PIC/SPIC what a mess
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Italy
Age: 36
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PIC/SPIC what a mess
Hey guys!
I hold a JAA ATPL FROZEN license,so i have in my logbook SPIC hours. I just converted my JAA CPL into canadian licenses. Question: How do I log SPIC hours in the canadian logbook?
I also have IFR SPIC hours on my integrated training, can I log them as IFR PIC?
I m freaking out guys
Thanks for helping
JD
I hold a JAA ATPL FROZEN license,so i have in my logbook SPIC hours. I just converted my JAA CPL into canadian licenses. Question: How do I log SPIC hours in the canadian logbook?
I also have IFR SPIC hours on my integrated training, can I log them as IFR PIC?
I m freaking out guys
Thanks for helping
JD
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi jd_jader,
Your question can best be answered by any cruise relief pilots who may frequent this forum. However, my response applies to all your questions (SPIC and IFR).
So, in short Canada does not recognize SPIC (Second Pilot-in-Command for those who are wondering) because per the CAR's there is only ever one PIC, one SIC (F/O) and (if required) then the cruise relief pilots (CRP). It depends on the airline itself as to how the CRP is ranked - I know one or two outfits class them simply as relief pilots and they are able to log the time as FO for the hours they actually sat in the seat [so crossing the Atlantic, they may only get to log 3 hours of a 6 hour flight] - there was no logging of PIC time because there can only ever be one PIC, regardless of whether he or she is on the flight deck or not. Indeed, there is at least one outfit that used to give training to their CRP's to a First Officer level but never actually gave an F/O PPC - therefore, technically their pilots could not even log it as F/O time (although I've been told this may have changed in the last number of years).
In saying that, different companies may have different procedures, so I will not claim that the above applies to all operators. However, I think you would be safer to ask your specific airline and perhaps use the last column on the right (its a blank column for logging anything you specifically want to log but that will not count towards anything) should you wish to keep count.
I will, of course, default to any current CRP who can give you a more accurate analysis - my answer is based off the CARS and second hand knowledge from friends who are CRP's.
Your question can best be answered by any cruise relief pilots who may frequent this forum. However, my response applies to all your questions (SPIC and IFR).
So, in short Canada does not recognize SPIC (Second Pilot-in-Command for those who are wondering) because per the CAR's there is only ever one PIC, one SIC (F/O) and (if required) then the cruise relief pilots (CRP). It depends on the airline itself as to how the CRP is ranked - I know one or two outfits class them simply as relief pilots and they are able to log the time as FO for the hours they actually sat in the seat [so crossing the Atlantic, they may only get to log 3 hours of a 6 hour flight] - there was no logging of PIC time because there can only ever be one PIC, regardless of whether he or she is on the flight deck or not. Indeed, there is at least one outfit that used to give training to their CRP's to a First Officer level but never actually gave an F/O PPC - therefore, technically their pilots could not even log it as F/O time (although I've been told this may have changed in the last number of years).
In saying that, different companies may have different procedures, so I will not claim that the above applies to all operators. However, I think you would be safer to ask your specific airline and perhaps use the last column on the right (its a blank column for logging anything you specifically want to log but that will not count towards anything) should you wish to keep count.
I will, of course, default to any current CRP who can give you a more accurate analysis - my answer is based off the CARS and second hand knowledge from friends who are CRP's.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until JD confirms it...Student Pilot in Command? If you got some during training, my money is on that. Now that you have your Canadian licence, you will not accumulate any more. If, for some reason, you are transfering your JAA flight time to a Canadian logbook, it's just PIC.
I am worried about your 'freaking out' though....
I am worried about your 'freaking out' though....
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SPIC is only used in one form of training which is the zero to hero full time course in europe.
Its supervised pilot in command.
Basically these guys do that few hours (some come out with 160 total) that they needed to invent a way to get the required PIC time for CPL issue.
They don't have any licsense or ratings until they have completed the whole course. So they can't fly a twin solo as PIC. So they stick an instructor in the RHS and call it SPIC. The hours are actually dual with an instructor present in the cockpit and signing for the aircraft.
Its supervised pilot in command.
Basically these guys do that few hours (some come out with 160 total) that they needed to invent a way to get the required PIC time for CPL issue.
They don't have any licsense or ratings until they have completed the whole course. So they can't fly a twin solo as PIC. So they stick an instructor in the RHS and call it SPIC. The hours are actually dual with an instructor present in the cockpit and signing for the aircraft.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You learn something new everyday - I've only ever come across SPIC as Second-Pilot-in-Command...never even crossed my mind that it would be Student PIC...although, after hearing that it makes much more sense!
As I mentioned, I default to those who know better...
