P1/P2 definitive answer to "time logging" question???
 

Right..... I'm going to try to get a totally, 100%, definitive answer from everyone (even the CAA is invited) to a real time, genuine bedouin P1 or P2 flight time logging question.

This actually happened the other day and I will log it as the general view of forum members dictate.

I returned from overseas after 3 months graft and wanted to jump in and fly my aircraft. Firstly, and because I like to think I'm a safe and responsible pilot, I get a dual check with an instructor.
We do a 45 minute flight and I fly the whole thing from start to finish :ok:
Now tell me, (all with one voice I hope) what do I log it as in my log book, P1 or P2 :confused:

Okay. There is no such thing as P2 in aircraft that are certified for single pilot operation (that is, anything that does not expressly require two pilots as a condition of the aircraft's operation. If you can fly it solo, it means it must be a single pilot aircraft).

With that in mind, there are only three likely operating capacities you can log a flight as (in a single pilot aircraft):

1. Pilot in Command (P1) - fairly simple. Means no-one else in the aircraft can log anything of any kind (unless you hold an Instructor rating and you're instructing)...
2. Pilot under Training (P U/T) - you're 'dual' and under instruction of someone (who, incidentally, must hold an Instructor rating of some kind -- ANO 2009 53(2)(b) refers...)
3. Pilot in Command under Supervision (PICUS or P1/S) - is rare and very specifically for flight exams or tests you pass. Not for a general 'club checkout' or the like.

So, with that in mind, the questions are: a) were you legally allowed to operate as pilot in command (with respect to insurance on the aircraft etc) and b) did you act as pilot in command? If the three month layoff put you outside of, say, club currency or insurance limits and you weren't allowed to be in command without a dual check, then it's fairly obviously P U/T, and the instructor logs P1. If the instructor was pilot in command, then you can only log P U/T as you can't be P1 (not first pilot), P2 (can't have two pilots in a single pilot aircraft) or P1/S (as you're not completing a test or examination for a rating, or on an integrated course towards an ATPL and acting under the supervision of an instructor)...

For some reason, I can't find the references for this any more, but they should all be lurking in JAR-OPS somewhere (1.080?) -- I don't know if that's been superceded by EASA Part-OPS yet.

If you are over 90 days the instructor has to be PIC otherwise you will be taking PAX without 3 TO's and landings.

So instructor is PIC and you log dual.

If you had just gone up by yourself which it is perfectly legal to do, you would have logged it as PIC.

Anyway who signed the tech log?

Try LASORS Section A Appendix B

True, although I was looking for something legislative...

Who actually cares, ;).

A 'dual check' is not a regulatory licensing requirement therefore it is not a requirement for the individual conducting the check to even hold a valid licence let alone an instructor rating. The owner or operator makes up her/his 'dual check' rules as she/he sees fit, not the licensing authority. In the absence of a definition, a 'dual check' is not training (therefore cannot be PUT) nor examination (therefore cannot be PICUS). In a single pilot aircraft a pilot undergoing a 'dual check' can only be PIC or SNY. There can be only one PIC so determine who it is to be before the flight.

From ANO 2009 Schedule 7: The holder may not fly as pilot in command of such an aeroplane carrying passengers unless within the preceding 90 days the holder has made at least three take-offs and three landings as the sole manipulator of the controls of an aeroplane of the same type or class.

If during the preceding 90 days the holder has not made at least three take-offs and three landings as the sole manipulator of the controls she/he may only fly with another required crew member which can only be an FI (thus being under training and logging PUT) or an FE (thus being under training and logging PUT or under successful examination and logging PICUS).

Thanks for the replies gents.
OK, by P1 and P2 I meant "In Command" or "Dual".
My instructor and I did not discuss prior to the flight who was in command. After the flight I was assured by him that I was OK to fly and as we did more than 3 take-offs (and landings) I covered the requirement for pax.
Jock, I filled in the tech log, because it's my plane and I followed this flight with a couple on my own (definitely In Command) and actually penned the information into the book afterwards, in the comfort of the flying club, at which time the instructor had gone home.

