does cross channel check count as PIUS?

[slim_slag]

61.51 (e) (1) (i) doesn't mention the weather, just the airplane.

So, can you log PIC when receiving instruction when on your qualifying IFR (i.e your instructor has filed IFR) cross country when under the hood in VMC? By your argument you are not rated to be there either, as you need to have an IR to be on an IFR flight plan, so cannot log PIC.

[Hour Builder]

Originally Posted by nuclear weapon

just checked with the caa and they said it could be logged as P1S

thats bull, pardon my french

Originally Posted by shaun ryder

This flight should be logged as P1S, the instructor would have been the commander of the aircraft during the flight. Correct, but if the flight was handled solely by you i.e the instructor did not take over at any point, then its P1S, otherwise it would be PUT.
Read LASORS.

"if the flight was handled solely by you i.e the instructor did not take over at any point", then its PIC not P1s. Instructor is therefore a passenger, and does not log aything.
P1s on SPA is only for successful skill tests.

[BEagle]

Hour Builder (how apt)

The CAA's reference was clearly to the rules as they pertained in more enlightened pre-JAR-FCL days. Nowadays the 'pilot' would have been Pu/t, the instructor would have been PIC throughout.

Period.

No argument - it's the fact.

Sorry if you don't like it.

[slim_slag]

ca_flyer,

There is a difference between acting as PIC (91.3) and logging PIC (61.51 (e) (1) (i) )

In both the Catalina checkout and the IMC lesson, the instructor is acting as PIC, and in the latter performing the role as required by 61.57 (c).

The student may log PIC purely because there is a FAR which lets him do so. He is not acting as PIC in either case. If the plane runs out of fuel, in both cases the instructor will be the one explaining himself to the Feds, not the student (even if fully rated on the plane, and manipulating the controls, and therefore logging PIC)

Cheers

[Hour Builder]

err beagle thats what i just said. read again

[BEagle]

In which case you need to learn to express yourself more clearly. You''l find that handy if you ever aspire to a job as a professional pilot.

No matter what anyone might think, on any flight where the instructor is required (whether by the Club, ANO or whatever), he/she will be the PIC and the other pilot will be Pu/t.

[Hour Builder]

you are a funny man, perhaps you should learn to read and understand in the first instance, may help if you want to aspire to be a professional pilot.

[S-Works]

You have to remember that Beagle has been around since the Wright Brothers, he is one of the founding fathers of aviation so everything he says is correct 100% of the time and us mere mortals question at our peril.

But don't worry there are no immortals, especially in aviation.............

[Hour Builder]

indeed the points he made were all correct, for some reason he didnt get the jist of what I was saying though, which happened to be correct too

[skydriller]

Ive been watching this thread grow with some mild amusement. The reason being that I believe this was the first subject I ever posted about on PPRuNe. And all the arguements are exactly the same now as in 1999/2000 when I first started posting on here....And they are the same every couple of years this particular chestnut appears.

However I believe the most bizarre thing is that someone at the CAA is STILL giving out dodgy (say incomplete?) information, ie.:

The caa said it is P1 if you were in control throughout.

Yes, correct up to a point, such that this is true if the instructor logs nothing, otherwise, you are PUT and he is P1 - and this should be established BEFORE the flight. At the time (2000?) I was actually told that I should log P1/s by one guy at the CAA for any checkout like this!! Then, after the PPRuNe discussion, I spoke to someone else who said word for word what is quoted above - talk about confusion!! It must be the same guy, as that whole bit about "you being in control at all times" just sounds SO familiar to me , even 5-6 years on!! There is a small section of my logbook from back then fairly covered with tip-ex!!

The question of payment was brought up by someone. Now surely this is an excellent way to differentiate if you are to log P1 or PUT? If you paid a dual rate for the aircraft the you are PUT, the instructor P1. If you paid a solo hire rate, then you are P1 and the instructor (whether he likes it or not) is merely a pax!

