How should this be logged ? P1S ?? P/UT ?? or P1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ulceby
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How should this be logged ? P1S ?? P/UT ?? or P1
Please bare with me on this question......
A friend of mine is currently undergoing "Familiarisation" training on my aircraft....... the aircraft in question is an "Old" SEP, Tailwheel (Emeraude CP301-C1, built in 1960)
I have 700 hours total time (Most of it - 580 Hrs clocked up in the Emeraude), I only have the (basic) JAR PPL & Tailwheel qualifications.
My friend has 300 Hours total time, with PPL + Tailwheel qualifications. (They are also a qualified FI(R), with Multi-Engine IR & CPL)..... so far more experienced than myself.
My question is this...... How should we log the Familiarisation flights in both our logbooks ? (P1, P1S, P/UT ????)
I have done a fair amount of research on this but struggled to find a definitive "It needs to be logged like this....." for our situation.
Any help gratefully received ?
A friend of mine is currently undergoing "Familiarisation" training on my aircraft....... the aircraft in question is an "Old" SEP, Tailwheel (Emeraude CP301-C1, built in 1960)
I have 700 hours total time (Most of it - 580 Hrs clocked up in the Emeraude), I only have the (basic) JAR PPL & Tailwheel qualifications.
My friend has 300 Hours total time, with PPL + Tailwheel qualifications. (They are also a qualified FI(R), with Multi-Engine IR & CPL)..... so far more experienced than myself.
My question is this...... How should we log the Familiarisation flights in both our logbooks ? (P1, P1S, P/UT ????)
I have done a fair amount of research on this but struggled to find a definitive "It needs to be logged like this....." for our situation.
Any help gratefully received ?
Moderator
From my understanding, being a single pilot airplane, only one pilot logs the flying time, unless one pilot is the instructor, and the second person is a student receiving instruction. Two pilots cannot both log pilot time on a single crew type airplane otherwise. If you are flying, and the other person is your passenger, you log the time. If you have kindly offered the use of your airplane to a pilot qualified on that class of airplane, they log the pilot time - if you are aboard, you're a passenger. If the pilot to whom you have kindly offered the use of your plane is not insured to fly it, you should be extremely careful in letting them fly it, there are several insurance and regulatory gotchas in doing that. I'm not saying it does no happen, and yes I do it, but only the insured one of us logs the time. As you are not an instructor, you may have wisdom to offer, but you cannot offer, nor log pilot time for instructing. The other pilot is not under instruction, nor supervision, as an instructor does that. If the other pilot's logbook were audited, and someone asked about the "received instruction"/"familiarization"/"under supervision" time they had logged, but not as PIC, you don't want to be being asked your authority to provide that service. When they log as PIC, that's fine (presuming they are insured to fly it), you cannot log the time at all.
What you write in you logbook is up to you - it's your logbook. But, what you present as your pilot experience must be your actual experience within the bounds of your piloting privileges, not "the other pilot aboard" (unless it's a two crew type, and you're endorsed on that type). When I fly a type for which I cannot be PIC, and the other pilot is not an instructor, but I did fly it, I log the time in my logbook, but do not include it in my totals of flying hours, with a note explaining why.(I do not log the flight in the aircraft logbook, as I was not PIC). Anyone reading my pilot logbook (usually insurance agents while I'm being covered on another plane) can interpret the my log as they wish, but it's truthful.
What you write in you logbook is up to you - it's your logbook. But, what you present as your pilot experience must be your actual experience within the bounds of your piloting privileges, not "the other pilot aboard" (unless it's a two crew type, and you're endorsed on that type). When I fly a type for which I cannot be PIC, and the other pilot is not an instructor, but I did fly it, I log the time in my logbook, but do not include it in my totals of flying hours, with a note explaining why.(I do not log the flight in the aircraft logbook, as I was not PIC). Anyone reading my pilot logbook (usually insurance agents while I'm being covered on another plane) can interpret the my log as they wish, but it's truthful.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Near EGSS
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Pilot DAR says, but it is possible to operate a shared flight. Each pilot logs the time they fly as P1 with the total logged time being the same as the overall flight time. The remarks column would normally include "shared flight with xxxxx". This might be appropriate if you spend some time demonstrating some handling characteristics.
