CMD on flight tests
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CMD on flight tests
Interesting find...
Some CFIs I've spoken too say they encourage their students to log their RPL and PPL flight tests as command time.
Othe CFIs say no no no, as the ATO is PIC.
What's your thoughts?
As for me I didn't. I logged dual.
RD
Some CFIs I've spoken too say they encourage their students to log their RPL and PPL flight tests as command time.
Othe CFIs say no no no, as the ATO is PIC.
What's your thoughts?
As for me I didn't. I logged dual.
RD
Well, if the candidate passes, it should be "in command" but if they fail, it could well be dual, depending on what the fail was about.
An ATO must not allow an inadvertent breach of CTA or a dangerous situation to develop. If these are prevented by the ATO, the flight is dual.
In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter. You logging dual is pretty normal. I say you are not really totally in command on a test. You are being told where to go and when to divert. If you were PIC you could say no.
An ATO must not allow an inadvertent breach of CTA or a dangerous situation to develop. If these are prevented by the ATO, the flight is dual.
In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter. You logging dual is pretty normal. I say you are not really totally in command on a test. You are being told where to go and when to divert. If you were PIC you could say no.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting way to look at it Aussie Bob.
I might need to amend my logbook.
Actually on that note with logbooks. If your logbook is damaged how would you go replacing it and getting the CASA stickers and FI sign offs?
I might need to amend my logbook.
Actually on that note with logbooks. If your logbook is damaged how would you go replacing it and getting the CASA stickers and FI sign offs?
Actually on that note with logbooks. If your logbook is damaged how would you go replacing it and getting the CASA stickers and FI sign offs?
Now I just don't care .
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No.
For the issue of a licence the FE/ATO would be the PIC.
The only test where you could log ICUS (not PIC) would be an IPC or FPC. Provided you are recent and current when the PC takes place.
PIC would always be the FE/ATO as he/she is ultimately the one in charge.
For the issue of a licence the FE/ATO would be the PIC.
The only test where you could log ICUS (not PIC) would be an IPC or FPC. Provided you are recent and current when the PC takes place.
PIC would always be the FE/ATO as he/she is ultimately the one in charge.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the ATO/FE occupies a control seat, they are the PIC. The ATO/FE cannot be the PIC from a jump or observer seat.
61.095 defines ICUS, and a flight test meets the requirements, providing the pilot is already licensed.
Dual for RPLs, or any other licence test if it is the pilot's first licence. All other flight tests are ICUS.
The FEH stupidly requires applicants log dual for all tests, but flight tests are not flight training under 141.015 or 142.015, nor under any other rule.
61.345 (3)(f) lists the 4 types of flight time activity that must be logged: PIC, ICUS, co-pilot and receiving flying training (dual). The RPL is not flying training so shouldn't be dual, can't be ICUS because the pilot isn't licensed yet, only leaving co-pilot. This result would look a little weird, and I can see why dual is preferred. I wish there were more simple guidance that actually complied with the legislation.
There's no requirement under part 61 for an ICUS logger to be recent or current.
61.095 defines ICUS, and a flight test meets the requirements, providing the pilot is already licensed.
Dual for RPLs, or any other licence test if it is the pilot's first licence. All other flight tests are ICUS.
The FEH stupidly requires applicants log dual for all tests, but flight tests are not flight training under 141.015 or 142.015, nor under any other rule.
61.345 (3)(f) lists the 4 types of flight time activity that must be logged: PIC, ICUS, co-pilot and receiving flying training (dual). The RPL is not flying training so shouldn't be dual, can't be ICUS because the pilot isn't licensed yet, only leaving co-pilot. This result would look a little weird, and I can see why dual is preferred. I wish there were more simple guidance that actually complied with the legislation.
There's no requirement under part 61 for an ICUS logger to be recent or current.
During my initial training, my ATO's all said if you pass, it is logged as PIC. If you fail, it is logged as Dual.
My current operator requires all checks to be logged as ICUS.
My current operator requires all checks to be logged as ICUS.
During my initial training, my ATO's all said if you pass, it is logged as PIC. If you fail, it is logged as Dual
Deciding who the PIC is after the flight is an interesting concept!
"I'm the PIC. If we crash, you'll be the PIC."
Originally Posted by scavenger
If the ATO/FE occupies a control seat, they are the PIC. The ATO/FE cannot be the PIC from a jump or observer seat.
AFAIK it s the operator that defines who the PIC is, not where they are located in the aircraft.
Despite what I wrote in #2, I think we have firmly established that the testing officer is in fact PIC. I know I am when I do a flight test, even if I keep my trap shut and touch nothing (which invariably means you passed and acted "in command" and without supervision) .
How you log it afterwards ... I would say dual but I have never looked to see what "you" write. I don't even care. I am over the moon if "you" pass and somewhat depressed if "you" fail.
How you log it afterwards ... I would say dual but I have never looked to see what "you" write. I don't even care. I am over the moon if "you" pass and somewhat depressed if "you" fail.
ICUS for a licence flight flight test if you pass, dual otherwise. Same for a rating renewal if your rating hasn't expired.
I'm probably wrong, so don't take my opinion as Part 61 compliant. The CAR 5 system was a lot easier to understand and logical.
I'm probably wrong, so don't take my opinion as Part 61 compliant. The CAR 5 system was a lot easier to understand and logical.
61.095 Definition of flight time as pilot in command under supervision for Part 61
(1) A person’s flight time as pilot in command under supervision is the duration of a flight if:
(a) the person holds a pilot licence; and
(b) the person performs all the duties of the pilot in command for the flight; and
(c) subregulation (2) or (3) applies to the flight.
(2) For paragraph (1)(c), this subregulation applies to the flight if:
(a) the flight is conducted by an operator that has training and checking responsibilities; and
(b) the pilot in command of the flight is authorised by the operator or the operator’s Part 142 operator to conduct the supervision of the person.
(3) For paragraph (1)(c), this subregulation applies to the flight if:
(a) the person is supervised by a flight instructor or flight examiner; and
(b) the person is not receiving flight training.
(1) A person’s flight time as pilot in command under supervision is the duration of a flight if:
(a) the person holds a pilot licence; and
(b) the person performs all the duties of the pilot in command for the flight; and
(c) subregulation (2) or (3) applies to the flight.
(2) For paragraph (1)(c), this subregulation applies to the flight if:
(a) the flight is conducted by an operator that has training and checking responsibilities; and
(b) the pilot in command of the flight is authorised by the operator or the operator’s Part 142 operator to conduct the supervision of the person.
(3) For paragraph (1)(c), this subregulation applies to the flight if:
(a) the person is supervised by a flight instructor or flight examiner; and
(b) the person is not receiving flight training.
PPL, CPL or ATPL yes, if you already hold a lower level of licence.
Also ICUS if you're doing a flight test for a rating or an endorsement on a rating, ICUS would work. Otherwise it has to be dual I would say.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Care to show me where it says you have to be in a control seat to be PIC ? as far as I am aware, you can be PIC on the jump seat, on the throne, or in the bunk.
CASA don't permit their delegates to the be PIC unless in a control seat, and this was stipulated in previous versions of the FEH. Now that examiners are exercising the privileges of their rating the wording has changed slightly, but the use of the word 'should' in the FEH indicates a strong obligation.
The requirement to log dual for flight tests has disappeared from the current FEH, a step forward.
ICUS if you're licensed, dual if not. AOTW has it...
Only in Australia could such a fundamental question be the subject of such complexity and confusion....
