Faking log book flying hours

[Menen]

The problem of pilots faking flying hours has been with the aviation community for decades. If done with a modicum of care the perpetrator relies on the complacency of the industry to get him an interview before others more honest in the queue.

Few chief pilots vet their employees log books for honesty and accuracy and in any case the Privacy Act could be invoked if any probe on flying hours logged got too close to home. Certainly ATO's and FOI's seldom question the integrity of flying hours logged in the log books of those under test. It becomes almost impossible to police.

Instrument flight hours mean nothing in the real world because these can be logged while "monitoring" the auto-pilot. The RFDS advertisements for pilots now require a minimum of 800 hours of Instrument Flight Rules time. That is easy to fake as no one is going to trawl back on old flight plans to see if the claimed hours were IFR. The RFDS requirements are an open invitation to falsify IFR hours. CASA look the other way as they have no regulatory interest in what IFR hours a pilot claims. In PNG a pilot seeking a job was told that he must have a minimum of 500 hours in his log book before being employed. The would be employer added with a big hint that as long as the log book showed 500 hours - he would be satisfied and so would be the insurer. Get the message?

The job of the crew member of one of our major domestic jet operators is to write up the trip log after each sector flown. All sectors that day were flown on gin clear day conditions no cloud. His captain signed off the trip record and said "Put me down for 1.2 hours of instrument flying to keep up my currency." So we have the unlovely situation of even four bar jet captains falsifying instrument time to satisfy the company records. CASA would never check.

What an indictment on the integrity of pilots as a whole - both in GA and RPT. So it seems the morale of the story is that you can go fill your boots with fake hours and no one gives a damn.

[Ash767]

Menen

I am sure there are pilots out there that enter fake hours into their log books. If they choose to well that is there prerogative.

The thing about flying though is that you can sit at the bar the night before and show off your log book and tell them how good you are. Then you have to go out the next day and prove yourself (with 0 blood alcohol level):yuk:

So in a way our profession is an honest one as a good check and training person or chief pilot would have a fairly good idea of what to expect based on your hours I would think.:)

Ash767:ok:

[Arm out the window]

Obviously it's something that concerns you.
Have you put in a CAIR about the ones you know about? This would seem to be an obvious use of that avenue of reporting; having said that, I don't know how effective they are.

[Poto]

Had a dude with our mob who had one their of past employers aircraft in a local maintenance organisation for a hundred, upon analysing this pilots logbook with the hours on the aircraft it appears the figures were approx. 4:1 with an average of 3-4 hours between hours, nice one:ok:

Needless to say the end had already began anyway but this was a deal sealer, see ya mate:E

[18-Wheeler]

I've only ever flown with one guy who padded his hours, and he did it with great vigour.
He was an F/O with me when I used to fly a Citation, and I'm pretty sure he started to log the flight time from when we left the house to go to the airport.
He ended up in Ansett as an A-320 F/O, but after the airline's demise he isn't in aviation any more.
His lack of real hours showed in his handling skills of the Citation (very easy plane to fly) when he first got in it, but he picked up to a reasonable standard after some time in it.

[Ang737]

I am damn certain that if one of these dodgy hour fakers had an accident then the logbook would be scrutinised by insurance mobs. Has anyone heard of this occurring and have insurance failed to payout based on false logbook entries

Ang ;)

[ISHIHARA]

It all shows in the flying..................

Seen one particular boy look stupid "with all his hours"!

[swh]

Menen,

The RFDS advertisements for pilots now require a minimum of 800 hours of Instrument Flight Rules time.

Your statement that the RFDS requires 800 IF is incorrect have a look at the latest advertsement, have a look at Oz Jobs 03.10.03 (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104253)

SWH

[Kermit 180]

Reminds me of the story about a young pilot doing an IFR renewal. Looking through the candidate's logbook, the testing officer asked about one particular aircraft.
"Oh yes, I've flown that many times" the candidate said. "Flies like a dream".
The testing officer turns the page, sees more entries for the same aircraft. "Done a fair bit of IF time in it I see. Last flight in it IFR four days ago. Any problems with it?".
"No, no problems" replied the cadidate, "a nice day's flying".
The testing officer slamed the logbook shut and dropped it on the desk. "So maybe you can explain how you came to be flying an aircraft I own that has been undergoing a rebuild for the past two months!" :uhoh:

Hate to think some dishonest so and so would leap-frog me to a job through falsifying hours. Lie at your own peril....


