Logging ICUS in an NZ logbook

[Afterburner1]

Hi guys and girls,

just wondering if anyone could tell me if this is legal, and if it is, how do you do it?

Cheers,

Burner :ok:

[17pdboost]

Hello,

It depends on whether or not your running under CAA or CASA rules. CAA rules stipulate that if the aircraft is run under two crew operations, and the Captain is trained for com. practise, and you the pilot are responsible for the operation of the aircraft (under supervision) then yes it's perfectly legal. The only difference CASA has (that i'm aware) is you need a command rating on the aircraft that you wish to log the command practise.

Hope this helps

[solowflyer]

Loged mine as PIC as well as in the last column (16) with ICUS written in details spot, That way every one is happy. As long as it is clear can't see any problems.

[aileron_69]

Yeah just log it as PIC. M theory is if im rated/endorsed on the aircraft and the guy next to me isnt an instructor then im PIC. After all, its In COMMAND just under supervision. And in multi's there's the Command Practice column

[Sqwark2000]

Probably more details required here, Afterburner 1, are you logging this in a single or a multi? Private Ops or ATO's? Is the supervisor emplyed to do so or, or is it a mate letting you have a fang on a sunday jolly together. I don't think it would be recognised in NZ if it was Single Eng Private Ops as there is no such thing as ICUS in NZ. Command Practice in a multi on ATO's is recognised.

Be careful about what you log and for what purpose you're logging it.

Log it by all means to record experience, but don't include it in any totals that you compile for a licence or rating issue, or it could come back and bite you big time.

Cheers


S2K

[gas-chamber]

And don't try to spiv the chief pilot at your job interview. He WILL find out that you were not really the Captain, whatever you write in your logbook. A guy once nearly went to jail (in another country) for claiming co-pilot time as command. He even got so far as checking out as Captain with his new employer, but once they found out he had bull****ted them, they went for the jugular big-time.
Before you all dump on me, I am not suggesting that any Ppruner and certainly not the originator of this thread, would such a thing. But it does amuse me when I see c.v.'s with claims of command time that turn out on closer examination to be ICUS or simply co-pilot time as PF.

[ops.normal]

If you're coming back to NZ for a job, ICUS doesn't exist. Command Prac is only for Co's on ATOs (req'd 2 crew A/C). ICUS is more similar to the Part 135 supervision - but it's still different in that the supervising pilot doesn't log it in NZ (I believe).

[glekichi]

Hey ops normal are you telling me that the part 135 supervision requirements are not command practice? We always logged it as so and the CAA never seemed to mind.

The major difference between the OZ ICUS and the NZ methods is that in NZ the flights must be either an ATO or CTO. None of this private hire ICUS :mad:.

Solowflyers suggestion re the logging of time sounds like the safest option to me, although I would be tempted to just write it in the Command Practice column.

Here is another question... Is NZ Command Practice time recognised as ICUS or Command, or anything at all for that matter, in Australia? I have been assuming that as it is slightly more restrictive surely it could be counted to be at least equivalent to ICUS.

[Afterburner1]

thanks for all of the replies guys. sorry just to clear things up a bit, its a single engine a/c, doing charter and aerial tours, and doing the ICUS with a supervisor from the company.

cheers

[17pdboost]

I would assume NZ command practise would only convert to P2 time in Australia, as they need a command rating on the a/c, where we don't.

Here's a question:

I phoned CAA this morning to clarify something, AC 61-7 "ATPL flight time req."

With the 1500 total time requirement, 50% of co-pilot time can be counted towards this. Now what the guy from CAA said is you can only count a max of 750 hrs co-pilot towards the 1500hrs required, however, i can't find this anywhere on the AC and was told that this rule has recently been changed.

If a company is thinking of starting cadet programs then how on earth is anyone supposed to get command in the long run?

[ops.normal]

...are you telling me that the part 135 supervision requirements are not command practice?

Sorry, should have been more specific there - 135 supervision stuff can't be considered ComPrac towards ATPL.