The scenario that I describe here, which is absolutely genuine in my case, is played out regularly by many pilots who are probably perfectly safe to fly solo. Maybe even after they have been flying for many years, but because they are safe and responsible flyers feel comfortable about getting another individual to check that they are. In our flying club, we have a very nice chap who is an ATPL with huge experience that puts himself through this process if he hasn't flown for 28 days or more. So why is the logging of time into the Pilots Log such a foggy business? The number of strings on this forum dealing with this very question and variations of it show that a large number of pilots are getting it wrong time and time again. The CAA have a vast cartload of rules and regulations dealing with all sorts of minutiae that probably won't effect the average PPL, but on this one many of us are left wondering.
Is it not time for the CAA to come out with a clear and definitive explanation of what should be written into the pilot's log (in words that we can all understand please:ugh:) so that we can all get it right in future?

If you signed the tech log your PIC you signed for it.

Personally if I go over the 90 days I just go and do 3 circuits on my tod.

The reason why its so foggy is because everyone wants to log PIC. The instructors want it because they think its one step nearer flying an airliner. Punters want it for the 12 hours or if they are hour building for the PIC time for CPL.

So everyone wants to play with the definitions so they can log something other than dual. The CAA has written the rules and they are perfectly clear its just human nature means people want to interprate them to thier own advantage. Personally if I was the instructor with you I wouldn't log anything, but then again I have have over 4k hours and day job is LHS in a multi crew aircraft and another hour in a SEP added to the 1200 I have already is neither here nor there. But to an instructor who is sub 1k hours ever hour is golden

JAR-OPS 1 has been superseded by EU-OPS, which will, in due course, be superseded by EASA Part-OPS. However, nothing in any of these publications has any relevance to private flying.

Lets look at what the Law says:Thus if you have any operating capacity, it must be logged.
You can have two pilots in an aircraft, both rated to fly it, neither needs to be an instructor; if both have an operating capacity they must both log it! This does not fit any of the so called references.
The law does not define the maximum number of crew members, only the minimum number; it is the operator who deceides how many pilots are on board. Bear in mind most of the so called guidance is solely to allow people revalidating licences to easily determine if enough experience has been gained. At the end of the day its your personal log book; so long as you comply with Article 79 you can record it however you like. Of course if you are out of 90 currency you can only be Dual with an Instructor or Solo. P2 as already stated means nothing.

Whopity's quote suggests that a PIC is acting illegally by not logging a flight.

Is that true?

Why would one not want to log a flight? There's a good question ;)

You are an instructor, and "something" happened on the flight which you don't want to be responsible for but you are responsible because it was a G-reg and the other chap was not rated for the type (don't ask me how I know about this one).

You claim to be somewhere else than on the flight, for whatever personal reason.

Yes, although he didn't include the following paragraph, which states:

(2) Detailed information about each flight during which the holder of the log book acted either as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft or for the purpose of qualifying for the grant or renewal of a licence under this Order must be recorded in the log book as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of each flight.

A few people have been successfully prosecuted for breach of that particular article, although mainly, it must be said, in association with other fraudulent actions.

Although EU OPS doesn't, EASA OPS will regulate private flying

EASA OPS may regulate private flying. In its opinion to the EC on Part OPS EASA has, predictably, gone for the option of maximum regulation (to the extent of exceeding the scope of ICAO Annex 6), whilst acknowledging that there is no safety-based evidence to support this decision. The EC and EU parliament may accept this opinion or they may not, it remains to be seen. However, since EASA Part-OPS contains nothing relevant to this thread, the point is moot.

Assuming you have a JAA Licence the details of how you log the time are in JAR-FCL

WRT Whopity he's wrong

Just log the 45mins as PU/T and be done with it.What difference will it make now!
I have done exactly what you've described several times with different instructors but have always been told to log PU/T. :ok:

IO540 its not unknown for pilots subject to FTL schemes to do the odd check ride on days off which would stop being days off if they logged an hour as an instructor. The fact you could spend the whole of your days off teaching gliding (as some do) is quiet acceptable. Your quota is 900 a year and 100 every 28. And there is a heap of rules about manditory days off.

