Helicopter night time building.

[chopilot1984]

Im looking into sharing the cost of a 300cb helicopter. Done some research and come up with one offer at $270 / hr, which is $135 each. This will be in Florida. I want to do about 50 to 60 hrs. If anyone is, or knows a helicopter pilot who is interested is splitting the cost of 50 or so night hours, (to be done within a period between 12 to 15 days, as I am not in the US), Please pm/inbox me or reply to this post. I Would like to get this done this year. Anywhere in the US is also ok with me, as I can travel to any state where you would be available to fly.

[GoodGrief]

Do you hold an FAA CFI certificate?

[chopilot1984]

No, just an FAA CPL/IR

[GoodGrief]

Could be hard finding someone.
CFIs will probably not jump in since they get paid for instructing night flight to ppl and cpl students, but mostly doing ifr work at night killing two birds with one stone.

With two pilots on board you get twice as far, but only the one manipulating the controls can log the time.
There will be no savings for you, unless you cook the books.:=

[chopilot1984]

You can both log the time lagally, if one pilot is appointed safety pilot and the other pilot flies vfr under the hood, both are ( by FAR/AIM )required crew in the cockpit.

[Gordy]

You are correct, however it is not quite as simple. The "safety pilot" has to be designated as PIC, and that is how he logs the time. He must also be able to legally fly as PIC. Should something go wrong, or violations get busted...this is the person the FAA will go after.

Good luck finding a school to rent a 300 to you under these conditions......it may be a violation of school policy. Also, fyi....."some", (all the ones I know), employers will not count that time when evaluating you for a job.......

It is a disaster waiting to happen......

[chopilot1984]

Thank you Gordy. With all due respect, i am not here to ask if it can be done, as i said i did the research, i know it can be, i have the cash and contacted a few fsdo's. The whole point of doing this is in itself self explanatory, unlike stories you hear about cooking the books, i will do it legitimately. So if anyone is interested, please contact me. It seams the more i use pprune, the more i feel guys on here are just trying to act smarter...its not a pissing contest ppruners :ok:

[hueyracer]

True.

But we are playing "by the rules" here-as we all used to know people who "faked" their way into the business…..killing innocent people with the abilities they only had in their "faked books"..

Most rules are there for a reason (note that i wrote "most"-not "all")…

Gordy has probably been around flying for more years than you´re actually walking on this planet-and he knows the regs…..

:ugh:

[Gordy]

With all due respect,

Like Hueyracer said.... Tis a small industry.... I wish you luck and all the best...

[chopilot1984]

As I said, I am doing this legally, as per the FAR/AIM and FSDO direct information and advise. Are you saying this is illegal now or somehow faking numbers into the book or not playing ''by the rules''?

Yes, it is a small industry!

[Sandy Toad]

Most employers look not just at the number of hours but the quality of those hours - even with high time applicants.
So just fulfilling a minimum number requirement may not (and should not) be enough.
A tough road with no short cuts - but worth it!

[chopilot1984]

I need the night hours for the 100 hr requirement for the FAA ATP, I have a job already and have over 2500 hrs turbine.

[Sandy Toad]

"2500 hours turbine" yet still 50-60 hours short of the 100 hour requirement?
My comment about the quality of hours still stands I'm afraid.

[chopilot1984]

Haha, you are a joke sandy, if only you knew, never presume to know everything, you might surprise yourself, as I said, ots a pissing competition in here. Just fyi, if you thought you knew much about the helicopter world (which by the sound of it, you "think" you do), you would have known that not many civillian helicopter jobs fly at night, hence the lack of night hours. I personaly know pilots with over 15 years of just day vfr flying. Im not here to ask for your permission or information. You must be a favourite at your company!

[Sandy Toad]

I'm sure you're well placed for that day VFR job then. Good luck and enjoy.

[chopilot1984]

Some got it easy, some did not, some got lucky some did not. You seam to think you are on a higher skill level Sandy, personally, quality, quantity and skill all climb with time and effort, it seams you were born with it, hence easy and lucky. I did not, I work hard and pay thousands like many others do; to ask a fellow pilot to split the costs to time build is nothing new and nothing elligal about it. To insinuate that my experience in the industry is poor quality due to the fact that I lack some night time for my ATP is a poor quality attack from you with no relevance to the topic at hand. Personally, weather you have a fresh ppl or Me/Mc crm 10k hr military pilot, attitude is what gets you through it all....best of luck to you too.

[Sandy Toad]

The point being made by myself (and I think some of the others) was to be sure you weren't wasting your money.
Others questioned the legality aspect which you feel you have researched.
I questioned the value of these hours to a future employer. As a box ticking exercise for the ATP, fine.
To add value to your ability as a helicopter pilot, less so.
If you are pursuing a niche "Day VFR" career, that's ok. It can be rewarding and valuable.
However if you are hoping to break out into other fields, most employers will look at those hours as being exactly what they are, hour building - not experience.
In a similar way thousands of offshore flying may equate to lots of cruise hours with some intense arrivals and departures. Not what every employer is looking for.
If your eyes are wide open and these course of action fulfills your requirements, go for it.

