Time entries for a logbook when there is no VDO
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ˙ǝqɐq ǝɯ ʇ,uıɐ ʇɐɥʇ 'sɔıʇɐqoɹǝɐ ɹoɟ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɯɐu ɹıǝɥʇ ʇnd ǝɯos
Age: 45
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The What if game (don't worry the next post is much better... I humbly opine):
But what if you note the time as you start to taxi but then whilst taxying you get the updated ATIS and with it roll your watch forward or back to adjust and fail to note the difference. Well I may as well hand my wings in now, sell the house, cancel the holiday and turn myself in to my FOI.
Jesus some of the drivel I read here about the drivel I read here makes my head spin.
It's absolutely right that it's important to know the law (and I agree in principal with Leadsled says) but don't scare the kiddies too much. Use your judgement and try to be accurate but don't go buy a special 'block time watch' to strap onto your 'holding pattern timer'. The law is crystal clear... that's why we have judges (and to a degree juries), to allow for a bit of ambiguity, interpretation, reasonableness and good intentions.
Four spaces for times on a piece of paper (and some common sense) and you'll be right.
FRQ CB
But what if you note the time as you start to taxi but then whilst taxying you get the updated ATIS and with it roll your watch forward or back to adjust and fail to note the difference. Well I may as well hand my wings in now, sell the house, cancel the holiday and turn myself in to my FOI.
Jesus some of the drivel I read here about the drivel I read here makes my head spin.
It's absolutely right that it's important to know the law (and I agree in principal with Leadsled says) but don't scare the kiddies too much. Use your judgement and try to be accurate but don't go buy a special 'block time watch' to strap onto your 'holding pattern timer'. The law is crystal clear... that's why we have judges (and to a degree juries), to allow for a bit of ambiguity, interpretation, reasonableness and good intentions.
Four spaces for times on a piece of paper (and some common sense) and you'll be right.
FRQ CB
Last edited by FRQ Charlie Bravo; 3rd Mar 2010 at 13:16. Reason: Realised I sounded like a twit; now I think I come off more of a tosser.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ˙ǝqɐq ǝɯ ʇ,uıɐ ʇɐɥʇ 'sɔıʇɐqoɹǝɐ ɹoɟ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɯɐu ɹıǝɥʇ ʇnd ǝɯos
Age: 45
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part II
So here's another curly one. I do a CHTR from A to B to D (because the client is sick of me taking him to C) and back to A. The first leg block time was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs) the second leg was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs) and the third leg was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs). Do I log 0.6 x 3 = 1.8 or (34 x 3)/60 = 1.7?
Is Big Brother really going to throw the book at me if I choose to interpret it in the way which may benefit my logbook sum?
Take this to the Nth degree however and the obsessively prudent pilot might start logging her hours in terms of HH:MM and I suspect that her hours may drop due to the centuries old practice of rounding up when faced with an _._5 sum or product (i.e. rather than 5 flights out of 9 you'll only get to round up your current TTIS sum... maybe).
Know your Regs and don't let the bastards think that they have a god-given right to know them better than you.
~FRQ CB
So here's another curly one. I do a CHTR from A to B to D (because the client is sick of me taking him to C) and back to A. The first leg block time was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs) the second leg was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs) and the third leg was 34 minutes (0.6 hrs). Do I log 0.6 x 3 = 1.8 or (34 x 3)/60 = 1.7?
Is Big Brother really going to throw the book at me if I choose to interpret it in the way which may benefit my logbook sum?
Take this to the Nth degree however and the obsessively prudent pilot might start logging her hours in terms of HH:MM and I suspect that her hours may drop due to the centuries old practice of rounding up when faced with an _._5 sum or product (i.e. rather than 5 flights out of 9 you'll only get to round up your current TTIS sum... maybe).
Know your Regs and don't let the bastards think that they have a god-given right to know them better than you.
~FRQ CB
Last edited by FRQ Charlie Bravo; 3rd Mar 2010 at 12:31. Reason: grammar
Ok LeadSled, rather than bleating about the law, how about you come up with something constructive, what should someone log if they find they've forgotten to time a flight?
I'm not sure what I've done to deserve that.
Originally Posted by LeadSled
Aerowhatever
CAR 2 defines flight time as
(My underlining).
This perhaps infers that flight time commences at the start of the take-off roll and does not include taxi, run-ups etc at all.
However, the advice in AIC H10/99 says:
This clarifies the intent of CAR 2.
So taxiing the aircraft around for refuelling, parking etc is (in and of itself) not loggable.
Taxiing out (for the purpose of flight), getting to the holding point, discovering an unserviceability and taxiing back IS (in my opinion) loggable.
School I trained at nearly 20 years ago would send you off in the C150, before your first solo, over the other side of the airport to refuel, and come back. The CFI would say "log 0.2 command time for that, Ace!"
