does cross channel check count as PIUS?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle wrote:
Beagle, no reason to make any changes and trying to tighten up.
For most of us it is crystal clear what the rules say and only those on the scrounge for additional P1 time seem to want to interpret the rules any different from what was intended.
If you create a change as you propose then it will mean that people can not take instructor mates with them other than if they will make those mates P1 AND it also creates the situation that whenever an instructor is flying in any aeroplane they are automatically responsible for the whole of the execution of that flight.
So no more coming along for the ride and looking at the world glide by.
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.
For most of us it is crystal clear what the rules say and only those on the scrounge for additional P1 time seem to want to interpret the rules any different from what was intended.
If you create a change as you propose then it will mean that people can not take instructor mates with them other than if they will make those mates P1 AND it also creates the situation that whenever an instructor is flying in any aeroplane they are automatically responsible for the whole of the execution of that flight.
So no more coming along for the ride and looking at the world glide by.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
FD - I wrote:
"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."
In your scenario, your 'instructor mate' acting as a passenger wouldn't be P-anything, nor could he/she be paid.
But if some pilot wanted both to fly as PIC and have some sort of comfort blanket of taking an instructor along to hold his/her hand, then no, the pilot would be acting under the supervision of the instructor and would not be entitled to log the flight as PIC.
"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."
In your scenario, your 'instructor mate' acting as a passenger wouldn't be P-anything, nor could he/she be paid.
But if some pilot wanted both to fly as PIC and have some sort of comfort blanket of taking an instructor along to hold his/her hand, then no, the pilot would be acting under the supervision of the instructor and would not be entitled to log the flight as PIC.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is everyone trying to make this so complicated?
I fly GA light singles, not comercial 747s.
If I ever need to fly with an instructor - for my licence renewal, to get checked out on a new aeroplane or because I feel I just need the guy there to brush up on skills when I cant fly for a while, then I log PUT. I am paying for him to be there.
The only time I have logged PIC when an instructor is in the aeroplane, is if he doesnt have responsability for the flight. Examples of this would be if the club has a fly out, and an instructor wants to come too, then he is just like any of the other pax Im flying with at the time, or if I give the instructor a lift to pick up an aeroplane from maintenance, he also just along for the ride. In both instances I am not paying for his services.
What is so hard about this, its not rocket science is it?
I couldnt agree more, To me, P1, PIC, PIC/s, PIC/us, P1s, P1/us, or PUT.....I fly for fun and the only reason I queried this back in 1999-2001 when I first got my licence was because different INSTRUCTORS were telling me to fill in MY logbook differently, and it annoys me to be told two conflicting things.....
Have fun arguing about this some more, I'm happy with MY logbook, and have been for the last 5 years.
Regards, SD..
I fly GA light singles, not comercial 747s.
If I ever need to fly with an instructor - for my licence renewal, to get checked out on a new aeroplane or because I feel I just need the guy there to brush up on skills when I cant fly for a while, then I log PUT. I am paying for him to be there.
The only time I have logged PIC when an instructor is in the aeroplane, is if he doesnt have responsability for the flight. Examples of this would be if the club has a fly out, and an instructor wants to come too, then he is just like any of the other pax Im flying with at the time, or if I give the instructor a lift to pick up an aeroplane from maintenance, he also just along for the ride. In both instances I am not paying for his services.
What is so hard about this, its not rocket science is it?
For most of us it is crystal clear what the rules say and only those on the scrounge for additional P1 time seem to want to interpret the rules any different from what was intended.
Have fun arguing about this some more, I'm happy with MY logbook, and have been for the last 5 years.
Regards, SD..
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skydriller,
What if you owned the aircraft and needed a bienniel type of review because the regs say you do, and you wanted to do it in your own plane. Let's also assume you had more hours than the instructor.
You need the instructor because you need his signature, and you might also learn something (as might the instructor). Who would you want the PIC to be? Who would be in charge of your plane if you had an engine failure?
What if you owned the aircraft and needed a bienniel type of review because the regs say you do, and you wanted to do it in your own plane. Let's also assume you had more hours than the instructor.
You need the instructor because you need his signature, and you might also learn something (as might the instructor). Who would you want the PIC to be? Who would be in charge of your plane if you had an engine failure?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS,
I appreciate that you are probably refering to the FAA BFR, but I believe the JAA one requires a 1 hour training flight with an instructor. In that case I can't see any way to see that being anything other than pilot under training. Otherwise it wouldn't be a training flight.
In the circumstance described, I think I would be agreeing with the instructor before the flight that I would have the authority to end the training flight and take over as pilot in command at any point in the flight, and that he wouldn't object to that. I don't think too many would have a problem with that, but none the less, it would be best to have that sorted out before take off.
dp
I appreciate that you are probably refering to the FAA BFR, but I believe the JAA one requires a 1 hour training flight with an instructor. In that case I can't see any way to see that being anything other than pilot under training. Otherwise it wouldn't be a training flight.