Kerms

[Beer Can Dreaming]

Was there not a pilot that left Impulse to join Ansett on the A320 and was found to have faked certain educational qualifications?

Said pilot was apparently doing well on his Sim training and was purportedly asked to leave.

Rumour is he returned from whence he came.

If true this chap was very lucky no charges were laid but to avoid bad press the airline let it slip by .......................supposedly.

[wessex19]

I remember a MU 2 pilot a number of years ago from Newcastle Aviation who gave a dodgy reference from an Ansett Training Captain who he had met briefly at a bbq who he knew was going on long service. This bloke was accepted into Ansett on the A320, however it all ended in tears when on return from long service, a certain ground instructor told Captain xxxxxx that his mate xxxxx was doing well. The rest is history.

[TIMMEEEE]

Wessex - maybe there was something you werent told because once someone is employed it's very hard just to sack someone without due cause - industrially speaking.

Besides, wouldnt the company (Ansett in this case) ask the Training Captain about this fellow, even if he was on leave?

Doesnt sound very water tight to me and I just may smell a little bit of pork in this tale.

[jib]

I came across VH-BIC in central QLD a while ago, I asked the owner for a quick circuit so I could put the famous rego in my log book. The owner was unable to help due to a prior commitment, he told me however that nobody had ever asked before, much to my surprise.
jib

[greybeard]

What does an hour mean in the Log Book

A check Capt riding in the Jump seat as part of his checking duties logs the hours

Someone with a Command rating acting as an F/O by employment and assigned duties has been known to log the hours as command

An F/O from an Asian airline is rumoured to have logged all his hours as an F/O as Command, in a separate log book, as the endorsement was on his Aust licence as a Command rating and is rumoured to have used these hours to achieve a Command in another asian airline. (discussed many moons ago on this forum)

Heavy crews on long haul log the hours even when ASLEEP!!!!

So you have to have an open mind when you assess the Log as to what is what, a spot check with one of the A/C shown on a day vs the log book could catch the really dishonest but the game is open to all sorts of VH-BIC.


:ok:

[Av8r]

The RFDS advertisements for pilots now require a minimum of 800 hours of Instrument Flight Rules time.

Just to refresh your memory:


Instrument Flight Time

All flight time during which the aircraft was controlled solely by reference to instruments may be recorded in the instrument 'Flight' column:
a) Time above overcast or at night in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) is not counted as instrument flight;
b) In actual or simulated instrument conditions, only the pilot manipulating the controls or providing input to the auto-pilot may log all flight time as instrument flight;
c) A flight conducted on an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight plan is not to be counted as instrument flight unless flying in IMC;
d) Instrument approaches are to be credited to the pilot (pilots, in the case of an airborne radar approach) manipulating the controls or providing input to the auto-pilot during the approach.



There wouldn’t be too many pilots in Australia with 800hrs IFR time.

You can ONLY log time IAW the above parra B.

Your average jet jock out of a ****ty day in Melb and into a ****ty day in Sydney, and then ONLY the manipulating pilot, can only log….10 – 15 minutes…maybe.

Now if he / she did the entire flight on foggles or similar, well I guess he / she could log that. But I would doubt many flights are conducted in that manner.

In fact, having a think about it, probably the highest time IFR time jock would be a certain helicopter pilot working on Hamilton Island.

He flies on contract mostly nights, over water on 100nm legs on an IFR plan obviously, and as it’s a helicopter, at low-ish levels ( less than 10,000ft) a good percentage of that in IMC, and he’s been doing that for more than 20 years, and when I flew with him, all hand flown. A living legend.


Mack

[marreeman]

Good topic, it may look odd for someone to have a lot of IF time but if they were to take along someone who is a qualified pilot to keep a look out then the PIC could put the foggles on for most of the flight & legally log it. As people have said this time would be very hard to check up on even if weather forecast were still available years after a flight was done. To prove that you didnt have the foggles on would be impossible & im not saying it is ok to lie by using this excuse but it could be legitimate could it not.

What about if you are conducting a private flight the new employer cant ring & check with anybody if that flight was planned under the IFR.

AV8R IFR time is only operating under instrument flight rules doesnt mean IMC only on the plan.

[swh]

marreeman

AV8R IFR time is only operating under instrument flight rules doesnt mean IMC only on the plan.

Just checking to see if we are on the same page here, 40.1.0 does not require you to be on an IFR plan to log Instrument Time.

Everyone needs instrument time for a GFPT, PPL, and CPL, very few people would have done this on a IFR plan.