Regards, SD..

PS.. Mods - Is it possible to search back as far as 2000/1999? Then I could link back/quote the thread.

[IO540]

I think a part of the problem is that the instructor is usually an hour builder and he desperately wants the PIC time in his logbook.

If he could not it as PIC, he may as well be stuffing shelves at Tescos; he'd make more money.

Under G-reg regs, that alone prevents the other pilot legally logging it as PIC. He can log it as PIC (legally at that point) but the instructor then breaks the law himself when he enters it in his logbook as PIC. The student has not broken any law IMHO; it is the instructor who has. But in reality nobody is ever likely to find out.

The FAA addresses this intractable situation by making it legal.

[BRL]

PS.. Mods - Is it possible to search back as far as 2000/1999? Then I could link back/quote the thread.

Hi. If you can remember the title of the thread then do a search, that should be ok. As for your username, it only comes up with the last 500 posts. I will look into that for you,

[englishal]

Now surely this is an excellent way to differentiate if you are to log P1 or PUT? If you paid a dual rate for the aircraft the you are PUT, the instructor P1

What about if you are with an examiner I think it is a crock of poo myself. I think that at least the Bienniel should be a P1US flight. The last JAA Bienniel was a 30 minute flight west, enjoying the scenery, and a 30 minute flight east, with a stall and steep turn thrown in. I paid solo rates for the aeroplane, and greased the Examiners' (with his FI hat on) palm with cash at the bar after the flight. It doesn't particularly bother me as I don't need the P1 time for anything, but it seems unfair, and someone might need the time.

One trouble with the CAA is that they can never give you a definitive answer first time. Ask someone from FCL in person, and he says one thing (As I recall....."The FAA IR with give you the same pivileges as the IMC rating in a G reg").......Then you ask again, in writing, and the story has changed.

[skydriller]

Ah - Ha!! Found it!!

I posted this in 2001, though not sure if there was an earlier thread where I mentioned the P1/s quote from the CAA or if my memory is playing up!!

I am glad this came up as I had exactly the same situation as bcfc about a year ago, I was getting conflicting advice from different instructors at different clubs when I checked out on different or similar aeroplanes. I later called the CAA and was told the following:

1. Your Logbook is your own personal record.
2. P1/s is ONLY for a flight test with an Examiner, Eg for your PPL, IR, Twin Rating etc. You total these hours as SOLO.
3. If, when you have a PPL, you fly with an Instructor on a check-out, if he is TRAINING you on a new aeroplane type, ie he demonstrates something to you and touches the controls etc. Then you are PUT and the hours are DUAL.
4. If, when you have a PPL, you have flown this aeroplane type before and YOU are demonstrating to the instructor you can fly the aeroplane OK, ie he does NOT touch the controls during the flight, then you log the flight as P1 for yourself.

The guy I spoke to at the CAA said himself that this is a grey area and summed up by saying only one person can log the flight as P1, but alot of pilots are cheating themselves out of P1 hours.

I would be interested in what you all have to say about this advice, especially considering the conflicting posts above.

Regards SD

You can check out the whole thread here to see the reaction:http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ght=Instructor

Regards, SD..

Note to BRL - thanks for the info! But I still cant find any posts by myself in search earlier than about 2003. I found this thread by searching someone elses name. Interestingly, if you check out my post on the link I gave above, it does not show my details to the left as usual, its like I didnt exist prior to 2003, even though I did for several years earlier!!

[theresalwaysone]

Originally Posted by bose-x

You have to remember that Beagle has been around since the Wright Brothers, he is one of the founding fathers of aviation so everything he says is correct 100% of the time and us mere mortals question at our peril.

But don't worry there are no immortals, especially in aviation.............

Being around for a long time dosnt make you right nor does it mean you are good at what you do. I work for an airline, and some of its best pilots are those in their early thirties.

This individuals arrogance is very plain to see and my experience of arrogant individuals is that they are dangerous in a professional enviroment.

