ICUS on your leg - Fill yer boots
Thread Starter
ICUS on your leg - Fill yer boots
The question of first officers logging ICUS on their leg is explained in the recent CASA document - although of course the airline is not mentioned.
http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/ma...91117/0901.pdf
CASA certainly has changed it's tune since the following explanation of the principle of ICUS was published by it's predecessor the Civil Aviation Authority. The following extract from the July 1993 Volume 2, Number 6 issue of 'CAA Aviation Bulletin" covers the subject succintly.
In response to a question titled "ICUS for Pilot in Left Hand Seat", Graeme Smith of CAA Flight Crew Licencing replied (in part):
"The concept of ICUS needs clear defintion before the logging of flight time can be addressed.
ICUS merely provides a settling in time for pilots who are already qualified to be pilot in command of certain operations.
The operations to which ICUS applies are those that the CAA deems are sufficiently complex, or that constitute a sufficiently large public risk, to warrant the operator being required to provide supervision of a pilot until that pilot has acquired a base of experience.
The operations that are currently deemed to fulfil one or both of these criteria are:
1. The initial 10 hours of agricultural operations (the term direct supervision is used in CAO 40.6 only because the operatiopns might well be in a single place aircraft - see definition of direct supervision in CAO 40.6 subsection 1.
2. The first 10 hours of IFR charter operations in an aircraft type new to the pilot and that has a max take off weight not greater than 5700 kgs.
3. The first 25 or 50 hours as pilot in command of an aircraft type that is new to the pilot and that has a max take off weight of 5700kgs or more in charter or RPT operations.
The concept does not apply to training flights. If we assume the lefthand seat is the command seat, ICUS may only be logged by the pilot who occupies the left hand seat. There is no requirement for the aircraft to be multi-engined or require more than one pilot".
So there you are. The second line includes the point that "ICUS merely provides a settling in time for pilots already qualified to be pilot in command of certain operations." For aircraft above 5700 kgs it states "the first 25 to 50 hours as pilot in command" is acceptable for logging of ICUS"
A slight change of course from airline first officers logging several thousands of hours ICUS in lieu of copilot time. Some "settling in" time....!
http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/ma...91117/0901.pdf
CASA certainly has changed it's tune since the following explanation of the principle of ICUS was published by it's predecessor the Civil Aviation Authority. The following extract from the July 1993 Volume 2, Number 6 issue of 'CAA Aviation Bulletin" covers the subject succintly.
In response to a question titled "ICUS for Pilot in Left Hand Seat", Graeme Smith of CAA Flight Crew Licencing replied (in part):
"The concept of ICUS needs clear defintion before the logging of flight time can be addressed.
ICUS merely provides a settling in time for pilots who are already qualified to be pilot in command of certain operations.
The operations to which ICUS applies are those that the CAA deems are sufficiently complex, or that constitute a sufficiently large public risk, to warrant the operator being required to provide supervision of a pilot until that pilot has acquired a base of experience.
The operations that are currently deemed to fulfil one or both of these criteria are:
1. The initial 10 hours of agricultural operations (the term direct supervision is used in CAO 40.6 only because the operatiopns might well be in a single place aircraft - see definition of direct supervision in CAO 40.6 subsection 1.
2. The first 10 hours of IFR charter operations in an aircraft type new to the pilot and that has a max take off weight not greater than 5700 kgs.
3. The first 25 or 50 hours as pilot in command of an aircraft type that is new to the pilot and that has a max take off weight of 5700kgs or more in charter or RPT operations.
The concept does not apply to training flights. If we assume the lefthand seat is the command seat, ICUS may only be logged by the pilot who occupies the left hand seat. There is no requirement for the aircraft to be multi-engined or require more than one pilot".
So there you are. The second line includes the point that "ICUS merely provides a settling in time for pilots already qualified to be pilot in command of certain operations." For aircraft above 5700 kgs it states "the first 25 to 50 hours as pilot in command" is acceptable for logging of ICUS"
A slight change of course from airline first officers logging several thousands of hours ICUS in lieu of copilot time. Some "settling in" time....!
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: can't remember, I'm too tired
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I misunderstand you
When I read the CASA document my understanding is that
If my licence is endorsed with a Command rating and I am qualified as a co-pilot then I may log ICUS whenever I am in control of the aircraft including from the right seat (co-pilot seat)
Agree?
If my licence is endorsed with a Command rating and I am qualified as a co-pilot then I may log ICUS whenever I am in control of the aircraft including from the right seat (co-pilot seat)
Agree?
Bottums Up
Having performed zero minutes of research into this subject, I'd be surprised if a command endorsement on type but checked to line as an F/O would permit one to log ICUS on legs flown, for the simple reason that one might be PF/Handling Pilot (or whatever) but one isn't in command. The Captain is.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
I'm with you Capt, but I gather it does happen,
at the end of the day the Capt is the one in Command, although ICUS,
it has always been an iffy thing
at the end of the day the Capt is the one in Command, although ICUS,
it has always been an iffy thing
ICUS? Copilot?
Whats the big deal?
If you got your ATPL not much.
A hell of a lot if you have no command time, if you are looking at overseas positions or have the new beaut multi crew licence.
Whats the big deal?
If you got your ATPL not much.
A hell of a lot if you have no command time, if you are looking at overseas positions or have the new beaut multi crew licence.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
A hell of a lot if you have no command time, if you are looking at overseas positions or have the new beaut multi crew licence.
"And honestly Who throws a Cupcake?"
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: In a pipe in the upstairs water closet
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Just out of curiosity, how are airline crews in Europe, where there is effectively no GA to speak of, able to accrue command time to suitably qualify for a command post? Is it through ICUS? If so, it doesn't appear to decrease the quality of flying practices over there.