The test to apply is that all flight time during which the aircraft was controlled solely by reference to instruments under either actual or simulated instrument flight conditions may be recorded as instrument flight time.

CAO 40.1.0 para 10.9 Instrument flight time may be logged by the pilot monitoring or providing input to the autopilot/auto-stabilisation equipment when it is engaged or by the pilot manually manipulating the controls when the aircraft is flown by reference to instruments under either actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.

Note: Instrument flight time shall only be logged by one pilot at a time.

[Ash767]

I may have missed something but I have never heard the term VH-BIC. Just would love to know what the BIC "Rego" stands for.

Ash767:confused:

[Jet_A_Knight]

Ash, you must be young or have lived a very sheltered life so far!:D

Its a brand of pen (and disposable shavers if i am not mistaken):p

[Ash767]

Like I said. "I must have missed something"
Yeah you could say I am still reasonably young!

Nothing wrong with admitting you do not know something:)

Ash:ok:

[TopperHarley]

People logging dodgy time is only part of the problem.

The people that think they can judge a pilots ability by the number of hours theyve got is also part of the problem.

Hours dont equal experience, nor does experience necessarily make a good pilot.

[Tinstaafl]

swh,

The RFDS specified xxx hours IFR, not xxx hours IF. I suspect that's the cause of the confusion. It's bloody easy to have 800 hrs IFR after a couple or few thousand TT. Would have rather lower IF time though.

[MAXX]

i knew a bloke years ago that penned in about 500 hrs on navajo and chieftain only to do a check ride in one for a job interview.

only trouble was he not only didnt have 500hrs on type he hadnt flown it at all.

DOHHH

CHEERS

[Chocks Away]

Hate to think some dishonest so and so would leap-frog me to a job through falsifying hours. Lie at your own peril.... :ok: Here, here!

Sadly though it is more prevalent and I know of 3 such cases. Karma has it's way.

A pilots' logbook used to be the backbone of the aviation culture... a good honest logbook went without saying and its entries were respected. A prospective employer would take a good look at it, where you were trained, put you in an aircraft for a quick look and roughly know what to expect.

The people that think they can judge a pilots ability by the number of hours theyve got is also part of the problem. Hours dont equal experience, nor does experience necessarily make a good pilot
... to a point TH (given Sims etc) but how can it be part of the problem?
What other guage do you suggest to go by?
MORE hours generally meant MORE exposure to all the variables and hence a certain wisdom is obtained. That wisdom can not be substituted, no matter how you look at it.

I can at least sleep easy, knowing I can account for each hour in my two logbooks... with plenty of stories at the bar... as I drift of into sleep:zzz:

[swh]

Tinstaafl,

You are incorrect, the current information is as below.

To quote the RFDS employment page (http://www.rfds.org.au/employment.htm)

The only KSCs in the last round of appointments in relation to IFR time was 5 renewals, and 180 hrs IF. No specification on how much time IFR flight planned.

PILOTS

The large RFDS fleet is comprised of Beechcraft Kingairs, Pilatus PC XII and Titian C404. Positions are generally advertised in national newpapers, and competition for the limited number of opportunities is strong. The general skills and experience required are as follows:

Australian commercial pilots licence.

Current command instrument rating (multi-engine) with two renewals.

2000 hours as pilot-in-command.

1000 hours as pilot-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft.

200 hours night operations as pilot-in-command.

Pilots with turbo-prop experience preferred.

A sound work ethic.

Demonstatable maturity and stability of employment.

Excellent communication skills.

A philosophy sympathetic to the ideals of the RFDS.

An empathy for the bush and its people.

[18-Wheeler]

There wouldn’t be too many pilots in Australia with 800hrs IFR time.

Nearly 1,100hours, according to those rules posted above.
I'm pretty average as an airline driver, there's plenty of people with a lot more than me.

[Av8r]

Nearly 1,100hours, according to those rules posted above.

18wheeler, I certainly don’t doubt your hours.

I'm not a jet jock but interested in how long it took you to accrue those sort of IF hours, and if you could run me / us through a typical flight were you would accrue IF flight time.

Many thanks.


Mack.

[18-Wheeler]

In February 2004 it'll be twenty years flying aeroplanes for me.
Most of the flying I've done for about five & a half years is all 747 stuff, about half at night. A lot of that has been at night (along with about another five years of night freight in Metro's & Citations) and a fair chunk of that has been with no horizon at all.
There's also timesthat we'll spend a few hours flying through solid cloud in the day.
It all adds up.
For example, the last flight I did was all night and the only time I could see the horizon was breifly after take-off and about ten minutes before landing. There was no Moon, clud cover, etc, and it was a nearly seven hour flight.

