Frankly I think a bigger issue is the dangers inherent in having 2 pilots in a single pilot aircraft. There have been many incidents/accidents over the years where the guy in the right seat decided to "help" and did something unexpected or where both pilots thought the "other" guy was going to take care of/do something. If 2 pilots are flying together there should be a discussion by the PIC to the other pilot detailing what (if any) actions are expected of the other person in the airplane. There is a reason aircraft that require 2 crew to operate have detailed SOPs which define the duties of each pilot and those pilots receive training operating in a multi crew environment.

That's all very interesting, but we're discussing a purely non-commercial setting here (PPL holders sharing a plane).

Most pilots only go into mountains once, Crash One!

CG:ok:

What about the situation where a single pilot aircraft is being operated by a pilot with a view limiting device (ie a hood). The rules require he have a safety pilot (rated in the aircraft). There are now two pilots required by law, so isn't this a multi crew environment? In this case what does the safety pilot log - if anything?

As far as I'm aware the safety pilot is not an active crew member, hence he does not log anything (or rather anything that will add up to his total flight time, you can still log it to keep track of what you did on that day, sort of like a diary) and the operation is still not multicrew as the PIC is still solely responsible for the safe conduct of the flight. The safety pilot's role is only to monitor and point out any issue to the PIC so that he can stop the exercise should it become unsafe to continue.
I'm assuming you're not referring to actual training and the second pilot is not a certified flight instructor.

Ciao,

Dg800

If you are talking about the JARs then correct, you only need a "competent observer" and hence not a required flight crew member and no logging.

If you are talking about the FARs under the FAA system, then you are required to have a safety pilot and you are both entitled to log PIC for the time the manipulator of the controls is under the hood.

That's interesting, didn't know that was the case on the other side of the pond. Who is then the person responsible for the safe conduct of the flight? Does the safety pilot have to be a CFI or just another PPL holder?

Ciao,

Dg800

A pilot who is qualified and current on the class of aeroplane. So yes PPL holder can act as safety pilot if they are qualified and current. The pilot under the hood must also have the safety pilot write his name and certificate number in his logbook (e.g. "SAFETY PILOT JOE BLOGGS, CERTIFICATE # 1234567").

Quote "The pilot under the hood must also have the safety pilot write his name and certificate number in his logbook (e.g. "SAFETY PILOT JOE BLOGGS, CERTIFICATE # 1234567"). "


Where is the reference for this?

I know the European rules are a muddle right now. However, prior to this, the UK required a safety pilot to assist with flyin (23.2(b) of the Jan 2010 ANO) when conducting simulated instrument flight. Either the second pilot is required crew or he is not - and in this case he appears to be required. This could just be another UK oddball concept where two required pilots are still single crew, but I suspect not. Which leads me back to what if anything does one log if you are required crew but not PIC in a non-multi crew aircraft.

You can log anything you want. The issue is counting time for higher licenses or ratings, or for declaring flying time for the purposes of an aircraft insurance application.

In aircraft which are certified to be operated by a single pilot, which is essentially all non turbine GA aircraft there can only be one PIC. The only way for another person to log time on the same flight is if he or she was an instructor in which case the first person is logging dual not PIC. There are 2 general exceptions to this. The first only concerns flights for the purpose of a flight test with a designated examiner and the second is a bizarre FAA ruling which permits, under the safety pilot situation under discussion here; for both pilots to log PIC.

Pretty much every other regulator in the world thinks the idea of having 2 PIC's is stupid and won't allow you to count any of this time towards higher licenses or ratings.

The "safety" pilot function is solely to keep a good visual look out. Other then that you are passenger. IMO and what I believe is the official explanation for not allowing the time to count, is that you are not performing the majority of the actions inherent in piloting an aircraft and so that time should not count anymore then occupying seat 34B on the Boeing going to a Spain for a piss up with the boys.

However like I said you can log anything you want just make sure that your log book entry accurately reflects your duties and I strongly advise that the time should be written in a separate column so that there is no way any regulator can think you are trying to pull a fast one. IMO your chance of getting any regulator, other then the FAA, to count safety pilot time towards a higher license is zero.

The flight engineer is "required crew" on a Boeing 707/727/Classic 747, DC 8/10. L1011 etc etc but they don't have to be a pilot and if they are they can't count the time. I would suggest that a safety pilot falls into the same category, required for the flight for obvious reasons but the time doesn't count because they are not performing the duties of a pilot.

Fair enough, but I still find it odd that a crew member who has to be a pilot (as compared to the engineer or the hostie) doesn't log anything.

The FAA logic (as I understand it) is the pilot without the hood is PIC. So if you crash into someone or something or some airspace, it is the safety pilot who carries the can. The pilot flying logs P1 on the basis of being the sole manipulator of the controls. (which is apparently a uniquely FAA concept)

It seems the European safety pilot is along for the ride with no particular accountability or function but to hopefully have a bit of a look for traffic. (and obviously to fly the plane if the guy under the hood is having problems - else why does this case require a safety pilot as compared to just practicing IFR which only requires a competent observer.)

If the pilot flying the aircraft "has problems" all he has to do is remove his hood or foggles and fly visually, something that hardly requires a safety pilot to perform......

I suppose his first problem might also be his last:
A mid air collision...

Since the safety pilot is going to lose just as big as the pilot flying, in the event of a midair, I would hope he/she understands why keeping a good lookout, the only specific requirement of the position of safety pilot would be a good idea.

In fact my flying school almost had a mid air when a PPL was up practicing IF with under the hood with a CPL (non instrument rated, not an instructor) decided he would play instructor and provide "advice" to the student instead of concentrating on keeping a good look out.........

The best safety pilot I ever had may have been a non pilot but he was a Sargent in an Army Reserve Air Defence battery. He was Really good at spotting aircraft :E

If he experiences severe spatial disorientation it might perhaps take him some time to get back on his feet (so to speak). The safety pilot can then take over for a short time in order to prevent the aircraft from entering a spin or spiral dive while the PIC becomes "fully functional" again, therefore he needs to be qualified to fly the plane. Maybe that's what the regulator had in mind, but I might be wrong. I don't even know if this might actually happen as I've had no instrument training myself, on the other hand the regulator who drafted the regs might have had even less of an idea of what flying is all about than I do, so anything is possible. :E

Ciao,

Dg800

FAA "Safety Pilot"
 

If you are under the hood working on some form of "instrument proficiency" with a non-CFII in the right seat then you are quite likely making a VFR flight.

VFR flight requires that the pilot "see and avoid," something that can only be done by the safety pilot in this case. The safety pilot is the PIC even if the guy/gal under the hood is the sole manipulator of the controls and may also log the time as such.

The moment the hood comes down the ability to "see" goes away. N'est-ce pas?

So, that begs the question - can two pilots alternate right/left, seat under the hood, etc. so that both of them can accumulate 50 hours of cross country flying with only a total of 50 hours a/c rental? Seems like it should work...

Terry

I agree, but oddly the CAA (and I believe EASA) don't - as they only require a competent observer if you practice IFR without a view limiting device, but an actual second pilot if you do use the view limiting device.

Makes sense to me - removing foggles, for example, involves being very careful not to pull my glasses off at the same time, and usually involves removing and replacing the headset. I'd not feel happy doing this in a hurry (if there's no hurry then it wouldn't be necessary to do it at all!) low on the approach on a collision course with something else with a non-pilot sitting next to me.