a) take off and landing times will define the total flight time. If that is an issue for you - draw an extra column in your logbook for it.
Woah there! That's a pretty basic mistake, if I may say so! Off stand to on stand is total flight time. Airborne time has nothing to do with any pilot's logbook, only the Tech Log.
Now, to the endless misunderstandings and misconceptions of PICUS.
It may well be that some (apparently usually UK companies) have strange and lax interpretations of this, but the wording and intent of the rule is perfectly clear.
PICUS, when all the duties and functions of PIC on that
flight were carried out, in such a way that the intervention of the PIC in the interest of safety was not required.
Now let's just re-read that definition people!
First of all, note that there is no mention whatsoever of who is pilot handling to achieve PICUS. It is of course perfectly possible to log it when non handling. The insistence on PICUS being logged as some function of being handling pilot is of itself the biggest indication of a complete misunderstanding of the entire concept. It doesn't say much for understanding the fundamental nature of Captaincy either.
The pilot logging PICUS
must carry out all the duties and functions - note
"all" the functions which means he must have conducted the preflight brief inc cabin crew if appropriate, assessed the weather, notams, made all the fuel and loading decisions, liased with the ground agent and dispatcher, handled the loadsheet and filled in the Tech Log and all other paperwork and returns/reports at the end of the flight. He may of course delegate some of those items just as a Captain does but he must maintain the overall position of Pilot in Command (Under Supervision). Once again, he acts out the
entire role of the Captain from beginning to end of the flight, but under the supervision of the real Captain. This involves a great deal of work and effort from the P2 but nowhere, nowhere does it mention handling the aircraft; well, of course it doesn't as handling the aircraft has nothing at all to do with being (or practicing being) the Captain. d'uh oh!
It is intended to give P2s the opportunityto practice the role of Captain. Who handles the a/c is utterly irrelevant
This requirement is far, far from just logging handling time as P2. It requires an active and specific participation - note
active - from the Captain from the first moment the crew meet in the crewroom and does not end until the P2 had completed the post flight paperwork. Then, and only then may the Captain choose to append his signature and thereby his Professional approval of the FO's conduct of the flight in his name.
A Professional pilot does not do that lightly, and a truly Professional company does not allow this time to be logged merely on the basis of who flew the sector. They might as well award it for time spent commuting by train for all that has to do with PICUS
The failure to apply this procedure faithfully merely cheats our FOs out of invaluable practice and insight into the role of Captain which should ultimately be greatly to their advantage once the Command course comes up. And we should never be cheating FOs out of Professional practice and training.
How should the Council for the Defence (or the pilot, God forbid) answer when the Judge is trawling through his training records and discovers that fundamental requirements for award of his ATPL had been subverted? I think he'll think what I think, if you see what I mean. ie that a number of specifically required qualifying hours had been fraudulently recorded in the pilot's logbook for the specific purpose of gaining an ATPL with the active connivance of the Company. Where would that leave the defendant?. The practice of awarding PICUS for handling sectors is no better and no different from the PPL who just sharp-pencils in a few score P1 hours to big up the totals for award of his CPL. Think on that.