You both have UK licences. If your friend was giving instruction he could log P1 whilst the student logs PUT however; it is the opposite way around. As you are both qualified to fly the aircraft, either of you can log P1 but not at the same time as only one of you can be PIC. You are not a FI so he cannot log PUT.
The rules for logging are in Article 228 of the ANO.
If you demonstrate the aircraft log it as PIC, your friend is a passenger. If he flies the aircraft he logs it as PIC and you are the passenger.
The rules for logging are in Article 228 of the ANO.
If you demonstrate the aircraft log it as PIC, your friend is a passenger. If he flies the aircraft he logs it as PIC and you are the passenger.
There has to be absolute clarity on who is acting as PIC before the flight. There can be no shared responsibility here, the person nominated as PIC is responsible for the flight, especially if there is an incident/accident.
The OP can provide some “advice” to the other pilot but if he is expecting that this advice must be followed then they are the PIC and the other person is a passenger.
There was a significant accident at my home drome years ago in a similar situation. The landing started to go pear shaped and the pilot flying expected the right seat pilot to take over and fix it. The end result was no one was flying for the critical few seconds and the airplane was rolled up into a ball by the side of the runway. There was no preflight discussion on who was doing what and as result an airplane was wrecked.
The OP can provide some “advice” to the other pilot but if he is expecting that this advice must be followed then they are the PIC and the other person is a passenger.
There was a significant accident at my home drome years ago in a similar situation. The landing started to go pear shaped and the pilot flying expected the right seat pilot to take over and fix it. The end result was no one was flying for the critical few seconds and the airplane was rolled up into a ball by the side of the runway. There was no preflight discussion on who was doing what and as result an airplane was wrecked.
The following users liked this post:
In complete agreement with my learned colleagues.
You're neither instructors, it's a single pilot aeroplane, only one of you can log it at any time, and that's as PiC.
Now, it might be reasonable for the other to log it as passenger / observer / whatever flying for their own interest and satisfaction - but those hours may not then contribute to any licencing totals.
But an agreed split within a flight is fine, you can swap as often as you like, just so long as it is never ambiguous about who is PiC at any moment.
A passenger may handle the controls, but the PiC is still in command and liable for all aspects of the flight, whilst the passenger is still legally a passenger.
G
You're neither instructors, it's a single pilot aeroplane, only one of you can log it at any time, and that's as PiC.
Now, it might be reasonable for the other to log it as passenger / observer / whatever flying for their own interest and satisfaction - but those hours may not then contribute to any licencing totals.
But an agreed split within a flight is fine, you can swap as often as you like, just so long as it is never ambiguous about who is PiC at any moment.
A passenger may handle the controls, but the PiC is still in command and liable for all aspects of the flight, whilst the passenger is still legally a passenger.
G
"There has to be absolute clarity on who is acting as PIC before the flight."
Agree, but P1 can ask a qualified pax to become P1 if he can't handle a deteriorating situation.
Agree, but P1 can ask a qualified pax to become P1 if he can't handle a deteriorating situation.
Moderator
Whenever I do a test flight with a company pilot (commonly much more experienced on type than I), I provide a preflight briefing. It goes something like: "These are the maneuvers we'll be flying today. I will continue to fly the plane no matter what. If you feel that you would like to take control, say I've got it, and I'll let go - and you'll have control, so be sure you want it then!". This comes from some earlier failings to brief well, and a little cockpit confusion. Recently, I gave this briefing to a very nice company pilot who'd been sent with the company Caravan floatplane for me to fly. After my giving the briefing, he calmly said: "No I won't be taking control, the airplane does not have dual controls.". Okay then, we both knew who was PIC for the entire flight!