[Tinstaafl]

Quite so, swh. I wasn't very clear in my intent: To highlight that replies were mixing IFR time with IF time. I chose a poor ie incorrect example to illustrate this. Oh well... :O

[Av8r]

For example, the last flight I did was all night and the only time I could see the horizon was breifly after take-off and about ten minutes before landing. There was no Moon, clud cover, etc, and it was a nearly seven hour flight.

...and probably none of it loggable as I.F.

This is exactly my point.

Whether you have an horizon or not is irrelevant. You are in VMC.

The spirit of the rule regarding the logging of IF time is you need to be in either actual or simulated cloud.

You are either flying through cloud or you are wearing a simulated cloud vision device.

Night flying with no horizon is not technically loggable as I.F. time.


Mack

[Iso]

How about this! A certain chappie was logging night time at our local home airport, during which time - three months - there were no runway lights at the airfield. The flights were day into little Island airstrips, but some how he managed to continue to log night without a problem. Incredible guy!

It was supposedly known by the pilot group within that company, but nothing said of course. Anyway he secured his ATPL no doubt based on these phantom night hours.

And CASA were so near, and yet so far!

[Thump & Go]

Hi all
There seems to be a whole lot of confusion over IFR vs IF. AV8r your response to 18-wheelers claim of 1100hrs ( in turn a response to the 800hr IFR requirement) seems to have blurred the line yet again. 18-wheels to me seems to indicate he has 1100hrs IFR (I stand to be corrected), which could have been accrued amongst as little as 1500hrs. In fact I can think of 1 person here in NZ who had exactly those numbers. He got a multi IFR job at 400TT,bang 1500TT, 1100hrs of it IFR.
To give a Kiwi perspective, our rule states " a flight during which the A/C is piloted solely by reference to instruments without external reference points " Night flight most certainly can be IF on a moonless night with no visual horizon,and why not? If you're not keeping upright(& navigating) by looking out the window at the horizon surely, you must be on instruments and therefore flying/logging IF?
You guys must have a whole lot of uncurrent long-haul pilots under present wording if they must be in cloud to log IF. When does a 747 driver fly in cloud? 5-10 mins on arrival/departure,perhaps some in the cruise over the equator. Will that little see them maintain 6hrs IF in 90 days?

ps Please beat the whinging poms tonight

Thump

[Av8r]

Guys I’m being pedantic here and probably splitting hairs.

Plenty of guys at work log ‘dark night’ as I.F. and there is no visible horizon and you are flying the aircraft with sole reference to the instruments. Granted. But it’s still technically VMC.

Is that flight time logging to the letter of the law?

You tell me.


http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/fcl_lic/flight_time.htm refers.



Mack

[VH-ABC]

Just to blur the fuzzy lines a little further...

What happens when you are within the vertical or lateral minimum distances from cloud below 3000'amsl/1000'agl (ie 1500m horizontal or 1000ft vertical), but not actually IN the cloud?

You're not VMC, so are you in IMC?

[Capt Claret]

I think you're making an assumption or two regarding IF requiring actual or simulated cloud. All it really requires is to be in conditions less than VMC, which in turn requires a certain clearance from cloud or less than 5km viz below A100 or 8km viz above A100.

At night with no horizon it could easily be argued that viz is effectively reduced. Additionally some where in the regs it states that VFR flight is impractical above F200, or thereabouts. Therefore in an aircraft above that level, one can log IF time.

CAO 40.1.0, states in part:

10.9 Instrument flight time may be logged by the pilot monitoring or providing input to the autopilot/auto-stabilisation equipment when it is engaged or by the pilot manually manipulating the controls when the aircraft is flown by reference to instruments under either actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.

