Originally Posted by rmcdonal
0.0 and 0 (maybe 1, some aircraft pressurise a bit when you apply power for take-off). MR time is not logged in my log book so it makes no difference.
I would hope you do not log MR time, or duty time, just FLIGHT time.
If a pilot were to log such an event, an audit of the pilots logbook against the MR would then show an inconsistency. The MR would show no flight time, no cycles, and it would no doubt explain why there was a rejected takeoff (i.e. a defect) for further investigation.
Larger airlines often have out, off, on, and in times automatically transmitted to their flight and duty time database via ACARS, so the company computer logbook for the pilot(s) would also be inconsistent with a pilots own logbook if one were to log such an event.
Some airlines even have their pay system linked into this as well as the pilot pay is also sometimes linked to flight time. The pilots would receive no pay for a rejected takeoff and a return to the gate to shutdown, as no flight was performed.
Originally Posted by rmcdonal
All of the above is academic when you consider that if you had rejected and the Capitan made the call then you were never In Command any way.
ICUS is not in any way shape or form "in command" or "command" time, it is co-pilot time, even when the person doing ICUS is in the LHS. Each flight only has one PIC, that is the one assigned by the operator under CAR 224, the one supervising the ICUS.
Originally Posted by rmcdonal
ICUS is not selective, you can't say I will log ICUS for the cruise but not the Take off.
CASACom 01/09/0 makes it very clear that a person undertaking ICUS does not need to action every control, it can be by instruction.
Originally Posted by KRUSTY 34
The continual quotation of the "Regs" and one man's interpretation of what they mean will ensure that this debate goes around in ever increasing circles.
It is obvious to everyone that you have not been able to show one point of the law that backs up your position.
It goes around in circles as you ignore the law, and sprout factors which are nothing but red herrings.
E.g. which law states /does not state
that ICUS can only be undertaken in aeroplanes
where a PIC must sit (where does the PIC sit in a balloon ? )
that ICUS cannot be logged in the RHS (the normal PIC seat in a helicopter)
that ICUS cannot be logged in private operations
that ICUS cannot be logged in aerial work operations
that ICUS cannot be logged in low capacity RPT
that ICUS cannot be logged in high capacity RPT
It is obvious to me from the snippets of the Rex manuals you have related to :
• that Rex as an operator does facilitate ICUS (with conditions)
• that Rex as an operator does allow co-pilots to sit in the LHS or RHS (with conditions)
• that Rex as an operator does allow the PIC to sit in the LHS or RHS (with conditions)
So even you own previous claims have been rebutted by the Rex manuals.