Tell me Leadsled, what do I do with those logbook entries (signed off by the Deputy CFI, who is now very high in Qlink) that are plainly incorrect?
the total time from the moment at which the aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking-off until the moment at which it comes to rest after landing.
This perhaps infers that flight time commences at the start of the take-off roll and does not include taxi, run-ups etc at all.
However, the advice in AIC H10/99 says:
Flight time means the total time from when the aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of a flight until the moment at which it comes to rest on completion of the flight. (This is synonymous with 'chock to chock', 'block to block' or 'push back to block' time)
So taxiing the aircraft around for refuelling, parking etc is (in and of itself) not loggable.
Taxiing out (for the purpose of flight), getting to the holding point, discovering an unserviceability and taxiing back IS (in my opinion) loggable.
School I trained at nearly 20 years ago would send you off in the C150, before your first solo, over the other side of the airport to refuel, and come back. The CFI would say "log 0.2 command time for that, Ace!"
Tell me Leadsled, what do I do with those logbook entries (signed off by the Deputy CFI, who is now very high in Qlink) that are plainly incorrect?
When large aircraft are pushed back by a PPU or tug the timing (off blocks) starts from then but one could say that the A/C is not under it's own power. Usually only 2~3 minutes (sometimes more with delay for taxy clearance) but I guess it would add up over a period of time.
Clinton,
I agree with PCX.
Indeed, in the case of the unserviceability and return to blox case , QF and an associated crew was picked up by CAA (that long ago) for not logging a pushback and return to blox as flight time, when a window cracked as the window heat was turned on.
I am very familiar with the details, because I was the F/O.
The scenario you quote, all too feasible at YSBK, causes a real problem, because CASA audits look at ratios of recorded blox times and air times, and have rejected properly recorded air times (in HH:MM), after applying a "rule of thumb" ratio.
You can't win with CASA, Chapter 94477 of the never ending story.
At the other end of the scale, a pilot (around 1966) needed 4 hours more command by a nominated day, otherwise he last a job. The YSBK Wx had be atrocious for days, and on the final day, has below VFR most of the day. Said pilot "taxi'd" for four hours, got the job.
Sad but true, many organisations that hire aircraft have a concealed Hobbs or similar meter, activated by an air switch tapped into the pitot pressure line.
Tootle pip!!
I agree with PCX.
Indeed, in the case of the unserviceability and return to blox case , QF and an associated crew was picked up by CAA (that long ago) for not logging a pushback and return to blox as flight time, when a window cracked as the window heat was turned on.
I am very familiar with the details, because I was the F/O.
The scenario you quote, all too feasible at YSBK, causes a real problem, because CASA audits look at ratios of recorded blox times and air times, and have rejected properly recorded air times (in HH:MM), after applying a "rule of thumb" ratio.
You can't win with CASA, Chapter 94477 of the never ending story.
At the other end of the scale, a pilot (around 1966) needed 4 hours more command by a nominated day, otherwise he last a job. The YSBK Wx had be atrocious for days, and on the final day, has below VFR most of the day. Said pilot "taxi'd" for four hours, got the job.
Sad but true, many organisations that hire aircraft have a concealed Hobbs or similar meter, activated by an air switch tapped into the pitot pressure line.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ˙ǝqɐq ǝɯ ʇ,uıɐ ʇɐɥʇ 'sɔıʇɐqoɹǝɐ ɹoɟ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɯɐu ɹıǝɥʇ ʇnd ǝɯos
Age: 45
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
School I trained at nearly 20 years ago would send you off in the C150, before your first solo, over the other side of the airport to refuel, and come back. The CFI would say "log 0.2 command time for that, Ace!" 
Tell me Leadsled, what do I do with those logbook entries (signed off by the Deputy CFI, who is now very high in Qlink) that are plainly incorrect?
Tell me Leadsled, what do I do with those logbook entries (signed off by the Deputy CFI, who is now very high in Qlink) that are plainly incorrect?
Also, the CFI's relationship with Qlink is totally irrelevant for two reasons:
- He/She was not in Qlink at the time
- being "very high in Qlink" doesn't make anyone more right.
FRQ CB
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well thanks to the people on here who are able to read and comprehend my question (namely that I wanted to know what to do AFTER THE FACT of not having written down the times) and provide me with some useful advice. To all those dimwits who like the sound of their own voice (or the sight of their own typing), instead of crapping on for hours on here and paying the crap out of others who really don't give two hoots what you say, log yourselves into a Unix box and type "echo 'your crap here' > /dev/null" Seriously people!
Sad but true, many organisations that hire aircraft have a concealed Hobbs or similar meter, activated by an air switch tapped into the pitot pressure line.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: YBBN
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unix box and type "echo 'your crap here' > /dev/null" Seriously people!