So if you had a prang on on day 2 of your roster and they discovered you were moonlighting for cash on your days off as an instructor but failing to log the hours you would be in deep poo.

And yes Whopity is quite correct it is illegal. My comments on not logging it were in the case of the person being inside 90 days pax currency.

I would be very careful saying that Whopity is wrong in these kinds of things. But in any case both you and Whopity are quoting regulation that explicitly refers to multi-crew aircraft/operations. In other words, aircraft or types of operations that require, by law or by other regulation (e.g. operator handbook/SOP) to have two fully licensed crew otherwise the flight is not going to happen. My bold:

Only in a multi-crew aircraft can anyone ever log P2. For single-crew aircraft (the subject of this thread), it's either:

• One person logs PIC, anybody else on board logs nothing.
• One person, who has to be a current FI, logs PIC and the student logs P/UT (or "dual")

Unless we're talking about a formal flight exam, or an integrated course, in which case there are two more possibilities.

You can get approved multi crew ops on SPA aircraft but there is a whole load of hoops you have to jump through. And only realistically available in a commercial AOC enviroment.

eg Fisheries F406 is a single crew turboprop but operated as dual crew with dual crew SOPS and an instrument fit to match.

But its unheard of in the UK for SEP-SPA

For the situation described in the original posts this is the definitive unambiguos answer which applies pretty much anywhere in the world.
I am surprised nobody has brought out what to my mind is a far more important consideration, that is who is actually in charge of the flight. This is non trivial because I know of one accident on a "currency checkout" checkout type of flight that occured because the who, does what, when question had not been asked. In this case the very experienced pilot sitting in the right seat had only planned on giving a bit of advice, unfortunately when the airplane bounced badly on landing the low time owner expected the right seater to "help" on the controls. In the confusion the aircraft stalled and dropped to the runway hard enough to do major damage. Ironically the owner stated if he had been alone he would have immediately gone around after the bounce.

Personally if I am asked to do these kind of flight I specifiy the ground rules before the flight.

1) I am PIC and in the event of an actual emergency, I will take control and the owner will handle the radios and read any checklists I call for and only perform further actions which I have specifically requested (this avoids the other pilot unintentionally making things worse by actions which could be at cross purposes to what I am doing). This also applies for what I percieve is a developing unsafe flight condition.

2) The flight will follow an agreed upon sequence of manoevers and any additional work will be briefed in the air before being carried out (this avoids any unplanned "hey watch this manoevers" from the check pilot. If emergencies are to be simulated I will brief how I will simulate the failure/malfunction and will always state "this is a simulated emergency" before doing anything.

3) If at any time I say "I have control" the pilot must immediately relinquish his hold on all controls without any discussion.

If these conditions are not acceptable I politely decline the flight and suggest other instructors he/she may wish to contact.

As for logging the flight......well I have enough SE PIC I am quite happy to have the student log the time as PIC as long as I am not required to attest to competancy ( eg an insurance required sign off).

To be a Co-pilot, you must be rated on type and the aircraft must have a certification requirement for a minimum of two pilots. I was referring to an aircraft certified for a minimum of one pilot where there are a number of scenarios in which two pilots may have an operating capacity, neither of which is P2. They invariably involve checks which can quite legally be conducted by a pilot who is qualified to fly the aircraft without any other qualifications. There is no difinitative answer to what you log, neither does there need to be. Log what you do, and if the CAA don't want to count it, its their perogative not to.

P.u/s
 

The answer for check rides is pilot under supervision in the majority of cases. Neither P1 or P2. Although if you reach the grade with a CFI during the flight he/she may allow you to continue the flight under P1 or P2. Only one pilot may be P1 at any time for the aircraft so that is a technicality debated between you and the other pilot and doesn't really matter which seat you sit in. Of course whilst you are P.u/s then the other person must be P1.

