observer, occupies a position in the aircraft which from his field of vision makes good the deficiencies in that of the safety pilot, and from which he can readily communicate with the safety pilot.
For the purposes of this rule the expression "simulated instrument flight" means a flight during which mechanical or optical devices are used in order to reduce the field of vision or the range of visibility from the cockpit of the aircraft.

You don't need to write to the CAA with a load of questions about what you can and can't do when all of the answers are available on the web for you to read for yourself.

[Flyin'Dutch']

FFF

PPL will not allow you to fly more than 5750 kg.

ISTR (and was reminded of this recently)

FD

[santan17]

So the CAA don't allow it and the Portuguese authorities do, so the question is which rules apply? the rules of the country of registration or the rules of the country of licence issue?

[StrateandLevel]

A UK PPL has never restricted pilots to 5730Kgs! Type rated aircraft above that weight could be flown on a PPL with Group C rating. The Group A and B aircraft ratings imposed a 5730 Kg limit.

You can get a PPL with a 747 Type rating on it!

Since the change to JAA style ratings there is no weight limit on SEP aeroplanes,Group A no longer exists and the 5730 Kg limit has gone with it.

Satan,

You licence privileges relate to the State of licence issue and the laws of that country.

[mad_jock]

Another funny I have seen is in a SPA flying IFR, if the Autopilot goes tits up then 2 pilots need to be carried The second pilot doesn't need to be lic on type or even have a SPA-IR.

In respect to practising IFR for an IR valid pilot.

As long as they are flying under Instrument Rules what does it matter if they are under a hood or in cloud?

Declaring yourself IFR and asking for radar vectors to the ILS so you miss fannying about joining the circuit and obiting to allow landing IFR traffic is one of the perks of paying the 12k for your rating. Tatical use of box 2 is required to work out which is going to be quicker.

MJ

[2Donkeys]

mad_jock asks;

In respect to practising IFR for an IR valid pilot.

As long as they are flying under Instrument Rules what does it matter if they are under a hood or in cloud?

A lot of people forget this fundamental.

When a flight is in VMC, the flight rules under which the flight is being conducted have no effect on the crew's legal duty to maintain a look-out and to see and avoid.

If the pilot of an aircraft operating in VMC elects to obscure his vision, this requirement doesn't somehow disappear. This is the underlying reason for a safety pilot in the FAA rules. It also explains amongst other reasons, why the safety pilot does not need to hold an instrument rating.

In the UK, the strong line drawn between controlled and uncontrolled airspace protects people from one another to some extent. In most other parts of the world, where VFR and IFR traffic can come into closer proximity, the importance of this see-and-avoid principle is more obvious.

[FlyingForFun]

Exactly, 2Donks.

Remember that, under ICAO rules (i.e. this applies anywhere in the world), VFR traffic is not seperated from other traffic anywhere except in Class B. (In Class C, it is seperated from IFR traffic, but not from other VFR traffic. And although many Class D controllers will keep IFR and VFR traffic apart, they don't have to.) Even when seperation is provided by ATC, though, the pilot is still responsible for looking out in VMC. The controller probably can't see that glider or hot-air balloon (or even bigger non-squawking aircraft if they have primary radar turned off) which accidentally wandered into his airspace right in front of you.

Mad_jock said "Another funny I have seen is in a SPA flying IFR, if the Autopilot goes tits up then 2 pilots need to be carried The second pilot doesn't need to be lic on type or even have a SPA-IR." I didn't know that - definitely counts as a "funny"! But the requirement for an autopilot for single-pilot IFR is contained in JAR-OPS, and therefore doesn't apply to a private flight, so it won't concern most people on this forum.

FFF
--------------

[englishal]

Under the FARs you can actually log safety pilot time as either PIC, SIC or not log it at all if you wish, so you see there is a time when a PPL can log SIC time in a single pilot A/C...

Remember though, you cannot log the entire duration of the flight, only the time the other pilot is under the hood...

Ta ta
EA:D