Anyway: I was not aware of specific laws about this. Will have a look!
I think you agree but I'm unsure
the DCFI's relationship with Qlink is totally irrelevant
They had trained at the same school as they worked at and had never had outside experience. Beware the inbred GA operation!!!
Last edited by Horatio Leafblower; 4th Mar 2010 at 22:05.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That was a pretty harsh post, Krazy. After we had been encouraging you on another thread. Just ignore the bulls..ters as you identify them.
You have a lot to learn yet !
You have a lot to learn yet !
Ok LeadSled, rather than bleating about the law, how about you come up with something constructive, what should someone log if they find they've forgotten to time a flight?
Have any of you even thought about why we even bother to log hours, with criminal penalties for non-compliance ---- or is it just a hangover from the military beginnings of civil aviation in Australia, and the continued dominance of CASA by the "Wing Commander's Club".
It is instructive to look at US practice: Essentially, nobody has to log flight hours, unless they are claiming credit for recency, or other license and qualifications, and then only enough to meet the minimum requirements. Anything additional is individual choice.
Where a notice of limitations is involved --- flight and duty times under FARs 121/125/135, the Certificate Holder has to keep the records.
Naturally, records of air time are still required for maintenance records. FAA Acceptable Means of Compliance lays down a number of alternative (in a quite flexible way) methods for recording both flight time and air time, where required.
There is simply no evidence to suggest that Australia criminalizing essentially administrative chores of little to nil importance, has had the slightest beneficial air safety outcome.
But it sure as hell keeps a whole bunch busily employed.
Krazy, you sound like such a nice chap, must be a pleasure flying with you. Just what sort of answer did you expect, to a question to which there is no legal answer, which I rather suspect you knew all along.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Checkboard,
Who said anything about "unofficial modifications", whatever they might be. Do you understand how an air switch might activate a Hobbs or similar ---- a meter which doesn't care where the power supply comes --- be it connected to the master switch, an oil pressure switch or a squat switch.
I have personally investigated a number of cases where an aircraft hirer was disconnecting the tachos at the first away landing. When confronted with the evidence from the concealed Hobbs meter, plus Airservices records and fuel records, said hirer found themselves in a very uncomfortable position.
I might also point out that only one of the cases involved private hire --- think about it.
Last edited by LeadSled; 5th Mar 2010 at 02:17.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: your house
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have personally investigated a number of cases where...
Again, the DG&P forum descends to worthless slander.
S
Senshi
Who has been slandered?
Who has been slandered?
Many moons ago a number of operators north of Victoria and south of Queensland, used standard flight times for there RPT route. That's what went on the M/R and .1 got added to that figure for the pilots logbook and flight and duty sheet. Holding at Bindook was not included on the M/R or pilots flight time, very convient for all parties concerned apart from the pilots who were paid on a casual basis. Funny how it was never picked up on CASA audit for many years!
Another operator for M/R time used to use depature time a/beam the field or five miles from the field, and arrival time was joining downwind.
Another operator for M/R time used to use depature time a/beam the field or five miles from the field, and arrival time was joining downwind.
LeadSled, if you do work for CASA, that would explain the long-winded, regulatory based diatribes that you continue to write
There is simply no evidence to suggest that Australia criminalizing essentially administrative chores of little to nil importance, has had the slightest beneficial air safety outcome. But it sure as hell keeps a whole bunch busily employed.
Dr
senshi,
Fear not, I don't and have never worked for CASA. The investigations, with which I have been involved, all concern operators/owners who have been the victims of criminal fraud.
What I do come across repeatedly, is the the surprise of many pilots who have had the same cavalier approach to the aviation law AS IT IS, as is illustrated in many posts on this thread.
When they are confronted with the fact that the system/courts are very unforgiving of breaches of aviation law, pleading ignorance of the law cuts no ice, whether it is a matter that will be handled by an Administrative Fine and loss of points or go to a full court hearing.
The sad thing is that, in most cases it is just as easy to it "to do it the right way than the wrong way" --- but laziness/ignorance/contempt for the law rules, until it hits you, and maybe your career, for a six.
Tootle pip!!
Fear not, I don't and have never worked for CASA. The investigations, with which I have been involved, all concern operators/owners who have been the victims of criminal fraud.
What I do come across repeatedly, is the the surprise of many pilots who have had the same cavalier approach to the aviation law AS IT IS, as is illustrated in many posts on this thread.
When they are confronted with the fact that the system/courts are very unforgiving of breaches of aviation law, pleading ignorance of the law cuts no ice, whether it is a matter that will be handled by an Administrative Fine and loss of points or go to a full court hearing.
The sad thing is that, in most cases it is just as easy to it "to do it the right way than the wrong way" --- but laziness/ignorance/contempt for the law rules, until it hits you, and maybe your career, for a six.
Tootle pip!!