Log Book entries
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that was the case TPK, then no one would be able to log their 1 hour training flight with an instructor in order to revalidate their licence, without training to add a new rating!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 2nm due S EGLK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, they couldn't log it as PUT, no.
The copy of LASORS that I have in front of me (admittedly, it's 2003) has a table on page 40, Section A, Appendix B, entitled "Guide to logbook annotation". It claims that you can only log PUT for case G ("Pilot under instruction for the purpose of gaining a licence or rating, or for conversion to an aircraft type within an aircraft rating group or class"), or for an unsuccessful test under case J ("Pilot undergoing any form of flight test with a JAA or CAA Authorised Examiner").
So, next time an instructor tells you to log PUT, tell him where to go. Of course, I also fully appreciate the argument about the instructor wanting to be "in command" in order to take command and I, like everybody else, have no idea what it should be logged as.
TPK
The copy of LASORS that I have in front of me (admittedly, it's 2003) has a table on page 40, Section A, Appendix B, entitled "Guide to logbook annotation". It claims that you can only log PUT for case G ("Pilot under instruction for the purpose of gaining a licence or rating, or for conversion to an aircraft type within an aircraft rating group or class"), or for an unsuccessful test under case J ("Pilot undergoing any form of flight test with a JAA or CAA Authorised Examiner").
So, next time an instructor tells you to log PUT, tell him where to go. Of course, I also fully appreciate the argument about the instructor wanting to be "in command" in order to take command and I, like everybody else, have no idea what it should be logged as.
TPK
If you go for any 'Club Check' or whatever else the club calls it, the FI will be the Commander and will log the flight as PIC. You can log it however the hell you like, but not as PIC.
Telling a club FI "where to go" will invite you to have a chat with the Head of Training or CFI. Who will very probably tell you to wise up sharpish or take your custom elsewhere.
Logically, you flew as a qualified pilot under supervision. P1/S. But logic, commonsense and the JAA are not always synonymous!
Telling a club FI "where to go" will invite you to have a chat with the Head of Training or CFI. Who will very probably tell you to wise up sharpish or take your custom elsewhere.
Logically, you flew as a qualified pilot under supervision. P1/S. But logic, commonsense and the JAA are not always synonymous!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread raises another question, at what time should a pilot fill in his log book, I always fill mine in after the flight, which is what I was shown to do during my training. I see lots of other pilots doing the same, so when I am doing a club check I have had no discusion with the instructor about how either of us is to log the time. No instructor has ever mentioned being P1 BEFORE the flight.
Is my experience common? and more to the point is it wrong?
Is my experience common? and more to the point is it wrong?
The FI must specify who is Commander (him/her) and what is required of you as the pilot being checked.
I certainly hope that your experience is out of the norm.
Mind you, I've heard tell of some clubs who even attempt to use non-FIs as 'check pilots'....
I certainly hope that your experience is out of the norm.
Mind you, I've heard tell of some clubs who even attempt to use non-FIs as 'check pilots'....
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle, I have only flown from 2 clubs but the experience was the same at both, which makes me think that my experience is more normal than it should be. Both clubs are long established and reputable.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe P1/S should be used more frequently for this "club checkout" scenario?
I have never been told by the FI whether he is PIC or I am, under the JARs I just assume they are, and log Dual received (PUT).
I have never been told by the FI whether he is PIC or I am, under the JARs I just assume they are, and log Dual received (PUT).
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 2nm due S EGLK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, you can't log P1/S either.
The only situations where LASORS mentions P1/S are in case B ("Co-pilot performing the duties of PIC under supervision of pilot-in-command"), and we all know you can only be a co-pilot in an aircraft requiring 2 pilots, and for an unsuccessful test under case J (which I quoted above).
Neither of those fits!
What I find most amazing is the total lack of guidance from the CAA/JAA on this.
The only situations where LASORS mentions P1/S are in case B ("Co-pilot performing the duties of PIC under supervision of pilot-in-command"), and we all know you can only be a co-pilot in an aircraft requiring 2 pilots, and for an unsuccessful test under case J (which I quoted above).
Neither of those fits!
What I find most amazing is the total lack of guidance from the CAA/JAA on this.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I find most amazing is the total lack of guidance from the CAA/JAA on this.
ocks regarding the P1/s issue, or so I was told by the forum when I discussed it on here at the time....
