Logging Check ride hours as PIC?

[badboy raggamuffin]

Hi to all you instructors, hope you dont mind answering my question, but Im sure most of you have come across this issue b4, just done some flying recently, have been told by the flight school (a certain florida establishment) that I can log the following hours as PIC to count towards my CPL. Whilst that may be true under FAA rules, I am not sure if it is true under CAA/ JAA rules.

1. The first hours were what I think was my "FAA bianual flight review". These I did with an instructor in a type of plane I have already flown. Whilst I did all the flying, landing, etc the instructor did the taxiing as I was at an unfamiliar airport, and did all the RT, as my headset was fooked.

2. The second hour in question was a check out to let me fly in a different type of plane, again I did all the actual flying, landing etc, but the instructor did the taxiing, and about half the RT.

My thoughts are that it would not be correct to log these as PIC, as the instructor was pretty much in charge of the conduct of the flight at all times.
Ive heard however that there is something called PIUS, pilot in command under supervision, which might apply to my situation. What is a definition of this exactly, and does it count as PIC? There is no separate column in my logbook to log PIUS, so I am wary to put these hours in the PI column.

What is the correct way to log these hours under JAR/CAA rules.

Cheers, Badboy.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Under CAA/JAA rules, the flights should be logged as P/UT, as it was not a successsful flight test with an examiner.

If only I had a pound for everytime this has come up.........

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Yeh, the dollar has gone down so far it ain't worth much now, so the pound definitely would be better. :E

[badboy raggamuffin]

Cheers for the repiles, if only I had a pound for every time i was confused by CAA regulations!

What does PUT stand for, pilot under training?

In my "industry standard" pooleys log book, there are the following headings:

PIC, DUAL, Co PILOT, INSTRUCTOR.

I assume that DUAL would therefore be the correct one?
Sorry if it seems like a daft question, but Im logging hours towards my CPL, so I need to be absolutely sure that everything is filled in correctly.

[Say again s l o w l y]

P/UT means Pilot Under Training. Dual is the same thing.

In your training you you should only have need for 3 columns, Dual for dual flights (!!!), PIC for the solo's and PIC under supervision (PICUS) for successful flight tests. I can't say I'm particularily au fait with the Pooleys logbook itself, and they are all slightly different. If there isn't a column for PICUS, then I guess you'll end up putting it in PIC column.

[homeguard]

suggest you look at Lasors, Section A, Appendix B. Where it is specifically noted how your flights should be logged. If a flying club subject to its rules require - simply that an Instructor accompanies you to observe whether they consider you competant to hire their aeroplane, then you are the PIC simply being observed and log it as PIC. Should the flying Club require that all hirers undertake training on an aircraft prior to hire then it must be PUT.
As to the Biannual Flight Review your local FAA office will answer your question as will the FAR on how such flights are logged.
Additionally a succesful flight for the Issue of or a Renewal/Revalidation of a license or Rating (a Test) should be annotated as PIC/us and entered into the P1 column. The Examiners name in the name column. An Examiner should log the flight in their own log book as PIC and in the P1 column also.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

Simple fact is you are bi licensed. Therefore if you can legally log it in the country of issue of your license - stick it in the log book under P1. Let the CAA find out about if themselves and query it if they want to.

If you want a little defense in depth, ask the instructor to sign the entries next time you are over there - sounds like he's willing to.CAA can't moan then

American Airlines Captain has 747 on his FAA ATPL (ATP) wants to apply for a CAA PPL do his 747 hours not count ??? :ugh:

[FormationFlyer]

The CAA is QUITE clear on this matter.

If you log PIC US apart from a flight test with a JAA exmainer you MUST have a prior agreement with the CAA. The position of logging it and letting the CAA query it goes againt common sense.

American Airlines Captain has 747 on his FAA ATPL (ATP) wants to apply for a CAA PPL do his 747 hours not count ???
Well not exactly. as he is type rated on a 747 he must still meet the requirements for what one presume is an SEP class rating on his JAR PPL. The 747 is definitely not SEP so...