Pilot Under Supervision, 'wot dat den?

The pilot in the left seat needs an instructor there, the instructor is providing value to the flight - instructors instruct.

It's pilot under training, or PUT, in virtually all cases. Logging P1 is incorrect in virtually any occasion that an instructor is there as you are not genuinely in command - as you've stated, but PUS or PICUS is for successful tests, and pretty much nothing else in single pilot GA.

G

GtE (or anyone), can you help?

PICUS is for successful tests, and pretty much nothing else in single pilot GA.

"PICUS is for successful tests" I understand and am well used to, but
which regulation says "PICUS is for ........ pretty much nothing else in single pilot GA"?

Thanks

The simple answer is that there are no regulations I can think of which define its use in any other context.

G

Thanks GtE, my understanding, too.

As I see it, using plain language 'Pilot In Charge Under Supervision' matches, pretty closely, what's going on with this sort of flying .....
..... right up to the point where the instructor needs to take control.
That's the point where the instructor, most emphatically, must be the one in charge.

Logging PICUS for just the portion of the flight where take over didn't happen would be madness, although a flight where none was required at all corresponds, in some respects, to a test pass.

Thus, outside testing, if an instructor's services are required, Pu/t or Dual is the only sensible choice.

Pretty much what GtE said.

Crucial:
As many have said, getting understandings sorted out before flight is essential.
Happiness resides in common sense, not reliance on regulation.

So how do you legally record PICUS in a single-pilot aeroplane?

You don't, because there is no such thing as a Co-Pilot in a single pilot aircraft.

........unless on a successful flight test with an Examiner, then:


Examiners name goes in the "in command" box, time is recorded in the P1 box (or P1u/s box if the log book has one).


All UK practice of course - different in the USA.

"Single pilot aircraft.."

Does that mean an a/c with just one seat ? When I fly with two pilots on board because I've got two seats usually filled with two pilots, am I breaking the rules ?

How do we know that a 'single pilot' aircraft is a single pilot a/c ? If I find another pilot on board should I ask him/her to leave ?

No, he is entirely welcome to sit there - just not to "act as a pilot". He can, of course, be a passenger handling the controls under your supervision, offer opinions about the aeroplane, assist with lookout... - but you'll still be the one and only person acting as a pilot on board.

G

And in most of the rest of Europe which, unlike the UK, complies with EU law.
No, according to FCL.010 it means an aircraft certificated for operation by one pilot.You look at the EASA Type Ratings and Licence Endorsement List

So, if the single pilot a/c certificated for operation by just one pilot, has two pilots then, by implication, it shouldn't/can't fly.

Perhaps it should be qualified by the insertion of 'minimum'.which would be obvious or maximum which would disqualify two pilots.

Interestingly worded !

See CAP 804 Part 1 Section 1 Part E Para 9 Item J

Which is not compliant with EU law - my point, exactly. The fact that it's in CAP 804 does not make it legal - FCL.010 is 'hard' law which the UK does not have the right to change.

My question remains: How do you legally record PICUS in a single-pilot aeroplane?

" . . . in a form and manner established by the competent authority."

Yessir. And by extension, licensed pilots (regardless of licenses/ratings held) cannot fly as passengers on commercial aircraft. As these are typically two-pilot aircraft, any extra pilot on board would be cause for immediate grounding.

This is why commercial pilots don't wear uniforms or anything that makes them recognisable as pilots, when they're on board a commercial airliner as pax. It keeps them under the radar so the authorities don't know an illegal flight (3 pilots on board a 2-pilot aircraft) is taking place. And it's also the reason why flight crew don't appreciate private pilots identifying themselves to them before take-off: It leads to all sorts of unnecessary complications and paperwork. Best to stay quiet about it or you run the risk of being offloaded.

But the 'form and manner' must still comply with 'hard' law and the UK's does not.

Alice in Wonderland lives on ! For unrealistic legalese, it almost rivals the limits for flight in VMC.