(Ill do a search later and see if I can dig up the thread)
Regards, SD..
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle,
But logic, commonsense and the JAA are not always synonymous!
No the JAA system is very logical. The JAA logbook format does not have a "holders operating capacity" column.
The columns are "Pilot in Command", "Co-Pilot", "Dual".
Very simple for single pilot aircraft, if you are not pilot in command, then the flight is dual.
I think that everyone would agree that a club checkout flight with an instructor is indeed a dual flight. Very logical and very simple.
Under JAR-FCL, PIC/S can only be logged by the co-pilot.
Perhaps you may find that the JAR system would be very much more logical.
Regards,
DFC
But logic, commonsense and the JAA are not always synonymous!
No the JAA system is very logical. The JAA logbook format does not have a "holders operating capacity" column.
The columns are "Pilot in Command", "Co-Pilot", "Dual".
Very simple for single pilot aircraft, if you are not pilot in command, then the flight is dual.
I think that everyone would agree that a club checkout flight with an instructor is indeed a dual flight. Very logical and very simple.
Under JAR-FCL, PIC/S can only be logged by the co-pilot.
Perhaps you may find that the JAR system would be very much more logical.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When an instructor is acting as an instructor on board, then HE is PIC! very easy really. If the club insists on you having a flight with an instrutor, well, then the instructor will be the pic, as he is acting in his capacity as an instrutor. If he goes along for the fun of it, then he's not acting as an instructor and doesn't log anything.
Not only in your country, but in Germany, too, there are lots of misconceptions of all this. The JAA wording is just dumb (and the German translation even dumber). Many pilots still think the other 6 hours can be as a fellow pilot flying along in the right seat, especially if he helps out with the radios work, etc.
In the Germany law books we also have strict words about which seat is the one for the PIC, usually that seat which the planes manual dictates as for solo flying. This happened after a glider instructor took a non-student up for a joy ride, letting her sit in the front seat... they crashed and I believe the girl died. Being a "joy ride" and not an instrution flight, he should have been sitting in the front seat, which was the seat for solo flying.... so the rules were made more precise.
Complicated? maybe.... I hope EASA will make it more understandable...
Westy
Not only in your country, but in Germany, too, there are lots of misconceptions of all this. The JAA wording is just dumb (and the German translation even dumber). Many pilots still think the other 6 hours can be as a fellow pilot flying along in the right seat, especially if he helps out with the radios work, etc.
In the Germany law books we also have strict words about which seat is the one for the PIC, usually that seat which the planes manual dictates as for solo flying. This happened after a glider instructor took a non-student up for a joy ride, letting her sit in the front seat... they crashed and I believe the girl died. Being a "joy ride" and not an instrution flight, he should have been sitting in the front seat, which was the seat for solo flying.... so the rules were made more precise.
Complicated? maybe.... I hope EASA will make it more understandable...
Westy
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I echo BEagle's comments, and agree with them.
I would add that if the instructor is a passenger and not P1 then his is not required flight crew - and as such if he touched the controls he does stand the possibility of being the wrong side of ANO 2005 article 78(c) (shall not interfere), additionally he gives up the rights provided to the commander under article 77.
The CAA/JAA provide perfect guidance - its clearly written in LASORS, and additionally AIC 7/2004 (white 94) regarding priv CofA solely owned/grouped owned a/c.
With regard to JAA - this logging of flight time is not just UK - it is embodied in JAR-FCL 1.080 which is effectively what LASORS copies.
Q: Which bit of LASORS is unclear!?
BTW LASORS is FREE to EVERYONE - all you need to do is download it from the CAA website (and so can the ANO) and therefore you can all be experts as well
I also hasten to add, that if the club FOB requires you to have a checkflight with an instructor thats that - the FOB is legally binding - comply or fly elsewhere.
WestWind1950 - agreed, I flew only today with another pilot - as a passenger - which was clear to both of us so I log nothing. Suits me fine - I just enjoyed being able to look out and enjoying flying without worrying about what the other person was doing for once!!
DFC - PIC U/S is also logged by a pilot who is successful on a flight test conducted by a JAA or CAA authorised examiner. As mentioned above.
