Doh! Now where is the fighting talk in a comment like that......... :p

If you ever saw the quality of my landings you would think differently...! But thanks for the compliment anyway.

(Those who can, do. Those who can't, write about it.:})

The answer to the questions are;

1. No.

If you were pilot in command then you can log Pilot in command time. If you were pilot in command then you did not need a check beause you were not getting one.

If you were pilot in command then anyone else in the aircraft with you was a passenger and you must have been entitled legally and under your club rules and insurance to be pilot in command of an aircraft carring passengers...........so no checkout was required........so you did not do a checkout.

If you were not so entitled then you were operating either illegally, in breach of the club rules or in breach of the insurance requirement (thus illegal) or any combination of all three.

2. No

You can not change the entries in your logbook ans that would be falsifying the entry. If you think that there is an error then before changing the entry from dual to Pilot in command, you need to contact the person who is named as pilot in command and ensure that they agree that there was an error and that they have not also logged the time as pilot in command.

------------

It has nothing to do with who wants to log the hours, it is a legal requirement for the pilot in command to log the time as such and for the other pilot not to log pilot in command time.

The CAA can and do check logbooks and can check entries are correct. The fine for false entries i.e. one such as claiming to be pilot in command when one was not and the aircraft / club / instructor records say you were not is about £2500 per line.

Even at £400 per hour there is a few hours in that money.

Regards,

DFC

I have to say DFC, that's the best expression of the rules I've seen so far in this thread. BTW, it is illegal to fly without insurance isn't it?

Yes.

Regards,

DFC

But suppose the insurance company isn't involved, ie it's not a requirrment? And suppose the club rules simply state that you can't fly solo after 28 days, but need a competent pilot in the other seat. In other words, they're not saying you can't be PIC, just that you need a safety pilot. What then?

Oooo, isn't this fun? A perfectly simple piece of flying activity that goes on every day of the week, and we can argue about it for ever and ever. ;)

I did say 28 pages.....

He/She is a passenger who goes by the title of Instructor as far as he is concerned.

28 day rule is usually a club thing or insurance, it is NOT a requirement of someones licence. As previously stated and we have had this 'discussion' several times on here, unless you agree beforehand its an instructional flight then you are P1 the 'Instructor' can enjoy the view.

I did a 'check flight' yesterday in our group aircraft guess what - it was P1 for me. Unless the club states that his to be an FI does the 'safety pilot' or whatever term you wish to use, have to be an FI? Insurance requirement? Certainly not on our aircraft.

Like I said, this one splits the camp.

J.

And it's still rambling on:ugh:

But what about a co-pilot in a light aircraft not required by the order to operate with two pilots?

In that case then you can be PIC because nothing says that you can not. Unfortunately, that is not how most clubs operate.

Clubs (and anyone who owns an aircraft) can decide the club rules to suit themselves. If the club rules do not require a checkout with an instructor when no longer current eg more than 28 days since last flight the that is up to them.

However, the safety pilot system can lead to two friends simply saying that each was being a safety pilot to the other and thus removing the safety element that the 28 day rule was trying to acheive.

Regardless of the system, the person who is designated the pilot in command pre-flight is the pilot in command and they log the flight as such and just as important, no one else in the aircraft can log it as pilot in command.

Regards,

DFC

Rubbish.

I have flown many flight where PIC has changed during the flight.

I also did a BFR in my aeroplane, and I was PIC......

Which is what the ever-so-sensible FAA system does - "As flight instructor". I suppose so the airline interviewer can look at the logbook and say "yea, you have 3000 hours total time, but you haven't really flown any of the last 2500 have you";)

And probably very few of the next 2500 if you end up flying people-tubes in an airline!

The interesting fact is that if you're a good instructor you rarely touch the controls. :{

Subject for another thread?

But the US rules are different, most people in this country still log with the assumption that there can only be one P1 (at one time) in the cockpit except after a successful flight test. JAR-FCL brought us the concept of more than one pilot logging P1 at a time but it seems most in the UK don't use it.

Where? Excepting PICUS for a flight test.

I don't know the ins and outs of this but I happen to have a JAR-FCL compliant logbook at home (which I use as a sort of backup logbook) and in the 'instructions for use' it says this:

Column 11: Pilot function time: enter flight time as pilot in command (PIC), student pilot in command (SPIC) and pilot in command under supervision (PICUS) as PIC. All time recorded as SPIC or PICUS must be countersigned by the aircraft commander/flight instructor in the Remarks column. Instructor time should be recorded as appropriate and also entered as PIC.

So if I understand correctly a dual instructional flight is logged by the student as SPIC time (with dual time going in the adjacent column) which goes in the PIC column of the logbook. The instructor then also logs 'instruction' time as well as PIC time.

Agreed. The PICUS debate is an example. JAR FCL and LASORS just say that under such a such circumstance use P1/S. It does not seem to infer when you may not. LASORS only provides some guidance on successful skills tests and PICUS but there is no mention of this in the rules (which only talk about co-pilots) so it seems clear that it is a matter of what is sensible, not what is written.

I asked the CFI this question. Their practice is as llanfairpg states. The 'posh' school at Blackbushe treat PICUS as BoseX describes.

In fairness, the rules have not be designed around insurance/club requirements for 4/6 week recency checkouts. They have been designed around formal flight training and that is what they describe. But JAR FCL does state the an instructor may log P1 when acting as an instructor which read likes a catch all.

On that basis, I would say that a student logging as PICUS if an instructor has not had to intervene is justified and legal. Certainly the CAA have not questioned this in my logbook.

Erm no.

It just tells you to put whatever is relevant in the column. PICUS is only logged on successful completion of a test.

So if you pass a skills test you log as PICUS, if you fail you log as PUT. If you are in command in a single pilot aircraft you log as P1. If you are getting training in a single pilot aircraft you log PUT and the Instructor Logs P1.

Nothing else counts for a single pilot aircraft.

Now back to the argument of who is actually in command on a 28 day check.......

The instructor should be is the obvious answer but that isn't the practice of a lot of flying clubs.:=