On the matter of BIC hours. I worked years ago in an earlier life with such a chap. I was somewhat surprised to bump into him years later at a CASA sponsored seminar, particularly as he was a CASA FOI! :oh:

[Croozin]

Cooked log books are by no means a novelty in Aviation. Back in the ‘old’ Ansett we had a… chap who, before he joined AN, went to New Guinea, where he never got a permanent position with any operator. He flew the (very) odd short charter he was able to scrounge… but came back to Melbourne 12 months later magically with 1200 hours in his log book for those 12 months. (I know that’s more than you’re permitted to fly in 12 months, but as I said, his was a truly ‘magic’ log book.)
It might come as no surprise to many that the same gentleman (re)joined the ‘new’ Ansett in that year we cannot mention here, where he became a legend in his own lunchbox, enjoying quite few nicknames, one of them the same as a wonderful Australian children’s movie of the 70s about a pelican, bad weather and a male child.
The tradition would seem to go back even further if the following is anything to judge by. It’s taken from the very early annals of Pprune.
He carefully adopted a ponderous tone. "Yea Sire, whenever possible, a wise Master Cameleer will entrusteth his autocamels only to the hands of cameleers whose skills he knoweth well. What better way to learneth the true worth of any aspiring cameleer than first to observeth him as an effoh calling warnings of oncoming potholes and falling rocks? For it is written that many cameleers who willst seeketh to joineth Thy caravan will cometh not from the caravan routes, but from the tribe of Parker bin Pehn."
"This tribe of Parker bin Pehn. We knowest it not."
"Ah, Sire, the Parker bin Pehn beith a secretive sect and one which plyeth its trade behind tightly closed tent flaps with but a single quill. Many an unwary Master of Cameleers hast fallen foul of this widely scattered tribe. They willst enter Thy house glibly, bearing stirring testimonials from masters who in fact knewest them not. These richly bound scrolls willst speak of wondrous deeds on caravans they have travelled - but, alas! they willst have travelled these routes but only in their dreams."
If you want to read the whole story, go to the Pprune Humour Page or Click here. (http://www.pprune.org/go.php?go=/pub/fun/caravan.html/)
It may be saying a lot about the ‘dumbing down’ of our society that these creatures nowadays fly ‘VH-BIC’ when in days gone by their flying ‘experience’ was known as ‘'P-51 time', the P-51 being both the North American Mustang and a popular model of Parker Pen which many a child received as a high school graduation gift. Hence 'Parker Pen hours’, or in the military, ‘F4 time’, the ‘F4’ being the Phantom, hence ‘Phantom Hours’.

[Menen]

Interesting replies all. Can anyone please tell me the date that the last advertisement for RFDS pilots was placed in "The Australian" newspaper. I am sure it was in the last three months but I need the correct date. Thanks.

So night flying in a total black no cloud moonless night is not loggable as instrument flight time? Try flying a jet by looking outside the front window then, and unless you are competent at unusual attitude recoveries solely by reference to instruments, you and your unhappy passengers will surely die.

[compressor stall]

I am surprised the meek and modest BIK has not piped up here yet. :ok:

There was a thread in which he posted all the relevant regs a while ago to show that flight out of cloud with no horizon etc can be categorised as IMC. However I have just done a search, found the thread, but BIK has deleted his posts!

Reference 1. CAR 1988. Definitions.
instrument flight time means flight time during which a person is flying an aircraft solely by reference to instruments and without external reference points.

There was an AIP supplement (the blue ones) about filling in logbooks saying that clear nights with no horizon was not loggable as IMC, but as pointed out, they do not override the CARs. That AIP supp does not exist any more.

I flew last night in the desert. Clear night, no moon at all (a thin slither rose about 0400. For much of the time there was no discernable horizon at any stage at all - even with all the lights off (which I tried briefly).

I might be clear of cloud but I was poling the a/c with sole reference to instruments and without external reference points.

CS

Capt Claret, was that you into perth last night (21/11)? Just heard you changing off freq as txferred onto it.

[swh]

CS,

Have a look at CAO 40.1.0 para 10.9, it adds the bit about being in actual or simulated IMC to log IF time. Dont know when this was added to the CAO's, at one stage it was the same as the CAR's.

SWH

[compressor stall]

Now the rubgy's over I can elaborate (and I have learnt a bit finding this out too!)

SWH g'day! Still on cloud 9? :)

That does not restrict one from logging IF time on a black horizonless night. The reg CAO 40.1.10.9 reads (my bolding):

Instrument flight time may be logged by the pilot monitoring or providing input to the autopilot/auto-stabilisation equipment when it is engaged or by the pilot manually manipulating the controls when the aircraft is flown by reference to instruments under either actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.

This actual instument time defined in the CARs as:

instrument flight time means flight time during which a person is flying an aircraft solely by reference to instruments and without external reference points.

Further (CAR definitions)

I.M.C. is the symbol used to designate meteorological conditions other than those designated by the symbol “V.M.C.”. (Refer to CAR 172 and references for VMC distances).