FOr me it comes down to responsibility. If Im observing you...and Im going to be held accountable if anything goes wrong...Ill generally say Im P1 and you are PUT (whether you like that or not is up to you)...unles Im feeeling very genourous and I dont log the time at all - in which case assuming you are legal for pax Ill let you log P1....very rare I have to say.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

4motion flyer

I'm afraid you missed the point.

How can the CAA tell you what you can or can't log when operating in a foreign country in a foreign aircraft with a foreign license.

If its P1 in that country then its going in my license as P1. Its up to the CAA to ask me the question.

It doesn't matter if the CAA are "QUITE" clear or not, it simply doesn't concern them.

To answer this question is to answer a question of its legality in America. With all due respect to the JAA/CAA ex-spurts here sorry but it doesn't concern you.

Quote:
American Airlines Captain has 747 on his FAA ATPL (ATP) wants to apply for a CAA PPL do his 747 hours not count ???

Well not exactly. as he is type rated on a 747 he must still meet the requirements for what one presume is an SEP class rating on his JAR PPL. The 747 is definitely not SEP so...

Again point missed - CAA are not going to make the 20,000 hr 4holerman do the 45hr PPL course even though he doesn't have a CAA/JAA license with a 747 on it.

Surely if you log it as P1/us then the CAA will comment adversely no doubt, just as your interpretation of responsibility about your checkflight is your own judgement, then its this chaps ability to write this in his logbook as P1, quite appropiately in my eyes as the flight took place probably 2500 miles from the nearest border of jurisdiction from the CAA.

Heres one for you, just say for example the CAA did not let you operate in Class D airspace SVFR, but whilst flying in America you were allowed in Class D airspace SVFR. Could you/Would you log it? - see where i'm going with this ???

Willing to enter into a healthy debate over this but the debaters need to have relevant FAA knowledge to join in :suspect:

[FormationFlyer]

G-SPOTs Lost - Well your attitude towards claiming hours is wrong. Its not up to the CAA to 'find out' - thats illegal - if you get caught thats another matter - but mis-declaring hours is a definite no no. Thats called deception.

There is nothing to say you cannot record the flight in TWO separate log books in two different ways - then the recording of the flight in each case is correct and the hours you claim to the appropriate authority are correct under the rules of that authority.

The other option is dont count a flight towards two different hours claims and fulfil each authorities requirements separately.

The question however, was one of logging hours flown under one regime for claim under another. For me this is simple.

If you are a JAR licence holder, say a PPL upgrading to a JAR CPL NOT using a licence or ratings gained in another country then you must log the flight in accordance with JAR.

If you are using the hours to obtain a US CPL say, and then convert to a JAR CPL thats another matter and you would of course log the hours as per the US system as this is what would be required for the FAA to issue the CPL.

Juristriction is important - when you present your logbook evidence with a claim for the grant of a licence or rating you are signing forms to LEGALLY state that you have the experience you claim...if you did not have that experience then you may find yourself on the wrong side of things.

re the 747 captain he would be doing licence conversion. Would he need to do the 45 PPL - no. BUT nor did I say he would. I said he would have to meet the requirement for SEP issue. thats - an SEP class rating which is not the same as the PPL. That is unless of course he wants a PPL issues with a 747 type rating on it...

FAA knowledge is not required here as we are not talking about licence conversion of the FAA system. What we are debating here is the UK CAA & JAR FCL standards.

[Whopity]

A log book is a "Personal Log" it must contain what the ANO (Art 35 requires for the purpose of obtaining or maintaining a licence. It can also include anything else the holder wishes to put in it because it is the owners personal log and there is no specified format.

Log book fraud when associated with the obtaining or maintaining a licence currently runs at about £300 a line in fines in the UK Courts, if you make an illegal claim, and once convicted you can stand to loose the licence as an unsuitable person!