I thought getting a command was all about aptitude, rather than the number of hours filled out in the appropriate column...
I thought getting a command was all about aptitude, rather than the number of hours filled out in the appropriate column...
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet A
it also has a lot to do with jumping ques........
local hoops is local hoops..... like 'em or loathe 'em.... they're for jumping through not dodging around
bbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzz
it also has a lot to do with jumping ques........
local hoops is local hoops..... like 'em or loathe 'em.... they're for jumping through not dodging around
bbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears to me that our rubbery rules are manipulated by our esteemed regulators to suit the commercial aspirations of a few major airlines, and some weird and wonderful theories.
Since when did fact or logic have anything to do with it.
Since when did fact or logic have anything to do with it.
JetA_OK and Fuel-off, the regulations as they stand have come about for historical reasons. As I understand it, 20~30 years ago many GA operators were stepping up to more complex turboprop equipment for the first time and the then DCA became concerned at the lack of suitable experience within these organizations, so they introduced to these additional requirements (10 hrs on type, 500 ME Command etc. etc.) but they only applied to Low Capacity Air Operators certificates (36 seats or less). As such none of these requirements ever applied to Qantas, Ansett or any other other High Capacity AOC. The only issue for them is the PIC requirement for the issue of an ATPL (usually only an issue for cadet entry pilots) which has been covered by their ops manual dealing with the logging of ICUS. (Ask Keg).
That said, there are apparently many Co-pilots of all stripes logging ICUS time (and possibly putting time in the PIC column of their logbook as well) when they are the handling pilot, regardless of whether it is appropriate for the operation or not.
That said, there are apparently many Co-pilots of all stripes logging ICUS time (and possibly putting time in the PIC column of their logbook as well) when they are the handling pilot, regardless of whether it is appropriate for the operation or not.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The operator must ensure they apply sound governance in the assignment of supervisory captains to oversee the PICUS activity"
I am a lowly line captain, not supervisory. I don't believe FO's will be able to log ICUS when flying with me.
I am a lowly line captain, not supervisory. I don't believe FO's will be able to log ICUS when flying with me.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Here and there
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sitting far away from home,killing the afternoon with a glass of chardonay ( well ...several).Probably more pensive than I will be by the time the bottle is empty but, here goes!
Why is it that everyone wants to shortcut their way in the industry?
What's wrong with doing the hard yards and waiting ,hoping, for a chance at the good stuff. I remember busting my backside in aviation during the day and working at night to pay bills. I also remember 50 applications ( in 7 years, yeah a 150 apps)to all three players in the airline market before I got a chance .Yeah, maybe I'm no god of aviation but, I did it and as Franky said...I did it my way.
Everybody wants it, now, today.Forget about actual experience and ability gained by honing skills.
It's not just pilots but ,the operators as well and it shows in the declining standards.
You wonder why the pay and respect for the position of pilot has dived in Australia ? You have done it to yourselves.
Whats easily gained is not appreciated nor rewarded.
Back to the chardy!
Why is it that everyone wants to shortcut their way in the industry?
What's wrong with doing the hard yards and waiting ,hoping, for a chance at the good stuff. I remember busting my backside in aviation during the day and working at night to pay bills. I also remember 50 applications ( in 7 years, yeah a 150 apps)to all three players in the airline market before I got a chance .Yeah, maybe I'm no god of aviation but, I did it and as Franky said...I did it my way.
Everybody wants it, now, today.Forget about actual experience and ability gained by honing skills.
It's not just pilots but ,the operators as well and it shows in the declining standards.
You wonder why the pay and respect for the position of pilot has dived in Australia ? You have done it to yourselves.
Whats easily gained is not appreciated nor rewarded.
Back to the chardy!
I'd be surprised if a command endorsement on type but checked to line as an F/O would permit one to log ICUS on legs flown
Nunc est bibendum
As was pointed out on another thread recently. QF (mainline) have been doing this for the better part of a decade! I'm not sure what the drama is. It's not good enough to fast track you into a command job anywhere else (that I know of) and so it's simply a way of showing what sectors you operated ICUS.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: utopia
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wynsock
so when you're PNF (Capt) you don't monitor/supervise the PF (FO) ... if not, what the
??? Regardless of who's flying, I thought the buck stops with the skipper, skipper
... so i guess supervision is a mandatory role of a captain during a normal line flight...???
ICUS: Who really cares??? Like previously posted Q have been doing this for decades. It's only those with big egos and smalls who have issues with this.
so when you're PNF (Capt) you don't monitor/supervise the PF (FO) ... if not, what the
??? Regardless of who's flying, I thought the buck stops with the skipper, skipper... so i guess supervision is a mandatory role of a captain during a normal line flight...???ICUS: Who really cares??? Like previously posted Q have been doing this for decades. It's only those with big egos and small
s who have issues with this.
Thread Starter
and so it's simply a way of showing what sectors you operated ICUS.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus, the Icus time will get you laughed out of most Asian airline interviews if applying for a Dec position. My Prc logbook has columns for radio operator, navigator, engineer, copilot, dual ( in fact everything but lunar landings) but Icus doesn't exist & I'd have a hard time explaining how it could exist to those in power.
Perhaps if they were desperate, but the Asian airlines are happy to put one of their own with 2500 hours total time in the Lhs of a narrowbody. Others (Eva, China Airlines) specifically exclude Lhs cruise/ relief command time so Icus won't enhance the resume.
Perhaps if they were desperate, but the Asian airlines are happy to put one of their own with 2500 hours total time in the Lhs of a narrowbody. Others (Eva, China Airlines) specifically exclude Lhs cruise/ relief command time so Icus won't enhance the resume.