Rejected Take-Off and Flight Time
It’s all well and good for people to express opinions about whether .3 does or doesn’t make a difference. And it’s all well and good for people to express opinions about the motivations of a pilot who wants to enter .3 for some ‘event’ in his or her logbook for some reason.
But, in Australia, a pilot commits a criminal offence if s/he does not enter, in his or her logbook, the precise ‘flight time’, as defined, for each and every ‘flight’, as defined. And the pilot commits an offence if the entries s/he makes are false or misleading. That includes entries of ‘flight time’ that do not fit the definition.
The meanings of terms like ‘flight’ and ‘flight time’ in the rules - whatever the f*ck their meanings happens to be this week - therefore have profound consequences, even if CASA is not presently inclined to do something about it in your case.
You show me your logbook and the maintenance releases of aircraft you’ve ‘been in’, and I guarantee I’ll be able to conjure an argument that you’re a dangerous criminal under Australian law. I may ultimately turn out to be wrong, technically, but I’m confident I’ll be able to drive you into the ground, practically, long before that’s established.
It’s all about safety, after all.
But, in Australia, a pilot commits a criminal offence if s/he does not enter, in his or her logbook, the precise ‘flight time’, as defined, for each and every ‘flight’, as defined. And the pilot commits an offence if the entries s/he makes are false or misleading. That includes entries of ‘flight time’ that do not fit the definition.
The meanings of terms like ‘flight’ and ‘flight time’ in the rules - whatever the f*ck their meanings happens to be this week - therefore have profound consequences, even if CASA is not presently inclined to do something about it in your case.
You show me your logbook and the maintenance releases of aircraft you’ve ‘been in’, and I guarantee I’ll be able to conjure an argument that you’re a dangerous criminal under Australian law. I may ultimately turn out to be wrong, technically, but I’m confident I’ll be able to drive you into the ground, practically, long before that’s established.
It’s all about safety, after all.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NT
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
So if I tech an aircraft during taxi, and it spends several hours in maintenance before departing, does that mean I log the time the aircraft is in maintenance as well?
Hat, coat, door.
Hat, coat, door.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Time vs Air Time
Nobody is downplaying the situation but you have to recognise flight time IS time in flight. It's not the time performing actions before of after a flight important though they are up to and including a catastrophe. Flight = Flight. Airtime.
The Australian (and ICAO) definition of ‘flight time’ covers some time before the aircraft becomes airborne and some time after the aircraft ceases being airborne. ‘Flight time’ is about an individual’s aeronautical experience (which is why a rejected take off should count). How far the definition reaches before take off and after landing has been and will continue to be the subject of many (many) debates.
In Australia, aircraft ‘time airborne’ is called ‘time in service’. ‘Time in service’ is about aircraft maintenance management and continuing airworthiness.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the day a Mallard duck decided to fly through the prop blades on take off roll, just before rotation. I aborted the take off, braked, cleared the active grass runway, informed ATC, and taxied back; I then did the usual shut down checks, all part of the pilot role. That all is flight time, because it is related to the operation of the aircraft.
The instructor then made me hose down the debris from the front of the cowling and complete the bird strike report for the CAA
Here’s my final answer.
This was intended as a solo flight which means your school is required to maintain training records.
How did they record the event in your training folder?
Copy that entry if they made one.
This was intended as a solo flight which means your school is required to maintain training records.
How did they record the event in your training folder?
Copy that entry if they made one.
Disagree completely; the original poster detected abnormal engine conditions and correctly aborted the flight, that is a record of the events, regardless whether air borne or not.
Back in the day a Mallard duck decided to fly through the prop blades on take off roll, just before rotation. I aborted the take off, braked, cleared the active grass runway, informed ATC, and taxied back; I then did the usual shut down checks, all part of the pilot role. That all is flight time, because it is related to the operation of the aircraft.
The instructor then made me hose down the debris from the front of the cowling and complete the bird strike report for the CAA
Back in the day a Mallard duck decided to fly through the prop blades on take off roll, just before rotation. I aborted the take off, braked, cleared the active grass runway, informed ATC, and taxied back; I then did the usual shut down checks, all part of the pilot role. That all is flight time, because it is related to the operation of the aircraft.
The instructor then made me hose down the debris from the front of the cowling and complete the bird strike report for the CAA
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time was logged from when the Hobbs meter started till the Hobbs meter stopped, so once electrical power was on it was ticking. Standard practice here. It used to piss me off, because if you were number 2 or 3 for departure the same meter was billing you for your aircraft time.
