Logging PIC vs SIC.
Ok, but this is exactly what I wrote:
when you are operating your aircraft under instruments, and that is, by definition true for 100% of the flight time, when you are flying under IFR-rules. Or do you fly IFR and say "oh, look, that mountain is near the "Mountain View VOR", let's fly there, must be right 
(1) A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.
The idea is simple. For FAA logging purposes, instrument time may be logged when the airplane is flown solely by reference to instruments. In the FAA universe, this means there is no outside visual reference available to the pilot. This is either because a view-limiting device is being used in the case of "simulated instrument time" or because meteorological conditions of limited visibility prevail during "actual instrument time". Black of night doesn't count.
As a practical matter, all jet flying is instrument flying if you're doing it right! Even when there's something useful to see out the windshield, the airplane is still controlled by reference to instruments AND whatever useful information can be sensed by looking out the window. How you do it and how you log it are not the same thing.
But if the question is what may be logged as "instrument time" under FAA rules, please see paragraph 1.
As a practical matter, all jet flying is instrument flying if you're doing it right! Even when there's something useful to see out the windshield, the airplane is still controlled by reference to instruments AND whatever useful information can be sensed by looking out the window. How you do it and how you log it are not the same thing.
But if the question is what may be logged as "instrument time" under FAA rules, please see paragraph 1.
For FAA logging purposes, the "sole manipulator of the flight controls" means the person who is controlling the attitude, speed and direction of the aircraft. This is the "Pilot Flying". And yes, it counts while the autopilot is engaged too. The other pilot operating secondary controls and appliances, radios etc is most often referred to as the "Pilot Monitoring" in most two-pilot operations these days. They are not the "sole manipulator" and may not log "PIC time" or "instrument time" while performing PM duties. Of course if they are the designated PIC, then they log ALL the time as PIC. If they are acting as the SIC, but they are also the PF, then under 61.51 they may log "sole manipulator" time as "PIC time" if they are rated in the aircraft. Any "instrument time" or "approach procedures" goes to the PF for logging purposes.
So now this should be just about as clear to everyone as Mississippi river mud!
So now this should be just about as clear to everyone as Mississippi river mud!
The Office of the Chief Counsel has a different opinion.
See para 5 in the opinion given to Joseph P Carr on 7 Nov 1984 by John H Cassady, Assistant Chief Counsel, Regulations & Enforcement Division.
Archived as Legal Interpretation # 84-29 in a set of Chief Counsel opinions on logging time available here: http://www.offhand.org/amb/pic-time.txt
See para 5 in the opinion given to Joseph P Carr on 7 Nov 1984 by John H Cassady, Assistant Chief Counsel, Regulations & Enforcement Division.
To answer your first question, actual instrument conditions may
occur in the case you described, a moonless night over the ocean
with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is
necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. The
determination as to whether flight by reference to instruments is
necessary is somewhat subjective, and based in part on the sound
judgement of the pilot. Note that, under Section 61.51(b)(3),
the pilot must log the conditions of the flight. The log should
include the reasons for determining that the flight was under
actual instrument conditions in case the pilot later would be
called on to prove that the actual instrument flight time logged
was legitimate.
occur in the case you described, a moonless night over the ocean
with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is
necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. The
determination as to whether flight by reference to instruments is
necessary is somewhat subjective, and based in part on the sound
judgement of the pilot. Note that, under Section 61.51(b)(3),
the pilot must log the conditions of the flight. The log should
include the reasons for determining that the flight was under
actual instrument conditions in case the pilot later would be
called on to prove that the actual instrument flight time logged
was legitimate.
Thanks for that FAA legal council interpretation reference selfin. I had not seen that one before. I guess black of night could indeed be counted legitimately, so long as it was subjectively determined by the PIC that reference to instruments was required in order to control the aircraft absent adequate visual reference. If I ever log instrument time for that reason, I'll be sure to explain my reasoning in the comments block. 
I know I myself have certainly had to fly strictly by instrument reference in what passes for VMC on many occasions. Live and learn!
I know I myself have certainly had to fly strictly by instrument reference in what passes for VMC on many occasions. Live and learn!
I think Australia is probably unique in that we have a night VMC classification. Following a number of tragic accidents where folks died because they didn't have the instrument skills on absolutely black, black nights they introduced a ruling that for night VMC there must be a discernible horizon. From experience I know that being over water on a pitch black overcast night with no celestial lighting you can't get more IMC.
https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-pag...nible-external
https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-pag...nible-external
Ok, but this is exactly what I wrote:
when you are operating your aircraft under instruments, and that is, by definition true for 100% of the flight time, when you are flying under IFR-rules. Or do you fly IFR and say "oh, look, that mountain is near the "Mountain View VOR", let's fly there, must be right
when you are operating your aircraft under instruments, and that is, by definition true for 100% of the flight time, when you are flying under IFR-rules. Or do you fly IFR and say "oh, look, that mountain is near the "Mountain View VOR", let's fly there, must be right
..I believe the question about logging PIC time was already discussed..
Fly Safe !!
B-757
Originally Posted by B-757
...under FAA rules you can log instruments ONLY if you are flying in IMC conditions
IMC (absent from the regulation) simply means the VFR minimums in 14 CFR 91.155 aren't met whereas the logging rule refers to actual instrument conditions which exist when "use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft" (interpretation to Carr, see post 24).
That interpretation does not follow from the regulation provided in post 19 by PukinDog.
IMC (absent from the regulation) simply means the VFR minimums in 14 CFR 91.155 aren't met whereas the logging rule refers to actual instrument conditions which exist when "use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft" (interpretation to Carr, see post 24).
IMC (absent from the regulation) simply means the VFR minimums in 14 CFR 91.155 aren't met whereas the logging rule refers to actual instrument conditions which exist when "use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft" (interpretation to Carr, see post 24).
Fly safe
B-757
