PIC time in the US – one big doubt

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

So, I heard that in the US it is possible to fly with a buddy and both are allowed to log PIC hours at the same time with a FAA licence – be it standalone or based on a EASA licence.
Can anyone confirm this?

Also, I understand that flight hours in the logbook during hour building are self certified by the holder of the logbook, taking full responsabilities.

Has anyone flown with a pal to share costs?

[maximus610]

It works only for FAA world: one logging PIC under the hood simulating IFR and another form the right only PIC as a safety pilot.

When I did hour building in USA, the school provided me with some papers that proves my PIC1 in the a/c I rented.

Mxms

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

Did you fly on your own or with someone else? Because I am looking at this option with a friend, as long as we don't break any rule.
I understand it is totally legal with a FAA certificate, which is what we will fly on.

[Martin_123]

people are doing this, but that doesn't mean it's legal.. If you are flying a plane that's certified for single crew ops, there is only one PIC thus only one get's to log the hours.

At the end of the day you're only fooling yourself, there's a big difference whether you arrive at your MEP/MEIR training having done 150 hours flying yourself or having done 75 hours yourself and another 75 being essentially a pax

[maximus610]

I did on my own. But some other guys flew together splitting the costs and PIC time 1:1 so they logged hours only from the left side each.

[oggers]

It is completey legit in FAA land. When flying under the hood (or foggles) with a safety pilot, both can indeed log PIC. Of course, both pilots have to be legal to act as PIC in the first place. I did quite a few hours like that and probably saved north of a $1000 when building airplane hours for my ATP.

As for this "only fooling yourself" idea, I flew many IFP trips with a young PPL as my safety pilot the runup to her IR course. Had she been flying solo it would have been 40 hours of easy x-country VFR trips for her. Instead she got abundant practice in IFR nav as a non handling pilot, as well as time on the dials herself.

[Martin_123]

well don't rush to call it nonsense, It's all nice if you do it properly, but there are quite a few who don't

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

I just want to be sure that it won't be a problem once I come back to the old continent to continue with my modular training.

[oggers]

...well, you may not be able to claim the PIC hours outside the USA. But that doesn't change the fact it is completely legal there. The logbook entry should be annotated to indicate you were safety pilot and include the name of the handling pilot. The handling pilot should claim the equivalent hrs as simulated IF and annotate their entry with the name of the safety pilot.

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

So it actually doesn't seem to be the best option in my case, as I am looking to build hours to start commercial training.

[B2N2]

So it actually doesn't seem to be the best option in my case, as I am looking to build hours to start commercial training.

Not so fast......

Let's analyze the situation here for a moment...I've dealt with this a lot...I mean a LOT
As Chief Flight instructor I was constantly battling with foreign students who read about something online and now they know better...

It is a combination of regulations:
61.51 (e)(iii)

(iii) When the pilot, except for a holder of a sport or recreational pilot certificate, acts as pilot in command of an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted;

61.51(g)(3)(ii)

(3) For the purposes of logging instrument time to meet the recent instrument experience requirements of §61.57(c) of this part, the following information must be recorded in the person's logbook—

(i) The location and type of each instrument approach accomplished; and

(ii) The name of the safety pilot, if required.

61.57(c)

(c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, a person may act as pilot in command under IFR or weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR only if:

(1) Use of an airplane, powered-lift, helicopter, or airship for maintaining instrument experience. Within the 6 calendar months preceding the month of the flight, that person performed and logged at least the following tasks and iterations in an airplane, powered-lift, helicopter, or airship, as appropriate, for the instrument rating privileges to be maintained in actual weather conditions, or under simulated conditions using a view-limiting device that involves having performed the following—

(i) Six instrument approaches.

(ii) Holding procedures and tasks.

(iii) Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigational electronic systems.

91.109(c)(1)

(c) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless—

(1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown.

So to summarize:
SAFETY-pilot time was never intended as a time-building exercise but intended to allow an Instrument rated pilot to maintain the required IFR currency when actual IMC conditions are not "available" eg a fair weather day.
However, the regulations do not specifically NOT allow it.
It is the most abused and misused regulation.

• You can only log the safety pilot PIC time while the pilot flying is using a view limiting device.
• The pilot flying must log the name of the safety pilot in order to log simulated IMC.
• The safety-pilot may NOT log any landings
• The safety-pilot may not log night.
• The safety-pilot may not log cross country time.
• The safety-pilot may only log Total Time and PIC time.
• In order to justify and legally count this time you must log it as safety-pilot time and put the applicable regulations in the remarks section of their logbook because otherwise 61.59(a)(1)(2) comes into play which is logbook falsification which is grounds for revocation.

61.59

(a) No person may make or cause to be made:

(1) Any fraudulent or intentionally false statement on any application for a certificate, rating, authorization, or duplicate thereof, issued under this part;

(2) Any fraudulent or intentionally false entry in any logbook, record, or report that is required to be kept, made, or used to show compliance with any requirement for the issuance or exercise of the privileges of any certificate, rating, or authorization under this part;

So the counting of safety-pilot time is a risky enterprise and of very limited value. You are better off finding a flying buddy that needs to do the same and act as safety-pilots without logging any of the actual time.
So instead of a 2hr there and back cross country you can fly a 4 hr cross country where each flies a 2hr leg and pays for their share.
You get the other 2hr experience for free.
The trick with time-building is to fill as many columns in your logbook.