As I mentioned, I default to those who know better...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are trained to go into the right hand seat of a fully automated cockpit with a full set of SOP's defining up to the point of going for a dump.
Airmanship and PIC skills arn't really a feature of thier training. The mangment of the systems and the proccess of the flight they are very good at.
But give them an aircraft and ask them to fly from A to B even in CAVOK and still wind and your asking for trouble. They haven't done a single minute of unsupervised flying in their course unless they bothered to get a SEP class rating and flew privately post license issue.
Airmanship and PIC skills arn't really a feature of thier training. The mangment of the systems and the proccess of the flight they are very good at.
But give them an aircraft and ask them to fly from A to B even in CAVOK and still wind and your asking for trouble. They haven't done a single minute of unsupervised flying in their course unless they bothered to get a SEP class rating and flew privately post license issue.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad Jock, I recently sat one of these folks in the right seat of my 421, {used for buisiness and charity flying into some pretty poor strips} smart, well spoken, keen and all that good stuff, but without a doubt the worst pilot Ive ever had the misfortune to observe in over fifty nine years of flying, I think I gained an insisght into the Air France hull loss . Its a bloody crime that his parents emptied their savings and sent this kid to some place of shore believing this would get him a job this side of the pond, {they told me that they belived the sales pitch from this place, and had no clue about the real requirments in our part of the globe} I reapeat, he is not a stupid kid, but the basics were totally lacking, he is smart enough to understand this and is now starting again with his training, this time I hope he gets the kind of training needed to do the sort of flying required to land him a job in "our world".
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clunck its ex 1-14 which arn't getting hammered home.
The the visual phase of flight is deemed not worth knowing Which means they can't position themselves without a nav aid leading them to a runway.
Trimming is just a bizarre concept. Take your hands off the controls and the aircraft not instally entering a spiral dive is a suprise to them.
I have got one just now that can't gasp the concept that to slow down you need to either increase the nose pitch to maintain the rate of decent while removing power or if you already have it all off you need to lift the nose even if it means you stop decending . Apparently he had been taught point it at the threshold and put the gear down. His record so far is asking for the gear at 220knts with a limiting speed of 160knts. But apparently its not his fault its ATC because they turned him in at 6 miles instead of 10 which is apparently "standard" so he ended up hot and high.
He really didn't like the way i sorted it out either. But we were stabilised at 500ft. You could see what was going to happen as soon as we were turned onto base just by the picture of the runway. Not that he would know having his head rammed in the cockpit never looking out.
The the visual phase of flight is deemed not worth knowing Which means they can't position themselves without a nav aid leading them to a runway.
Trimming is just a bizarre concept. Take your hands off the controls and the aircraft not instally entering a spiral dive is a suprise to them.
I have got one just now that can't gasp the concept that to slow down you need to either increase the nose pitch to maintain the rate of decent while removing power or if you already have it all off you need to lift the nose even if it means you stop decending . Apparently he had been taught point it at the threshold and put the gear down. His record so far is asking for the gear at 220knts with a limiting speed of 160knts. But apparently its not his fault its ATC because they turned him in at 6 miles instead of 10 which is apparently "standard" so he ended up hot and high.
He really didn't like the way i sorted it out either. But we were stabilised at 500ft. You could see what was going to happen as soon as we were turned onto base just by the picture of the runway. Not that he would know having his head rammed in the cockpit never looking out.
Last edited by mad_jock; 22nd Mar 2013 at 12:40.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Italy
Age: 36
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guys sorry for my delay;
Yeah I do confirm it's Student Pilot in Command. It s a JAA bull****t.
Yeah number 1, that what I thought it's simply PIC.
Thanks for your replies guys!
Oh yes, Donna, the conversion from JAA is a pain in the ass. I mean I had 2 re-do the written exams CPL & INRAT and then I had to do 2 flight test. And the commercial flight test is way different from the european ones. I have to tell that the written part was way easier than the ATPL JAA written, But you have to study anyway
JD
Yeah I do confirm it's Student Pilot in Command. It s a JAA bull****t.
Yeah number 1, that what I thought it's simply PIC.
Thanks for your replies guys!
Oh yes, Donna, the conversion from JAA is a pain in the ass. I mean I had 2 re-do the written exams CPL & INRAT and then I had to do 2 flight test. And the commercial flight test is way different from the european ones. I have to tell that the written part was way easier than the ATPL JAA written, But you have to study anyway
JD
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most places its transferred as Dual.
Unless you have signed the techlog and taken full responsability for the flight its never PIC. There can only be one PIC on a flight and the instructor in the RHS was that pilot.
Unless you have signed the techlog and taken full responsability for the flight its never PIC. There can only be one PIC on a flight and the instructor in the RHS was that pilot.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dublin
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twin Otter question?