In the circumstance described, I think I would be agreeing with the instructor before the flight that I would have the authority to end the training flight and take over as pilot in command at any point in the flight, and that he wouldn't object to that. I don't think too many would have a problem with that, but none the less, it would be best to have that sorted out before take off.
dp
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my eyes that authority you grant yourself would make you the boss all along.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BEagle makes a suggestion and I would like to make a counter suggestion.
Flying instructors are P1 when
In all other cases, the FI is a passenger.
Flying instructors are P1 when
- When delivering a structured lesson in a course of study directly concerned with the obtention of a license or rating
- When delivering the 1 hour of training required under JAR
- When delivering structured training requested by a pilot and where the syllabus is briefed on the ground and taught in the air
In all other cases, the FI is a passenger.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about
"An authorized instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time while acting as an authorized instructor."
No prizes for guessing where I got that from (hint, "z" )
Who is PIC for legal reasons is a matter for the owner of the plane and is a separate issue completely.
"An authorized instructor may log as pilot-in-command time all flight time while acting as an authorized instructor."
No prizes for guessing where I got that from (hint, "z" )
Who is PIC for legal reasons is a matter for the owner of the plane and is a separate issue completely.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: london
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still find it hard to believe this debate hasn't ended. I think the instructors and fto's have a share of the blame for the lack of clarity in this situation. I have always understood p1s to be on sucessfull completion of a flight test however when I spoke to a lady at the licencing dept at the caa regarding my case after listening patiently and appearing to go off to check with one of her colleagues. She came back and said in her exact words YOU CAN LOG IT AS P1 AS LONG AS THE CROSS CHANNEL CHECK WAS SATISFACTORY!
This seems to make sense while it is also a con on behalf of some fto's. I personally have friends who have thier own aircraft and have no problems flying to France , Spain and Portugal whithout doing any checkouts.
Several times during my training some instructor told me to log p1s for a 45 day check and some told me to log put. As I did a couple of these while I was doing my atpl ground school and wasn't flying often. It is not uncommon to see instuctors at the fto I attended arguing about the rules amongst themselves. I think it will help if the fto's have a procedure similar to sop's in airline whereby the rules are clearly stated. If you are going to do a cross channel check it will be logged as put for the student and the instuctor p1.
While this sounds daft as all the instuctor did was show us the directions from letouqet airport to the town center which I could have done by myself had he not been there. Or better still the caa should come up with a way of logging something like this. The flight was only one hour and ten minutes and by the way before I sent my log book off to the caa I had 102.5 hours (2.5hrs over the required 100)just in case this particular flight was not accepted as p1.
This seems to make sense while it is also a con on behalf of some fto's. I personally have friends who have thier own aircraft and have no problems flying to France , Spain and Portugal whithout doing any checkouts.
Several times during my training some instructor told me to log p1s for a 45 day check and some told me to log put. As I did a couple of these while I was doing my atpl ground school and wasn't flying often. It is not uncommon to see instuctors at the fto I attended arguing about the rules amongst themselves. I think it will help if the fto's have a procedure similar to sop's in airline whereby the rules are clearly stated. If you are going to do a cross channel check it will be logged as put for the student and the instuctor p1.
While this sounds daft as all the instuctor did was show us the directions from letouqet airport to the town center which I could have done by myself had he not been there. Or better still the caa should come up with a way of logging something like this. The flight was only one hour and ten minutes and by the way before I sent my log book off to the caa I had 102.5 hours (2.5hrs over the required 100)just in case this particular flight was not accepted as p1.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...when I spoke to a lady at the licencing dept at the caa regarding my case after listening patiently and appearing to go off to check with one of her colleagues. She came back and said in her exact words YOU CAN LOG IT AS P1 AS LONG AS THE CROSS CHANNEL CHECK WAS SATISFACTORY!This seems to make sense....
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me, that the biggest problem here is that people leave it until after the flight to agree who was commander during the flight.
Surely this should be agreed before the flight? If it was, this whole area wouldn't be an issue at all. Those who couldn't agree, simply wouldn't fly together.
dp
Surely this should be agreed before the flight? If it was, this whole area wouldn't be an issue at all. Those who couldn't agree, simply wouldn't fly together.
dp
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not try to expand the arguement to P1, P.etc.
Several times during my training some instructor told me to log p1s for a 45 day check and some told me to log put. As I did a couple of these while I was doing my atpl ground school and wasn't flying often. It is not uncommon to see instuctors at the fto I attended arguing about the rules amongst themselves. I think it will help if the fto's have a procedure similar to sop's in airline whereby the rules are clearly stated. If you are going to do a cross channel check it will be logged as put for the student and the instuctor p1.
It seems to me that the CAA really do need to get their act together when it comes to giving out advice - especially when it comes to their own flight crew licencing rules. Only then can instructors, and then in turn pilots, get it right also. If they cannot get the simple stuff right, what does it say for the rest of the regulatory process?
Regards, SD..
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
According to CAse P, both are able to log PIC for their portion of the flight, SNY when playing Student.