Now what the guy from CAA said is you can only count a max of 750 hrs co-pilot towards the 1500hrs required, however, i can't find this anywhere on the AC and was told that this rule has recently been changed.

That sounds dodgy as...The UK cadet scemes (CTC etc) don't need to worry about that, seeing as a JAR ATPL only requires 500 hrs multi crew...NZ lags behind a bit in terms of pretty exhaustive ATPL requirements.

[Sqwark2000]

Afterburner,

Is this for the part 135 requirements to have 5hrs on type and 5 t/o & landings to act as PIC on an ATO?

If so, you can't do it whilst conducting ATO's under supervision of another company pilot, I had to ride along and pick up the dead head legs of charters etc to get my min time on type. Also to manipulate the controls of an a/c conducting ATO's you have to be Comp Checked for the type of operation that's being conducted. So training before your Comp check whilst on ATO's is a no-no.

I'm not familiar with the new rules brought in Dec07, but there's something about needing 750TT and 40hrs on type for Pt135 ATO's, is this for VFR or IFR ATO's or both? Either way, I think the only way to get the time on type is to fly dead heads or just blast around till you got the time unless NZCAA have published acceptable methods of gaining the necessary time (highly doubt that part). Interested to know tho.

S2K

[Spotlight]

If you don't claim five hours for every one you did in AUS, you will ruin things for Generations of Kiwi's to come.

[glekichi]

Not true that you can't do it on ATOs Sqwark2k.
For multi VFR its 10hrs and for IFR its 50hrs on type and it MUST be on ATOs unless its a new aircraft type for the company, in which case they allow ferry flights etc. You are right about having to do the competency check before all of this! I dont think there are any minimums for the comp check, and it can also be integrated into an IFR renewal, for example.
Previous to the rule change it was only 10hrs for IFR charter in our company SOPs but Im not sure if that was a CAA rule or not.
I got comp checked before the new rule came in and then silly me went and moved to OZ without picking up enough multi time to land a decent job here :\

[DeltaT]

>>on closer examination to be ICUS or simply co-pilot time as PF


is co-pilot as PF not ICUS? (2 crew)

[Mach E Avelli]

CAR 5.40 is the reference. The gotcha is that the person giving the ICUS must be designated by the operator to do this. Where I come from this is interpreted as a Training Captain who is training another person for command. A Line Captain may give the F/O the sector as PF, and he may make most of the decisions on that sector, but he is still the F/O.
The NZ notion of command practice could be something else.

[Big Beres]

Afterburner1

I would suggest you call Mike Tucker @ NZ CAA as the buck-stops with him,
in relation to licensing and such matters 04 560 9480 or [email protected]

I've just recently had dealings with him and found him most helpful.

BB

[Afterburner1]

Cheers Big Beres, you're right, probably best just to go straight to the source!! Thanks for all the suggestions though guys.

Burner :ok:

[DeltaT]

Copied from NZ ATPL hours requirements thread
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=323035


Part 61.31 (b) says that one of the requirements for logging command practice is
(6)the pilot-in-command designated to supervise the co-pilot has certified an appropriate entry in the co-pilot's logbook,or a permanent record of the flight has been made by the operator.



Anyone feel like looking up the ICUS definitions for FAA, JAA ?

[Sqwark2000]

must be designated by the operator to do this. Where I come from this is interpreted as a Training Captain who is training another person for command. A Line Captain may give the F/O the sector as PF, and he may make most of the decisions on that sector, but he is still the F/O.
The NZ notion of command practice could be something else.

That's exactly how Eagle does it. Any line F/O may receive/conduct command practice under the supervision of any line captain as long as both crew members have completed their 3 month check after initial clearance to line in their respective role. i.e. a new captain (<3mths experience in role) may not supervise command practice, and a new co-pilot (<3mths experience in role) may not receive/log command practice.

The captain does not have to sign each entry in the Co's logbook, because the daily trip record (kept by company) records whether the sector was flown as Command Practice.

S2K