Just wondering if someone could enlighten me on the logging of RHS Twin Otter time? In our company we split the legs as PF and PNF to the extent that the PF performs all the duties of PIC on that leg, with PNF carrying out all the paperwork and radio duties and boarding the passengers. We both have type ratings.
Now I know that my RHS hours wont count towards the unfreezing of my ATPL (because its apparently too light an aircraft, this is a BS reason in my opinion) but on the other hand the aircraft is required to operate two crew under the AOC and will become a performance category A under new EASA regs.
I log my PF legs as PIC with the captains name in the column, and i have a co-pilot column i put the paperwork legs under. But when I do apply for a new job one day i will be clear on my CV that the RHS hours are PICUS. I know we are all responsible for our own logbooks but there seems to be no guidelines i can find on this scenario.
Now I know that my RHS hours wont count towards the unfreezing of my ATPL (because its apparently too light an aircraft, this is a BS reason in my opinion) but on the other hand the aircraft is required to operate two crew under the AOC and will become a performance category A under new EASA regs.
I log my PF legs as PIC with the captains name in the column, and i have a co-pilot column i put the paperwork legs under. But when I do apply for a new job one day i will be clear on my CV that the RHS hours are PICUS. I know we are all responsible for our own logbooks but there seems to be no guidelines i can find on this scenario.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It depends where you are flying the twotter and which system you are going into.
I don't have a clue what the candians would do. But if its a european question we don't want to inflict our friends the Canadians with EASA rubbish.
I don't have a clue what the candians would do. But if its a european question we don't want to inflict our friends the Canadians with EASA rubbish.
Just wondering if someone could enlighten me on the logging of RHS Twin Otter time? In our company we split the legs as PF and PNF to the extent that the PF performs all the duties of PIC on that leg, with PNF carrying out all the paperwork and radio duties and boarding the passengers. We both have type ratings.
Now I know that my RHS hours wont count towards the unfreezing of my ATPL (because its apparently too light an aircraft, this is a BS reason in my opinion) but on the other hand the aircraft is required to operate two crew under the AOC and will become a performance category A under new EASA regs.
I log my PF legs as PIC with the captains name in the column, and i have a co-pilot column i put the paperwork legs under. But when I do apply for a new job one day i will be clear on my CV that the RHS hours are PICUS. I know we are all responsible for our own logbooks but there seems to be no guidelines i can find on this scenario.
Now I know that my RHS hours wont count towards the unfreezing of my ATPL (because its apparently too light an aircraft, this is a BS reason in my opinion) but on the other hand the aircraft is required to operate two crew under the AOC and will become a performance category A under new EASA regs.
I log my PF legs as PIC with the captains name in the column, and i have a co-pilot column i put the paperwork legs under. But when I do apply for a new job one day i will be clear on my CV that the RHS hours are PICUS. I know we are all responsible for our own logbooks but there seems to be no guidelines i can find on this scenario.
If I have read this right, then I would urge you to be very careful.
One of the requirements for your company's AOC is that they designate a pilot in command for each flight. They must also specify in their ops manual how that delegation of PIC is documented. In some cases, it will be listed on the flight release (OFP) or other company document, but it could be the person who signs the aircraft journey log. But no matter how it is done, the only way you can log any of your time as PIC is if the company designates you as the pilot in command for those legs. Otherwise, that time is SIC time only.
If you are not the designated PIC, logging that time as PIC is making a false record in your log book. If you then put that time as PIC on your application for an ATPL (which you must sign for as being a true record), you could be charged under the regulations for making a falsified log book. Keep in mind that others who have been caught doing so have cost themselves a career.
Last edited by J.O.; 26th Mar 2013 at 15:29.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its PICUS in european speak.
And you can log it in a single pilot aircraft if the operation is an approved multi crew setup. This will take into account instrument fit and sop`s.
The issue with the EASA ATPL is the skill test needs to be taken in true multi crew aircraft.
Loganair in scotland operate twotters multi crew and also the fisheries operate the F406 multi crew. Your hours are logged the same as any other multicrew aircraft.
And you can log it in a single pilot aircraft if the operation is an approved multi crew setup. This will take into account instrument fit and sop`s.
The issue with the EASA ATPL is the skill test needs to be taken in true multi crew aircraft.
Loganair in scotland operate twotters multi crew and also the fisheries operate the F406 multi crew. Your hours are logged the same as any other multicrew aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dublin
Age: 35
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry yeah its in Europe I don't want to confuse the situation, it was just something that had been on my mind. Its a similar operation to Loganair so i think my interpretation is correct as PICUS but without a specified column i have just put them in the PIC one, with the stipulation that I am always very clear to emphasize the hours are PICUS and would do so when applying for my ATPL many moons from now, when i do have the actual required hours.