[Helilog56]

As pointed out many times before cp1984....the moron/idiot content on this site is very high.....:ugh:

[hueyracer]

attitude is what gets you through it all...


Exactly….
At least you got that right…


As mentioned before-this is a small industry….

[ersa]

Chopilot1984

You should have not asked any questions , gone and done the 60 odd hours in the states and left it at that.

The only advise I can offer is , make sure you can log it as PIC time.

The jobs that I have done that required night hours have requested total night and then required for example night winching or vessel landings which you will only get via a position in a company.

But if you just want to tick a box to get a ATP in the US go for it.

Out of interest your location states south hemisphere , why do you need a ATP ?

[BH06L3]

"2500 hours turbine" yet still 50-60 hours short of the 100 hour requirement?
My comment about the quality of hours still stands I'm afraid.

Sandy toad Hey I'm in the same situation. And have lots of varied experience and quality hours. I know a pilot with 10,000+ hrs, lots of medium time that didn't have the Ifr or night hour requirements for the ATP. At least this guy is spending the money trying to do it legit rather than BS like a lot of others due.

[malc4d]

I believe that the "safety pilot" and logging the hours has just been changed by the FAA. Something about it in the AOPA mag legal brief.


January 17, 2014

By John S. Yodice


John S. Yodice“Hangar-flying lawyers” (like “guard-house lawyers” to us military veterans) who are not really lawyers at all but are usually experienced and insightful pilots and flight instructors, enjoy wrestling with interesting legal problems. I have enjoyed many such discussions.

Here is one raised by a just-issued (August 2013), legal interpretation from the FAA chief counsel that delves into the question of who—when two qualified pilots of a dual control aircraft are on board—may log time as pilot in command of a typical general aviation aircraft (that is, one that is certificated for single-pilot operation). We last dealt with this subject a few years ago (“Pilot Counsel: Logging Pilot-in-Command Time,” March 2010 AOPA Pilot). This recent interpretation deals with a commonly encountered situation in which one pilot is flying to maintain instrument currency and the other pilot is acting as the required safety pilot.

Pilots A and B rent a light twin-engine aircraft in order for Pilot A to operate it to maintain instrument currency. (The logging rules apply regardless of whether the pilots are flying a multiengine aircraft.) Pilot A intends to make several practice instrument approaches under simulated IFR conditions while flying VFR. Both pilots have appropriate ratings for the aircraft being flown. After takeoff, Pilot A puts on a view-limiting device and Pilot B acts as a safety pilot (“Pilot Counsel: Safety Pilot,” August 2013 AOPA Pilot). Pilot A is the sole manipulator of the controls throughout the entire flight. The interpretation assumes that Pilot B is acting as PIC for the flight. The question is who may log multiengine PIC time in this scenario?

It is FAR 61.51(e) that governs the logging of PIC flight time. The relevant part states that a private (or commercial, sport, or recreational) pilot may log PIC time for the time during which that pilot is “the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges” or “acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under…the regulations under which the flight is conducted.”

According to this 2013 interpretation, “Pilot A may log the entire flight as PIC time as that pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls for the entire flight. Assuming that Pilot B is acting as PIC for the flight, Pilot B may log any portion of the flight during which Pilot A operated in simulated instrument flight and Pilot B acted as the safety pilot because Pilot B’s presence is required for that portion of the flight under FAR 91.109(c). [Here is where the interpretation gets sticky.]However, if Pilot A is acting as PIC for the flight, then only Pilot A may log PIC time during the flight. Pilot B is a required crewmember under FAR 91.109(c) and may log second-in-command time under FAR 61.51(f) during the time that Pilot A operates in simulated instrument conditions.” This quote can be read to mean that Pilot B may not log any time as PIC because it says, “then only Pilot A may log PIC time during the flight.”

Another FAA interpretation, one issued in 2009, that has a similar scenario, raises the same question, but maybe a different result. In this 2009 interpretation, the total flight time was 2.2 hours and the total simulated instrument time was 2.0 hours. This interpretation says “that Pilot A may log the entire flight (2.2 hours) of PIC flight time because that pilot was the sole manipulator of the controls for the entire flight. Pilot B may log the portion of the flight during which Pilot A operated in simulated instrument flight and Pilot B acted as safety pilot (2.0 hours) because Pilot B was a required flight crewmember for that portion of the flight under 14 C.F.R. Section 91.109(b).”

Is there an argument allowing Pilot B to log PIC time? Can FAR 61.51(e) be interpreted to allow both pilots to log PIC time? Of course, there is no question about Pilot A. But cannot Pilot B be covered by the language of FAR 61.51(e)(1)(iii) that says in pertinent part that “a sport, recreational, private, commercial or airline transport pilot may log pilot-in-command flight time for flights—when the pilot…acts as pilot in command of an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required under…the regulations under which the flight is conducted?” Both of these interpretations concede that more than one pilot, a safety pilot, is required in simulated instrument flight by FAR 91.109.

An interesting legal conundrum for hangar-flying lawyers: Buried in these interpretations is the puzzling differentiation between “acting as pilot-in-command” that apparently sometimes may not be logged as PIC, and “logging pilot-in-command” time.

Web: Yodice Associates (http://www.aopa.org/yodiceassociates)