So (and this will be of interest to VH-ABC above)

If you are IMC you cannot automatically log IF time as you may not be in cloud!

Picking your way at full tilt between the towering Cus on descent (love doin' that! :E ) is technically IMC.

You need to be poling be reference to the instruments to log it. Whether you are in the middle of a cloud, have foggles on or it's a black black night onroute back from a minesite in the desert, you can log I.F.

This diversion deserves a thread of its own!

CS :O

[Capt Claret]

Not I. Departed Perth 0405z.

[Av8r]

a) Time above overcast or at night in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) is not counted as instrument flight;
Ref: http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/fcl_lic/flight_time.htm

I can find no reference to a requirement for a ‘visible horizon’

Vis isn’t an argument, you can see city / town lights for 50 nm.

I know what your saying, and I agree. It’s technically IMC with no moon. But is it legally IMC?

I think not and if thats the case, a) says you cant log it.

P.S. Compressor Stall: Can I have a better ref: for the CAR definition? You know how bad that book is to find stuff.

P.P.S: I'm doing my first solo cross country in a C150 above 3000ft on a moonless night. I can log that as I.F. in my log book?


Mack

[compressor stall]

G'day AV8r

A couple of good points you raise.

Whether or not (no pun intended :) ) it's IMC is not the issue. Reference the definition of IMC above. You don't have to be in <5/3km cloud/smoke/dustwhatever. You can be 100m from a towering Cu on a Darwin day in the wet at 24000 feet and see the horizon out the other window 181 nm away and this is IMC.

We are talking about IF time. IMC is irrelevant.

Even if there is 181 nm vis so long as there are no reference points out the window and you are poling by reference to instruments, then you are I.F. flying.

I am not sure who first said "visible horzon" but I take that to mean one of a number of possible external reference points. They may be a sliver of moon, the dull lights of ADL in the distance, or as happened 3 nights ago, tha aurora streaking up from the southern horizon. If you have any one of these, then you are not in accordance with the CAO 40.1. reference above.

Now if that is on your first solo nav on a black moonless night in the desert with no town lights on the horizon where you are heading (an highly unlikely scenario) then I fail to see why that would not be IF for the cruise.

That link you provide is General Guidance. It does not override the CARs nor the CAOs. They are the law.

It should be noted that 90% of pilots won't be flying in an area in which these conditions occur. Even for the number like me who fly at night regularly in areas where it is very common, the conditions are still the exception rather than the rule. For those who will suddenly start logging all their night hours as IF time, think again. It will look as suspicious as flying day IFR out of Alice and loggin bucketloads of IF.

CS


P.S. those definitions are at the start of the CARs - just after the index. Do what I do and download the CAR and CAO pdfs from www.casa.gov.au then CTRL-F to find words. MUCH easier!

[Tinstaafl]

Nicely explained Stallie! :ok:


Has BIK done a runner or something?

[compressor stall]

G'Day Tinny :ok:

Looks like it. Very odd.

Probably feeding coal into the steam locos has done his head in. :}

CS

[18-Wheeler]

*shrug*

If there's no horizon, so you have to use instruments to determine attitude, that's IF time as far as I can see.
That's how I log it.

[Tinstaafl]

Flying around the North Sea at night I'm frequently in legal VMC and still flying IF. There's nearly always lots of cloud layers & reduced vis. around here.

[Dale Harris]

Hey stallie, that aurora was pretty special a few nights ago, wasn't it.......

[Mshongo]

I battled the leans a number of times flying in heavy smoke with no reference to the horizon or ground. Didnt log it as IF though as was technically in VMC. Wonder how the blokes in Canada or some such place log time in white out conditions (ie still VMC)? How about in a high performance jet climbing at a high angle with no reference to the horizon either out the front or side windows? or even in a bug smasher but taking off into the sun, hence on instruments?

I bet the guys who've died by disorientation in VMC would argue that they could/should have been logging those last minutes as IF.

From looking at bunches of resumes online it seems that people tend to have between 5 and 10% logged as IF, regardless of their location in the world. Not exactly a conclusive study but it seems like a fair estimate. Anyone here fall outside this range?

[Av8r]

At the end of the day, log what you like if you can sleep at night and I’ll give the ‘no horizon’ some consideration as well. (Think of all that I.F. I could have logged over the years.)
The reference I supplied up a few posts is a ‘guideline’ but I think points to the intent of the regs.

However, I particularly like 18wheelers definition:
If there's no horizon, so you have to use instruments to determine attitude, that's IF time as far as I can see.