Correct me if im wrong as the only other columns i have are dual or co-pilot, i used dual for all the flying during the type rating as i was with an instructor. Maybe i should log them all under co-pilot wether i fly the leg or not?
Thanks for the help.
Correct me if im wrong as the only other columns i have are dual or co-pilot, i used dual for all the flying during the type rating as i was with an instructor. Maybe i should log them all under co-pilot wether i fly the leg or not?
Thanks for the help.
Last edited by cgwhitemonk11; 27th Mar 2013 at 08:23. Reason: Additional
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 69
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Canada, there is only one PIC on the aircraft. That person is the one designated as PIC and they are the one who signs the logbook. This person, and only this person can log the hours as PIC. If you have PICUS from another country, it is accounted for as copilot on your Canadian application and CV.
Canada does have a PICUS program, but it must be approved by TC for each company who wishes to use it. Each company will have its own program with very specific rules and it MUST be approved by TC. If the program is not approved, the hours are not valid on any application. Foreign PICUS is not approved!!!
On a twin otter, there are very specific CARS regarding logging copilot time. Copilot will be required on some trips (usually with passengers) and not required on other trips (cargo). If your company operations manual allows the aircraft to be operated single pilot (such as in cargo ops), then the F/O on that leg cannot legally log the hours. If you are flying a twin otter as F/O, keep very accurate records as to when you were required to be there. It is only those hours that are allowed on your ATPL application.
If you are operating as F/O on an aircraft that TC designates as a single pilot aircraft, then you can only log the hours if your company mandates in their ops manual that you are required to operate the aircraft with 2 crew. Make a copy of those pages to submit to TC to prove the hours you logged were legitimate. It is up to you to prove it. TC will not dig through company ops manuals to help you prove your hours, but enforcement might dig through to prove your bogus claims.
Remember - only one person is allowed to log actual PIC. If you are weaseling a way to log PIC, it will become very apparent on your license application and TC will tear your logbook apart.
Canada does have a PICUS program, but it must be approved by TC for each company who wishes to use it. Each company will have its own program with very specific rules and it MUST be approved by TC. If the program is not approved, the hours are not valid on any application. Foreign PICUS is not approved!!!
On a twin otter, there are very specific CARS regarding logging copilot time. Copilot will be required on some trips (usually with passengers) and not required on other trips (cargo). If your company operations manual allows the aircraft to be operated single pilot (such as in cargo ops), then the F/O on that leg cannot legally log the hours. If you are flying a twin otter as F/O, keep very accurate records as to when you were required to be there. It is only those hours that are allowed on your ATPL application.
If you are operating as F/O on an aircraft that TC designates as a single pilot aircraft, then you can only log the hours if your company mandates in their ops manual that you are required to operate the aircraft with 2 crew. Make a copy of those pages to submit to TC to prove the hours you logged were legitimate. It is up to you to prove it. TC will not dig through company ops manuals to help you prove your hours, but enforcement might dig through to prove your bogus claims.
Remember - only one person is allowed to log actual PIC. If you are weaseling a way to log PIC, it will become very apparent on your license application and TC will tear your logbook apart.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: ontario, canada
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad jock Logan air used to have Pilots Assistants in the right seat, all they needed was a PPL what did they log????? Tunnocks carmel I bet
Canadians dont seem to understand the PIC/US thing I think, But the system is very very good, an F/O working for a good airline there logs PIC/US when its his leg, and he does all aspects of the captains job...engine start,taxi,reject,logbook etc etc. Of coarse, the captain can overrule him, but not just cos he prefers a different style of operating...it stops the micro manager type captain.....this is a CRM thing, where the idea is to reduce the command slope, After so many crashes due, in part, to autocratic captains, CRM became a very important issue. If you were a F.O. for virgin atlantic, you may never see the chance to upgrade, so it gives you a much higher job satisfaction level.
I work in canada now after having used this system.....and we are still in the dark in a lot of ways in canada.....
Canadians dont seem to understand the PIC/US thing I think, But the system is very very good, an F/O working for a good airline there logs PIC/US when its his leg, and he does all aspects of the captains job...engine start,taxi,reject,logbook etc etc. Of coarse, the captain can overrule him, but not just cos he prefers a different style of operating...it stops the micro manager type captain.....this is a CRM thing, where the idea is to reduce the command slope, After so many crashes due, in part, to autocratic captains, CRM became a very important issue. If you were a F.O. for virgin atlantic, you may never see the chance to upgrade, so it gives you a much higher job satisfaction level.
I work in canada now after having used this system.....and we are still in the dark in a lot of ways in canada.....