28 day check - logged as P1 or PUT?

[TheOddOne]

llanfairpg writes:

something for all you self employed instructors out there without liability insurance to think about!

I've started a new thread on this subject in the Instructor's forum. I think it's worthy of separate debate.

Cheers,
TheOddOne

[S-Works]

The main reason for a pilots order book is not to make unenforcable law but to cover yourself, and your company/club in the event of a negligence claim.

Exactly. I am just making the point of separating LAW and arse covering.

There is not a legal requirement for a pilots order book, it is not a legal document and any rules in it are not legal requirements. This include the 28 day rule.

So when a club insists on a 28 day checkout out it is not for legal reasons it is for club reasons and if the pilot is already LEGALLY entitled to fly having met the FCL/ANO requirements then one could argue they are perfectly entitled to be P1.........

[rustle]

I still believe that if hiring an aircraft you have to comply with the rules of the hirer else you are [effectively] taking it without consent.

I further believe that if you are acting unlawfully (TWOC) you cannot obtain a benefit from that action.

PiC/P1 hours must be a "benefit", else why would there be so many threads about claiming them?

[S-Works]

Well you have certainly brightened up my day. It takes a very flexible mind to arrive at that conclusion!!!

[Arrestahook]

I agree with homegaurd, if you have a licence and are rated on the a/c and its just a matter of a currency check then P1/S is what my students use. P1 under supervision. It denotes that you were P1 but had and instructor with you. Shouldn't be hard to change in the logbook either.

[S-Works]

Accept P1/S is not allowed to be used in that context as it is not a flight test.

What are you putting in your logbook? P1? So we have two people logging P1......

[llanfairpg]

One can put P1 and the other P1 u/s or Pu/t--but what is in question is what can be claimed towards the grant/renewal of a licence or rating.

[Contacttower]

Accept P1/S is not allowed to be used in that context as it is not a flight test.

As I mentioned earlier my logbook differentiates between P1/S (or SPIC actually) and PIC U/S which is something different.

SPIC= student pilot in command (which can be logged simultaneously with 'dual').

PIC U/S= pilot in command under supervision (only possible after a successful flight test).

[S-Works]

My JAR compliant logbook only carries entries for:

PIC or P1
PIC U/S
P2
P/UT
SNY

There is no such thing as SPIC in JAA Land.

[llanfairpg]

PIC U/S= pilot in command under supervision (only possible after a successful flight test).

Or at any time the handling pilot is operating under the supervision of the commander but carrying all the duties of the commander.

Think of the case were a training captain is converting say someone with a BAC 1-11 on his licence to the Airbus.

[S-Works]

If you want to talk about this in the context of airline logging then fine. I look forward to my club getting their first airbus....

The question is around logging club check rides in club aircraft and sprang from an original question about the time being allowable towards a CPL application.

Why don't we discuss the use of P2 next?

[Contacttower]

Or at any time the handling pilot is operating under the supervision of the commander but carrying all the duties of the commander.

Surely that is only valid in a multicrew aircraft?

There is no such thing as SPIC in JAA Land.

Clearly Jeppesen don't know what they are talking about then?

[S-Works]

Clearly Jeppesen don't know what they are talking about then?

Its printed in your logbook by Jeppesen (who have a reputaion for mistakes) so it must be right.....

Or maybe as an American company trying to make a one size fits all logbook they may have got it wrong and confused things? My FAA logbook has the SPIC entry, but then in FAA land you can have 2 P1's in a single pilot aircraft......

My AFE logbook claims to be JAR FCL compliant and contains only the headings listed above. I have both the PPL and CPL varieties.

So which is right?

Discuss......

[llanfairpg]

Surely that is only valid in a multicrew aircraft?

If you can find that statement in LASORS I will agree with you.


Same as P2, you can log P2 in a Cessna 172 but unless it is part of a pre- agreement with the CAA it cannot be counted towards the grant or renewal of a licence or rating.

A lot of people posting on this thread are trying to make the answer what they would like it to be rather than actually reading LASORS.

My AFE logbook claims to be JAR FCL compliant and contains only the headings listed above. I have both the PPL and CPL varieties.

Your log book is not a statutory instrument so therefore has no place in law.

[Contacttower]

Or maybe as an American company trying to make a one size fits all logbook they may have got it wrong and confused things? My FAA logbook has the SPIC entry, but then in FAA land you can have 2 P1's in a single pilot aircraft......

That is what a thought at first when I saw it (I remember having long argument with a FAA instructor on why the concept of having two P1s was silly) but it just seems a far too basic mistake to make when you consider that Jeppesen sell a completely different logbook which is 'FAA compliant'.

It doesn't really matter because I've never used the SPIC entry and have just continued to log as I was told originally: P1, P U/T and P1 U/S (for completion of a flight test).

[S-Works]

Your log book is not a statutory instrument so therefore has no place in law.

Exactly, the point I was making........ Just like a club checkout......

[Arfur Feck-Sake]

SPIC features in JAA integrated training.

[S-Works]

SPIC features in JAA integrated training.

So not in a club checkout context then.........

Although I would be interested to see where, please provide a reference.

[Contacttower]

Although I would be interested to see where, please provide a reference.

You beat me too it Arfur !!!!-Sake, I was just putting down LASORS when the internet stopped working .

I hope I'm not breaking the rules doing this but it just seemed easiest:

[Tony Hirst]

Nice one CT.

References also in JAR-FCL1. But LASORS is more specific.