Yorks.ppl - I think you'll find that the instructors may have made an 'oversight' here assuming that it was 'understood' that they were PIC - You will possibly find that that is standard policy at the clubs you were flying at - just ask - Im surely a friendly instructor will clarify matters. Did you notice who was entered as the PIC on the tech log during booking-out? I always watch that in case the other pilot is in any way confused and Ill clear it up at that point if they arent aware that Im P1.
- and no I don't need the hours! Just for the record!
I would add that if the instructor is a passenger and not P1 then his is not required flight crew - and as such if he touched the controls he does stand the possibility of being the wrong side of ANO 2005 article 78(c) (shall not interfere), additionally he gives up the rights provided to the commander under article 77.
The CAA/JAA provide perfect guidance - its clearly written in LASORS, and additionally AIC 7/2004 (white 94) regarding priv CofA solely owned/grouped owned a/c.
With regard to JAA - this logging of flight time is not just UK - it is embodied in JAR-FCL 1.080 which is effectively what LASORS copies.
Q: Which bit of LASORS is unclear!?
BTW LASORS is FREE to EVERYONE - all you need to do is download it from the CAA website (and so can the ANO) and therefore you can all be experts as well
I also hasten to add, that if the club FOB requires you to have a checkflight with an instructor thats that - the FOB is legally binding - comply or fly elsewhere.
WestWind1950 - agreed, I flew only today with another pilot - as a passenger - which was clear to both of us so I log nothing. Suits me fine - I just enjoyed being able to look out and enjoying flying without worrying about what the other person was doing for once!!
DFC - PIC U/S is also logged by a pilot who is successful on a flight test conducted by a JAA or CAA authorised examiner. As mentioned above.
Yorks.ppl - I think you'll find that the instructors may have made an 'oversight' here assuming that it was 'understood' that they were PIC - You will possibly find that that is standard policy at the clubs you were flying at - just ask - Im surely a friendly instructor will clarify matters. Did you notice who was entered as the PIC on the tech log during booking-out? I always watch that in case the other pilot is in any way confused and Ill clear it up at that point if they arent aware that Im P1.
- and no I don't need the hours! Just for the record!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Did you notice who was entered as the PIC on the tech log during booking-out?"
I hadn't thought of that, but at both clubs I have always filled in the tech log with me as P1
Its interesting that no ones ever picked up on that.
I hadn't thought of that, but at both clubs I have always filled in the tech log with me as P1
Its interesting that no ones ever picked up on that.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC - I have had the same situation as English Al describes.
I had previously carried passengers to France. I was required to undertake a France checkout with their instructor though as I had never rented an aircraft from them before for a X-channel trip. The club insisted that I should complete one with one of their instructors on board for a sign off to allow future rental for xc purposes.
So EAs example is very plausible!
Julian.
I had previously carried passengers to France. I was required to undertake a France checkout with their instructor though as I had never rented an aircraft from them before for a X-channel trip. The club insisted that I should complete one with one of their instructors on board for a sign off to allow future rental for xc purposes.
So EAs example is very plausible!
Julian.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 2nm due S EGLK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FormationFlyer
Q: Which bit of LASORS is unclear!?
TPK
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And which bit of it precludes the logging of PUT?! I see no comment in this respect in LASORS. I would point out that the section provided here is merely stated as 'Guidance to annotation'. Not 'Rules of annotation'.
Under JAR FCL 1.080 which overrides ALL info in LASORS should there be conflict unless a difference has been notified by the CAA does not classify PUT - They state DUAL. i.e. flight with an instructor.
Henceforth, P1/PIC by the instructor, and DUAL (which PUT is equivilent to) is what is logged by the PPL. I see no case under JAR FCL nor LASORS to contradict this.
Agreed - and I take your point - that this particular area is not explicitly stated - however, as you say if you accept that the PPL cant log P1 they must log something - under JAR FCL DUAL is that option - again though it is not explicitly stated.
Under JAR FCL 1.080 which overrides ALL info in LASORS should there be conflict unless a difference has been notified by the CAA does not classify PUT - They state DUAL. i.e. flight with an instructor.
Henceforth, P1/PIC by the instructor, and DUAL (which PUT is equivilent to) is what is logged by the PPL. I see no case under JAR FCL nor LASORS to contradict this.
Agreed - and I take your point - that this particular area is not explicitly stated - however, as you say if you accept that the PPL cant log P1 they must log something - under JAR FCL DUAL is that option - again though it is not explicitly stated.