Getting back to the post;

When you take advice that could be of future legal significance always get it in writing, phoning the CAA for advice is like asking 10 people on this forum for advice! When people put things in writing it generally has to go through an approved path and is more of a guartantee of accuracy.

In fact the chap that took adice from the CAA and listed it as below is incorrect

1. Your Logbook is your own personal record.
2. P1/s is ONLY for a flight test with an Examiner, Eg for your PPL, IR, Twin Rating etc. You total these hours as SOLO.WRONG

3. If, when you have a PPL, you fly with an Instructor on a check-out, if he is TRAINING you on a new aeroplane type, ie he demonstrates something to you and touches the controls etc. Then you are PUT and the hours are DUAL. WRONG
4. If, when you have a PPL, you have flown this aeroplane type before and YOU are demonstrating to the instructor you can fly the aeroplane OK, ie he does NOT touch the controls during the flight, then you log the flight as P1 for yourself.

For a start LASORS does not mention P1/s its PIC U/S, (Where did P!/s come from)

Before anyone else makes a post can I respectfully suggest they refer to LASORS first

[BEagle]

Withdraw your libellous statement.

Time to get a hard and fast ruling on this, I think.

The proposal I shall be making is that if, as a requirement of the flight (no matter by whom - ANO, Club or whoever), there is an authorised instuctor on board (i.e. FI or CRI/SPA such as a PFA coach), than that person will be PIC. The other pilot will be Pu/t.

The CAA's wishy-washy statements on this help no-one.

[Julian]

The proposal I shall be making is that if, as a requirement of the flight (no matter by whom - ANO, Club or whoever), there is an authorised instuctor on board (i.e. FI or CRI/SPA such as a PFA coach), than that person will be PIC. The other pilot will be Pu/t.

Because its tosh! If the instructor was giving instruction then yes I agree.

If the person taking the flight holds the relevant licence then they are P1, they are there as a safety pilot as a requirement of the clubs flying order book/insurance/will of god/etc then the FI is SNY as regards how logging.

As stated previously, nothing stops P1 swapping in mid flight.

There are occasions also when the FI would also not warrant P1 for the whole flight. I.E. If someone from a club up North is completely a XC check then why should the FI log P1 for the whole flight when most of it is across the UK?

J.

[BEagle]

The question which has to be asked is "Why is there an authorised instructor on board?"

If for any reason other than as a passenger, then the authorised instructor must be providing some element of training or supervision. In which case, he/she must be the aircraft commander.

The fact that the other pilot is legally entitled to fly the aeroplane solo is nihil ad rem. Why, then, did he/she not do so?

[skydriller]

In fact the chap that took adice from the CAA and listed it as below is incorrect

That chap would be me, and I think that if you read my post at the top of the page you will see that I do not believe the advice I was given in 2001from the CAA to be entirely correct, I posted it as an example of The CAA not being clear to everyone about this subject. I think most here will understand that P1 = PIC, and that /us = /s (argue about that without me!). Therefore 1 & 2 are correct, but 3 & 4 are, to say the least, ambiguous. This sums it up very well I think

The CAA's wishy-washy statements on this help no-one.

Please follow the link and read the thread from 2001.

Regards, SD..

[theresalwaysone]

SKYDRILLER OK so when i am asked to sign log books for first officers when they fly a leg I must be doing something wrong although the CAA have agreed that some of their hours can be counted as P1 providing they log it PIC u/s and it is signed by the commander, again LASORS explains this.

In fact LASORS dosnt say that the only time PIC u/s can be logged is when a flight test is passed. Thats the whole point this check out can be logged PIC u/s .

My refernece to P1s etc is because ayone who quotes other than PIC u/s isnt looking at the regulations.

Someone also mentioned that the designated commander can be changed in flight, not so because the regulations state that the commander must be designated before flight for aspects like booking out, weight and balance fuel oil etc