Another peripheral note on this topic, is that if you are acting as PIC, and perhaps giving training within the scope of your privilege to do so, you may not be insured for your own life or injury. I found this out the hard way while finishing a float endorsement for a fellow in his amphibian. When we took off the runway, he was PIC. But, as he did not [yet] have a float rating, the instant we touched the keel to the water, I became PIC in the licensing sense. Then it went bad, and the insurer's entry point to the discussion about my insurance claim for injury was that PIC's are not insured, only passengers. It ended up less hard nosed than that, but it was a nuance I had not previously considered. So if you're PIC, and the other person flying has an accident, you may not have any insurance coverage for injury. This is worth understanding before you choose roles!
Another peripheral note on this topic, is that if you are acting as PIC, and perhaps giving training within the scope of your privilege to do so, you may not be insured for your own life or injury. I found this out the hard way while finishing a float endorsement for a fellow in his amphibian. When we took off the runway, he was PIC. But, as he did not [yet] have a float rating, the instant we touched the keel to the water, I became PIC in the licensing sense. Then it went bad, and the insurer's entry point to the discussion about my insurance claim for injury was that PIC's are not insured, only passengers. It ended up less hard nosed than that, but it was a nuance I had not previously considered. So if you're PIC, and the other person flying has an accident, you may not have any insurance coverage for injury. This is worth understanding before you choose roles!
that PIC's are not insured, only passengers
Generally, personal injury coverage in UK light aircraft insurance policies is a minefield of gotchas. Although the aircraft, passengers and other third party aircraft, persons and property are covered (by the mandatory third party element of the policies), Instructors and Private Pilot renters are generally not covered for personal injury, or if at all by only by very small amounts. My understanding, which as a layman in these matters could of course be incorrect, is that a student pilot can claim against the aforementioned third party cover if he is under dual instruction, but not when flying solo. Many PPLs take out their own cover or (often mistakenly) think they are covered by their own "normal" personal injury cover. Many years ago a student died whilst solo - I think it was in Scotland - and his parents sued the instructor who authorised and therefore supervised the flight. Hence we have available Instructor/Examiner liability policies. .
When instruction takes place arranged through the Flying Club/School then the instructor is insured subject to the club/school Employers Liability Insurance. Although the instructor may be self employed for tax purposes the insurer "will treat" the club/school instructor as an employee for insurance purposes. Should the instructor be instructing independently outside of the club/school auspices then it is particularly important that the instruction is covered within the aircraft policy as I outlined in my previous post.
Scottish law can be very different but all student flying is 'supervised' and the instructor acts in the role of 'employee'. Unless the student wilfully disobeys their authorisation for solo then the student must be covered by the club employers, public liability or aircraft insurance. However, it is important to note that public liability insurance is not mandatory in the UK (Scotland ?). If the school doesn't have Public Liability then stay clear.
Scottish law can be very different but all student flying is 'supervised' and the instructor acts in the role of 'employee'. Unless the student wilfully disobeys their authorisation for solo then the student must be covered by the club employers, public liability or aircraft insurance. However, it is important to note that public liability insurance is not mandatory in the UK (Scotland ?). If the school doesn't have Public Liability then stay clear.
I think that we should be clear that as far as we can tell, neither of the pilots described in the original post have an instructors rating, and UK air law does not permit instruction by people who do not hold instructors ratings.
G
G
'Familiarisation' does not need to be provided by the holder of an Instructor Certificate, whereas 'Differences Training' does.
The OP does say in the first post: "They are also a qualified FI(R)" I think "They are" should have been "He is".
An Operator's Employer's Liability Insurance (which is mandatory) only covers accidents in the operator's premises, not on airfield property, airside or in the aircraft. The same applies to Public Liability, however that is not Mandatory.
An Operator's Employer's Liability Insurance (which is mandatory) only covers accidents in the operator's premises, not on airfield property, airside or in the aircraft. The same applies to Public Liability, however that is not Mandatory.
Employer's Liability Insurance (which is mandatory) only covers accidents in the operator's premises
If the PIC might want to pass PIC duties to the other pilot that needs to be briefed before the flight and the other pilot has to affirmatively accept this possibility. This is exactly how things can end badly if there is not clarity in advance.