Why can’t Canberra write in plain un-ambiguous wording in all the regs?

You all know full well, with 10 pilots discussing a reg, there will 10 different opinions and that’s not good enough. Lawyers must have a field day in court with this stuff.

Definitions, guidelines, CASA interpretations and three reg books all saying different things about the same reg. I find it incredible.
We recently had a discussion about the use of Special Alt Min and the equipment required to use it, 5 pilots....5 opinions.
The books are full of these types of examples.

Still, it beats working for a living.

Mack

[Soulman]

Hey guys,

Great thread you have going here.

Being 17 and still in school - I have only recently started my flight training on spare weekends. I have a whole X (yes, single figure!) hours - ALL of which are VFR! :}

At the moment, I'm supposed to be studying for a Chemistry exam which I have tomorrow afternoon - but being a young aviation nut, I'm stuck here surfing PPRuNe.

One day, I'll be up there with you guys.

If only I could have logged my classroom hours...

Cheers,

Soulman.

[anti-skid]

Well that was a breath of freash air, thanks and good luck
soulman! :ok:

[Soulman]

If only Chemistry was a 'breath of fresh air'...

And if only I could see the horizon - instead of referring to my notes all the time! :p

Now where was I... Ahh, that's right! The laboratory preparation of Carbon Dioxide

CaCO3 (s) + 2HCl (aq) -> CaCl2 (aq) + CO2 (g) + H2O (l)

It's all too much.... :ok:

Soulman.

[Sky Monkey]

Hi all,
Great thread, I don't normally post, as you can see by how many posts I've done but I have a few questions.
Does an aircraft have to be IFR to log IF time or can it be NVFR, for single pilot ops? In the situation of scooting around CB's in skydiving It's a little bit hard to judge the distance of a cloud to an accuracy of 100m. If thats the case can I log IF without needing a licenced pilot sitting next to me and to be wearing foggles ( that is me wearing them!).



Sky's full of Monkeys, getting paid in bananas.
:rolleyes:

[Continental-520]

Yeah,

not only would I hate to look/fly like crap in front of a prospective employer, but I doubt I'd be able to live with myself knowing that I'd forged experience that wasn't and not knowing how much actual experience I had.

Besides, there's a sense of achievement involved every time you cross a 100 hourly... meaning, say, when you cross 500TT, then 500 CMD, then 750, etc...

Agree?


520.

[E.P.]

Quite seriously, isn't there a Flight Level at which VMC becomes IMC???

Used to be FL210........ :ugh:

Cold as a witches tit in ANC right now. The "A.B." was specky the other night though!!!!!

[Tinstaafl]

No. There is - or was, not sure under the new changes - a FL where VFR is no longer available and all flights must be IFR. That's NOT the same as VMC vs IMC.

[compressor stall]

And even if it was IMC, that does not mean that you are necessarily in cloud and flying IF. You can be IMC and still be in clear air.

For Skymonkey's situation, you are in IMC 100m from the nearest cloud in CTA above Edmonton but you can see the sky, the ground and the DZ. You cannot log I.F. in this situation.

[Sky Monkey]

Dohhh!!

What about 50m

[Woomera]

Soulman

CaCl2 (aq) + CO2 (g) + H2O (l) - Calcium Cloride, Carbon Dioxide and water - sounds like a fizzy drink that's good for your bones!!!

Now, if you could blend in around 70% C2H6O, it would probably be a top seller to old codgers at PPRuNe Bashes!!!!!!!!! :}

Woomera

[Soulman]

He He... Woomera,

The exam went quite well - not sure on my score yet - I'll let you know tomorrow.

Sadly, I'm not doing Chemistry next year - it was that or History and I really enjoy listening to our History teacher - then again, I could drop Specialist Maths and take up Chem? See what happens.

As for mixing up concoctions for PPRuNe bashes - I've only just finished my first year of Chem - not sure how well I'd go knocking up home brew!

Could always give it a go...

So if you guys happen to hear about a 17 year old blowing himself up while trying to make a bit of home brew - don't be too alarmed, it's only me... :}

Cheers,

Soulman.

[Spotlight]

From my deep dark recesses the reg many years ago had it, that VFR flight above FL250 was 'Impracticable'.

[Av8r]

Sky Monkey, if you think its IMC then it is. Log it as I.F.
Apparently everybody else does!

If you can slump down in the seat and therefore can’t see an horizon, it's I.F.

Hey, interpret the ambiguous rules to suit your self.


