Log Book Entries - Check Flights

[flyingsteve55]

As a recent addition to the flying community my early flying has all been ona single type (AA-5A). Limitations for hire have led me to checking out on the PA-28 (weather has slowed this down at the mo - no it's not, it has stopped it!:{ ) My question appears to be quite simple but I can not get two people to agree and therefore provide the definitive answer:

In the log book there is the opportunity to record one's operating capacity as P1, P2, P/UT, P1/S etc. When training it is P/UT no problem.When in command it's P1, BUT what is the correct entry when being checked out on a new type? Is it P/UT, P1/S (under supervision) or simply P1?

As I said I can't get two people to agree so what is the view of this forum?

[Andy_RR]

this will be the 10,000th thread on this subject unless you search the archives...

[S-Works]

Can of worms opening......... You won't get 2 people to agree here either!!!!

If you are being checked out on a new type by an Instructor then generally they will insist you are PUT which makes sense as it is a new type and you should actually be learning something. But technically you could log P1 as you have a valid SEP class rating and therefore can fly any SEP.

If you are being checked out on a type you are current on for club rules (say going to a new club) then 99% of instuctors will also insist that you are PUT as they want to log the time. Technically you could be P1 but watch for the arguments from my fellow Instructors giving 101 different reasons why they are P1 and you PUT!!!

P1/S is ONLY EVER logged on succesful completion of a flight test with an EXAMINER.

You could try the phillosophical approach that you will probably get turned over for a 1hr flight so log it as PUT and use it for your 2 year renewal flight!

[flyingsteve55]

Bose-X - thanks for the reply. You have confirmed my understanding - makes sense.

Shame it's not something that my instructors were ever clear on but further discussion on that would be crossing over to another thread and I don't want to be chastised again for banging on about a topic that's already been covered! :rolleyes: