Pilot In Command
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot In Command
A scenario. Two PPL holders, A and B fly together in an aircraft owned by A.
Is it OK for A to let the B manipulate the controls, and still remain pilot in command?
What if they go flying, and it turns out A did not have a valid medical? could he say B was PIC since he did at some point manipulate the controls even though the booking sheet would have A's signature as PIC?
Is it OK for A to let the B manipulate the controls, and still remain pilot in command?
What if they go flying, and it turns out A did not have a valid medical? could he say B was PIC since he did at some point manipulate the controls even though the booking sheet would have A's signature as PIC?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot A signs for the aircraft; so he needs to be taking it back in one piece.
In the event of Pilot B overstressing the aircraft, and then he denies having touched the controls, how would Pilot A
1) Prove
2) explain
or 3) justify the course of events?
This ought to be merged with another thread running here. http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...up-flying.html
Short answer is that if they go flying and A signed as PIC without having a valid medical then Pilot A needs to read the Colin MacRae accident report.
In the event of Pilot B overstressing the aircraft, and then he denies having touched the controls, how would Pilot A
1) Prove
2) explain
or 3) justify the course of events?
This ought to be merged with another thread running here. http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...up-flying.html
Short answer is that if they go flying and A signed as PIC without having a valid medical then Pilot A needs to read the Colin MacRae accident report.
A is Pilot in Command, whoever is handling the controls - if that is what was agreed and in the tech log.
In most national legal regimes, there is no reason why a passenger cannot manipulate the controls. They can't log it unless A was an instructor, and if they crashed it, A is responsible for that - so A needs to take every reasonable action to ensure that doesn't happen.
If he was flying illegally, he was flying as pilot in command illegally. But still pilot in commend.
G
In most national legal regimes, there is no reason why a passenger cannot manipulate the controls. They can't log it unless A was an instructor, and if they crashed it, A is responsible for that - so A needs to take every reasonable action to ensure that doesn't happen.
If he was flying illegally, he was flying as pilot in command illegally. But still pilot in commend.
G
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Troll or guilty conscience?
PIC is PIC, letting another manipulate the controls is just that. If you have flown illegally chalk it up to experience. If you are trying to cover something up good luck in getting pilot B to carry the can..
PIC is PIC, letting another manipulate the controls is just that. If you have flown illegally chalk it up to experience. If you are trying to cover something up good luck in getting pilot B to carry the can..
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose-x
I was thinking it looks like Pilot A wants Pilot B to say he was actually flying that trip, on the basis that A has no medical. B Agrees and all is squared away for a few days.
Then along comes the CAA man to interview Pilot B about an airspace infringemnet. Pilot B can hardly say "My defence to the charge is that I committed a different offence, that of falsifying a logbook!"
I was thinking it looks like Pilot A wants Pilot B to say he was actually flying that trip, on the basis that A has no medical. B Agrees and all is squared away for a few days.
Then along comes the CAA man to interview Pilot B about an airspace infringemnet. Pilot B can hardly say "My defence to the charge is that I committed a different offence, that of falsifying a logbook!"
Moderator
If he was flying illegally, he was flying as pilot in command illegally. But still pilot in commend.
He was "checking out" the new owner of an aircraft he'd just bought that day (which I had delivered the day before). My friend and the new owner flew all over that day, with my friend mostly sitting and speaking the occasional bit of guidance, but not actually flying. The bit they both missed was to check the fuel, 'cause they ran out and crashed - wrecked the plane, but not really hurt. Bad on both of them...
Turns out that the new owner did not have a valid license, but my friend did. My friend received the charge for the breach of regulation associated with running out of gas. He was the only licensed pilot aboard, and even though he was not flying, and not the PIC of record at the beginning of the flight, the government deemed him to be so at the end!
The accident should not have happened, and my friend missed the mark, but he was surprised to receive the formal punishment as PIC, when no one thought that he was PIC during the flight.
So, if you're a pilot, and you're just riding along: Actively prevent accidents and offenses, and, attempt to confirm (within the bounds of courteous behaviour) that the other pilot, is legal to be PIC!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting one there Pilot DAR, which country did that occour in?
As far as I was aware, if someone signed as PIC, they were responsible whatever.
So lets say if it turned out not only that pilot A didn't have a medical, but also the ARC was out of date, he would still be responsible by signing in as PIC. Are you saying pilot B could somehow be held responsible for the flight just by having a valid licence and being there for the ride? Bearing in mind in this example no accident has actually occoured.
As far as I was aware, if someone signed as PIC, they were responsible whatever.
So lets say if it turned out not only that pilot A didn't have a medical, but also the ARC was out of date, he would still be responsible by signing in as PIC. Are you saying pilot B could somehow be held responsible for the flight just by having a valid licence and being there for the ride? Bearing in mind in this example no accident has actually occoured.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: england
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, an interesting discussion! If two qualified, legal PPL's share a flight, is the LHS always PIC, with the RHS acting as a handling pilot, but the aircraft still being captined by the LHS?
Can a PPL holder legally fly from the RHS?
I see no reason why not, but it has never actually crossed my mind before
Can a PPL holder legally fly from the RHS?
I see no reason why not, but it has never actually crossed my mind before
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: 7nm N of LARCK
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Left or Right, Front or Back
Kengineer,
A qualified PPL can fly from any seat from which they can reach all necessary controls.
In the case of aircraft like the Piper Cub, some of them are P1 from the rear seat, some from the front. In that case it depends on the particular aeroplane.
A qualified PPL can fly from any seat from which they can reach all necessary controls.
In the case of aircraft like the Piper Cub, some of them are P1 from the rear seat, some from the front. In that case it depends on the particular aeroplane.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wanted to add that the Germans saw fit to write some specific legislation on this. From memory, absent of any paperwork that says otherwise, and two fully licensed pilots on board, the one in the LHS is the PIC.
If there's any doubt about who is PIC, remove it beforehand.
If there's any doubt about who is PIC, remove it beforehand.
Pilot A signs for the aircraft; so he needs to be taking it back in one piece
If one pilot is not current then he is a passenger and the answer is simple, the only legal pilot is PIC but, is there any paperwork to prove this and did he know he was PIC throughout?
This thread highlights potential issues if two pilots do fly together and share the responsibility. If something goes wrong, they may equally share the blame, and any liability that it might incur, unless they have had the foresight to document who is doing what and when before they take off.
Pilot A (PPL) delivers a/c within the UK. He takes along Pilot B (ATPL). Due to fuel mismanagement the a/c crashes and CAA prosecutes Pilot B, the most experienced pilot, for running out of fuel. This is obviously much more serious for an ATPL than a PPL.
Turns out they hadn't run out of fuel and Pilot A had logged the flight as PIC so case dismissed.
A real case. The aircraft was a C337 which crash landed near the M25.
Turns out they hadn't run out of fuel and Pilot A had logged the flight as PIC so case dismissed.
A real case. The aircraft was a C337 which crash landed near the M25.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don’t understand the signing out bit as PIC, and would appreciate those who know answering any or all of the following questions.
Is that always done in the UK, or only in the case of flying schools and rental arrangements? Does the law say it must? How does that go at farm strips etc.?
Is the techlog always signed to show PIC before the start of a flight? Again, does the law say it must?
I was commissioned to do a report to the BGA on PIC issues for gliding some years ago, and during the course of that I discussed several issues with the CAA and with other GA organisations.
Several GA pilots were emphatic that they could take off with one person (A, say) as PIC; and hand over to another (say B) during flight, without landing between. Each would log (in their personal logbooks) their own time as PIC. (Note – PIC is not the same as PF – AIUI, any PPL can let somebody else fly, but remain PIC. All my questions here are about PIC, not PF.) I did not think to ask, and nobody mentioned, what the “signing out” thing, whatever that is, or what the techlog, would have recorded beforehand.
At first, the CAA told me that there could only be one PIC for the whole flight. That person pointed out that in airliners, the commander was PIC for the whole flight even he was asleep and the FO(s) was/were flying it.
Later, a different CAA person led me to believe that the GA pilots’ belief was true, or at least the legislation was not sufficiently clear to rule it out. I never got to the bottom of it as far as PPLs are concerned.
In the OP’s scenario, however, if the general belief among PPLs is correct, surely A could hand over to B as PIC for any or all of the flight. (Nothing to do with PF or seat position, provided either can reach the controls from whatever seat they are in.)
So, is this what PPLs now believe? Can anyone show how the ANO (or any other legislation) in the UK allows PIC to change from one to another during flight?
And re my questions above – if it is true that either sign-out or techlog must show PIC before the flight starts, do both pilots have to be recorded beforehand as PIC for different legs (when it is planned to be one flight without an intervening landing)?
(By the way, in UK gliding, the PIC is always, AFAIK, declared before the flight and never changes. The only exception I can think of is what happens if PIC is incapacitated – and I know of no case where that arose and caused a problem.)
Chris N
(Written before the posts immediately above - I would still like law-based answers if possible.)
Is that always done in the UK, or only in the case of flying schools and rental arrangements? Does the law say it must? How does that go at farm strips etc.?
Is the techlog always signed to show PIC before the start of a flight? Again, does the law say it must?
I was commissioned to do a report to the BGA on PIC issues for gliding some years ago, and during the course of that I discussed several issues with the CAA and with other GA organisations.
Several GA pilots were emphatic that they could take off with one person (A, say) as PIC; and hand over to another (say B) during flight, without landing between. Each would log (in their personal logbooks) their own time as PIC. (Note – PIC is not the same as PF – AIUI, any PPL can let somebody else fly, but remain PIC. All my questions here are about PIC, not PF.) I did not think to ask, and nobody mentioned, what the “signing out” thing, whatever that is, or what the techlog, would have recorded beforehand.
At first, the CAA told me that there could only be one PIC for the whole flight. That person pointed out that in airliners, the commander was PIC for the whole flight even he was asleep and the FO(s) was/were flying it.
Later, a different CAA person led me to believe that the GA pilots’ belief was true, or at least the legislation was not sufficiently clear to rule it out. I never got to the bottom of it as far as PPLs are concerned.
In the OP’s scenario, however, if the general belief among PPLs is correct, surely A could hand over to B as PIC for any or all of the flight. (Nothing to do with PF or seat position, provided either can reach the controls from whatever seat they are in.)
So, is this what PPLs now believe? Can anyone show how the ANO (or any other legislation) in the UK allows PIC to change from one to another during flight?
And re my questions above – if it is true that either sign-out or techlog must show PIC before the flight starts, do both pilots have to be recorded beforehand as PIC for different legs (when it is planned to be one flight without an intervening landing)?
(By the way, in UK gliding, the PIC is always, AFAIK, declared before the flight and never changes. The only exception I can think of is what happens if PIC is incapacitated – and I know of no case where that arose and caused a problem.)
Chris N
(Written before the posts immediately above - I would still like law-based answers if possible.)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if they go flying, and it turns out A did not have a valid medical?
Then he doesn't have a valid pilots licence either, and couldn't operate as planned PIC in any event.
Pilot A signed the booking in sheet at the airfield on arrival. Is this a legally binding document to state he was PIC?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it is as cut and dry as that. I have never signed for the aeroplane in my life and who signs the book in the clubhouse is whoever gets there first........
I know UK pilots like cut and dry cases but in the real world, it is never like that. Imagine another scenario - Aeroplane enters IMC. Pilot A (LHS) does not have an IR but pilot B (RHS) does.
Are people really saying that Pilot B should sit back, and relax as the aeroplane plummets to the ground because he cannot become PIC in the air? I don't think so......
I know UK pilots like cut and dry cases but in the real world, it is never like that. Imagine another scenario - Aeroplane enters IMC. Pilot A (LHS) does not have an IR but pilot B (RHS) does.
Are people really saying that Pilot B should sit back, and relax as the aeroplane plummets to the ground because he cannot become PIC in the air? I don't think so......
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone show how the ANO (or any other legislation) in the UK allows PIC to change from one to another during flight?
Suppose two pilots go flying. They agree to split the PIC time and (thus) the costs. Pilot A is happily acting out his duty as commander and flies the aircraft within his personal and legal limitations. When handover time comes, B finds that the situation is actually well outside his personal comfort zone and/or his legal limitations. In other words, he finds himself painted in a corner by A. So what do you do?
It's probably the kind of discussion that you'd like to have on an internet forum or a flying club bar somewhere, but not in the air.