Mack.
:)

[compressor stall]

AV8R and Skymonkey,

It does not matter if you have half the wing of your Navajo or 182 in cloud, you are not VMC so by definition you are IMC but you cannot log I.F. as you can still see external features (ground, horizon, the pyramid, sugar cane, Mount Bartle Frere etc).

When you can no longer see any things outside, to reference the aircraft by visually, then it's IF.

[18-Wheeler]

When you can no longer see any things outside, to reference the aircraft by visually, then it's IF.

That's the criteria I use, but after reading this thread I'll be more strict and so probably log less IF hours as such.
As for ducking under the dashboard to log IF time, isn't that (almost!) what we do with those funny IF goggles things? :)

[4dogs]

Folks,

Interesting thread, particularly since CASA has managed to confuse others in its attempts to clarify things.

When Part 5 of the CAR(88) was written, it was on a fairly simple basis. For certain licences and ratings, a minimum amount of instrument flight time was, inter alia, prescribed. Accordingly, "instrument flight time" was defined in CAR(88) 2(1) and remains unchanged today. The definition purposely makes no reference to the flight rules. No subordinate legislation can change that definition.

CAR(88) 5.52 is the head of power that allows rules for logbooks to be set out in CAOs - it happens to be set out in CAO 40.1.0 subsection 9 with clarification in subsection 10. That reference again purposely makes no reference to flight rules and is consistent with CAR(88) 2(1) insofar as "instrument flight time" is concerned.

So, regardless of my flight rules, if I am forced or, subject to CAR(88) 153, choose to fly the aircraft by sole reference to the instruments then I am engaged in "instrument flight time", the sole regulatory purpose of which is to qualify for certain licences or ratings. Moreover, under CAO 40.1.0, that is how I am permitted to record that time in my logbook.

All other advisory material, to the extent that it is inconsistent with the primary legislation, is incorrect and has no legislative effect.:mad:

The AICs various and other material found on AirNoServices web sites etc was originally intended to clarify those particualr matters that the legislation did not prescribe. That the material therein is inconsistent with legislation is a reflection of the level of supervision within CASA and a problem to be resolved by CASA.

For those of you still struggling with issues of flight rules, the reference to flight above the overcast or in VMC at night was originally intended to relate solely to the issue of sufficient external reference to maintain safe flight, since the definitions for the flight rules are silent on the presence or absence of adequate external visual reference!! [Amazing how powerful the marine pilot transfer lobby was at the time. :mad: ] In fact, one could still be in VMC at night and lack the necessary external references, thereby properly accruing "instrument flight time" regardless of the flight rules at the time. Unfortunately, the explanatory material did not go on to explain the issues.

As for job qualifications, what an employer may demand is quite unrelated to the purpose of the legislation. The discussion on flight time under the IFR is interesting because I do not know of any logbook that easily lends itself to such a record. As we have also seen, flight under the IFR may be totally unrelated to instrument flight time and should not be confused. Of course, in the end, all that matters to the employer is that you can fly to an appropriate standard by sole reference to the instruments - a matter most often unconnected with any records in your logbook!

As for logbook cheats, dob them in - remaining silent only rewards their lack of integrity and that same lack of integrity may well hurt someone else badly in the future.

Stay alive.

[Chocks Away]

Here here.:ok:
DOB THEM IN!
Lets do it right here, right now and create a SHAME file.

[Centaurus]

"Yes - dob 'em in" said the walrus doubtfully -"what a good idea - I'm all for justice and the OZ true blue way of Life". But in OZ culture whistle-blowers are marginally lower than scabbing on our union comrades. And way below our cultural mates the rag-head terrorists.

[BabyMetroBoy]

Just as an aside for anyone contemplating falsifying hours, some time ago when I went through the interview process for Kendell noone ever even asked to see a logbook at either interview - which I found quite surprising. Their critique was based on the sim ride and the interviews themselves. Even after I got in all they wanted to see was a current medical! So I guess they believed that could tell in your flying whether you were for the job or not without the need to see a book. So it would seem it is hardly worth trying to falsify especially considering how easy it is to fall down as per previou posts.

[Captain Sand Dune]

If I have to use instruments to fly (in cloud, not in cloud but viz too poor to see a discernalble horizon, v. dark night and can't see a horizon etc), I log it as IF.
:cool:

[4dogs]

Centaurus me old,

There is another rule - if you are prepared to condone by inaction, don't whinge about it.

My whole point is simply that if a person will cheat in their logbook, they will cheat elsewhere.

Stay alive