Is any of this relevant
Flight time
The time when an FCM is acting in the capacity as a crew member on board an aircraft that includes:
• in the case of a heavier-than-air aircraft — 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; and
• in the case of a lighter-than-air aircraft — the total time from the moment at which the aircraft first becomes airborne until it comes to rest on the ground, excluding any time during which the aircraft is moored.
Note:Recording flight time from 'push-back' or 'off blocks', rather than from the moment the aircraft first moves under its own power (as per the definition), is acceptable.
comes from some gang that goes by the name of casa
Flight time
The time when an FCM is acting in the capacity as a crew member on board an aircraft that includes:
• in the case of a heavier-than-air aircraft — 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; and
• in the case of a lighter-than-air aircraft — the total time from the moment at which the aircraft first becomes airborne until it comes to rest on the ground, excluding any time during which the aircraft is moored.
Note:Recording flight time from 'push-back' or 'off blocks', rather than from the moment the aircraft first moves under its own power (as per the definition), is acceptable.
comes from some gang that goes by the name of casa
Any time before a heavier than aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking-off is not ‘flight time’.
It may be ‘acceptable’ to CASA to record it as such. But it’s unlawful under Australian law.
There’s plenty of stuff that CASA advises, accepts and requires that is unlawful or dangerous or both. So be careful out there.
It may be ‘acceptable’ to CASA to record it as such. But it’s unlawful under Australian law.
There’s plenty of stuff that CASA advises, accepts and requires that is unlawful or dangerous or both. So be careful out there.
How can it be unlawful under Australian law if that’s what the regulation clearly points out? Are there some other hidden contradicting regulations?
I think the original poster’s question has already been correctly answered. Case closed and Merry Christmas.
I think the original poster’s question has already been correctly answered. Case closed and Merry Christmas.
You haven't "flown". Jesus, where is the common sense. It's embarrassing that you would even consider logging taxi time. I used to do compass swings at various times in various aircraft in the past. Bugger, I didn't log them, could have got me at least a dozen hours or so. Really, do you need to log that 0.1? I'd be embarrassed to put that in my log book. In my airline days, had, lots of return to the gate, and rejected take-offs, but I'm going on my memory on that as I sure as **** didn't log em. Log it as it was for the purpose of a flight in my opinion, and document it correctly in your logbook. Not sure what the reg states today, however it once stated for the purpose of a flight. A rejected take off event in my humble opinion would comply with the reg.
That’s also the opinion of an ex CASA FOI who spent 4 years in the job.
That’s also the opinion of an ex CASA FOI who spent 4 years in the job.
The Civil Aviation Act is quite clear on what is a 'flight'. At some stage of the process the aircraft must have been airborne. Mere intent to go flying does not make it a 'flight'.
From several posts here, it would seem certain contributors may have made false entries in their logbooks.
Opinions are like rectums - everybody has one. In my short time at CASA, FOIs received minimal training in aviation law. It was left up to them to read the regulations and interpret as they saw fit. It seems nothing has changed. FOIs still get it WRONG.
The Civil Aviation Act is quite clear on what is a 'flight'. At some stage of the process the aircraft must have been airborne. Mere intent to go flying does not make it a 'flight'.
From several posts here, it would seem certain contributors may have made false entries in their logbooks.
The Civil Aviation Act is quite clear on what is a 'flight'. At some stage of the process the aircraft must have been airborne. Mere intent to go flying does not make it a 'flight'.
From several posts here, it would seem certain contributors may have made false entries in their logbooks.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Peninsula
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You haven't "flown". Jesus, where is the common sense. It's embarrassing that you would even consider logging taxi time.
I'm sure if anything happened and an insurance company got involved, you saying 'I didn't log the time, therefore I wasn't in command' would cut it.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Peninsula
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd be embarrassed to put that in my log book.
In my airline days, had, lots of return to the gate, and rejected take-offs.
Left the pitot cover on?Which airline was this? Out of interest.
Ixixly if you go to www.legislation.gov.au you will find the definition of ‘flight’ as easily as I did in about 2 minutes. Clue - it’s under the heading ‘Interpretation’ almost at the beginning of CAA 1988.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 24th Dec 2020 at 05:18. Reason: Making it even easier for those challenged by basic research