• Total Time
• Cross country time
• Night Time
• Simulated Instrument time
• PIC time

Using a safety-pilot buddy allows you to fill an extra column and gain the extra instrument flying experience.
On the way back you return the favor.
But I would stay away from logging it as apart from padding your time to meet a requirement it serves no purpose and trust me, it's frowned upon.
even in FAA-land.
I'm too lazy to look it up but people have also lost their license over logging fraudulent time.
And if you go back to EASA-land you can deduct all that time.

[B2N2]

Not to be a complete stick in the mud, here are some tricks that DO work:


Cross country time is defined by distance and by landing.
ATP is the only rating that does not require a landing if you log a waypoint. This to accommodate the Military pilots on 20+ hr bombing missions.
Now nobody got any wiser by just flying in cruise under the hood, but you need the XC time.

So you fly to an airport an hour away and practice 3-4 approaches for another hour.
Do not land but go around and fly the published missed approach, enter the hold and request the next approach.
This is all legal loggable cross country time as you flew at least 50NM away first.
You land, have a break and now it's your buddy's turn to fly to your home airport and practice 3-4 approaches without a landing.
This is all perfectly legal and you get maximum benefit if you do this at night also.
You pay for two hours but fill 5 columns in your logbook.

Final warning: don't think you won't get caught with the safety-pilot grey area as you only need to come across one FAA Inspector with a hair up his @ss and you're toast......

I've done many log book audits and sometimes it's laughable what they try to get passed you.....
Worse, sometimes their Instructor tried to "help"....

[2close]

And then there are the real 'cheats' who not only log the time simultaneously but don't even fly the aircraft, i.e. fly from A to B on paper but actually land not too far away at C, a remote unmanned airfield, chock the aircraft and leave the engine running up the Hobbs Meter. They then claim 3 hours flown which in reality was 40 minutes of flight plus 2 hours 20 minutes iPad time!

There should be a central ICAO register of aviation brain-dead, morons, against which any national applicant needs to be checked prior to licence issue. Anyone on that list gets a big fat naff-off tablet when applying for a licence. Further, there should be no national deviations from this rule. Saying that, some countries may find themselves with a massive shortage of pilots all of a sudden!

2close

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

Looks like keeping it simple and flying PIC ourselves the normal way is hassle free. It is not worth to be audited in a grey area which is up to the individual inspector's interpretation of regs.

Thanks for the exhaustive replies B2N2.

[oggers]

Looks like keeping it simple and flying PIC ourselves the normal way is hassle free. It is not worth to be audited in a grey area which is up to the individual inspector's interpretation of regs.

There is no grey area to be interpreted. In the USA both handling pilot and safety pilot of a single pilot aircraft can claim PIC. In EASA land they cannot. That does not stop you from flying it and logging it. You just have to understand that you cannot go back to Europe and credit the SP hours towards requirements for Part FCL licences.

On the other hand, if you were to end up pursuing an FAA licence (bearing in mind the growing shortage of pilots out there) those hours will count toward your total. If you are going out there to hours build with a buddy I can't see any good reason not to log a few free PIC hrs and have them in the nudge-bank. You can record it on a separate sheet (acceptable in the USA) if you wish so as not to confuse those concerned with the provenance of EASA logbook entries.

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

Unfortunately I have no right to live and work in the US even though I might consider getting a FAA certificate at a later stage as it seems relatively easy to convert from EASA – it's a pain in the backside the other way around with ATPL's.

[Reverserbucket]

You just have to understand that you cannot go back to Europe and credit the SP hours towards requirements for Part FCL licences.

But many do...

[B2N2]

But many do...

Here is what I always recommended; treat any Aviation Authority like they're Customs & Immigration in a Third World country run by a dictatorship.

Even with time building have your logbook signed and certified by the school. Not the friendly girl behind the front desk but the Chief Pilot or Chief Flight Instructor.

I, _______, Chief Pilot of __________ certify that the hours flown between (date)_____ and (date)___________ are true and correct.

___________
Signed & License number and school stamp.

Sacrifice half a page in your logbook to do this legibly.
In addition save all your receipts, for tax purposes later maybe and as evidence of hours flown.
Not the total bill but daily receipts that match up with the daily entries in your logbook.
If you file IFR you can print and save the online flight plans that list you as PIC.
Now in extreme cases and more for fun then anything else you can get a free Flight Aware account and save your flights.

So you have an audit by the logbook Nazi back in EASA-land and they question entries because your logbook looks like a drunk monkey got hold of a roller-pen. You now have all the evidence needed to prevent them from postponing your license issue.

[RedBullGaveMeWings]

Nice tips B2N2...

[BigGrecian]

The original poster is referring to building time for EASA purposes so most answers to this thread are irrelevant.

Although the time is acceptable for FAA licences, as well detailed and explained above, it will not be recognised in Europe....just ask the many people who have returned and ended up re completing hour building at great expense.
They even reject it in Turkey! (which although not an EASA state follows EASA FCL)
I can rattle off quite a few names of people who had EASA commercial licence applications rejected for this reason.

BNB2 you are basically encouraging people to commit fraud when applying for their pilot's licence once back in Europe.
In the UK this is punishable by a 2 year prison term and a £5000 fine.

It even appears in the UK guidance on licence issue in CAP 804 (the largest issuer of EASA licences over 25% of them) which states

Logging of Flight Hours gained in the USA
Some flight hour recording practices allowable in the USA do not comply with European and UK requirements. In particular:
• 2 pilots flying together in a single pilot aircraft both claiming P1 hours;
• One pilot accompanying another on newsgathering or traffic control flights and claiming P1/PIC when they have not acted as Captain or signed for the aircraft.
Flying hours of this nature cannot be credited towards the requirements for Part-FCL or UK Licences.

Pretty black and white to me.