Jar Fcl 1.080 - Copilot/picus
Just to confuse the issue further, my UK CAA log book (CAP 407) defines P1 (U/S) as "co-pilot acting as pilot-in-command under the supervision of the pilot-in-command".
I am legally still pilot in command of the aircraft even if the F/O is pilot flying. Thus it obviously isn't neccessary to be PF to be P1, so by the above definition surely the F/O can be P1 (u/s) whilst also not being PF, can they not? Even if the company has something extra in the ops manual that should not effect what is acceptable to the authority which is going to issue the license.
I am legally still pilot in command of the aircraft even if the F/O is pilot flying. Thus it obviously isn't neccessary to be PF to be P1, so by the above definition surely the F/O can be P1 (u/s) whilst also not being PF, can they not? Even if the company has something extra in the ops manual that should not effect what is acceptable to the authority which is going to issue the license.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Blighty
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agaricus bisporus,
Agreed that by your watch it aint but by the UK CAAs it is...
Thats the way they issue un-frozen ATPLs to cadets or ab-initio pilots who have operated commercial airliners since release from flightschool once they have the minimum requirements.
How else would you get a minimum of 500hrs PIC to qualify?
Hence the P1 U/S or PICUS route/rule...
Hope this clarifies.
By the way, am not from the CAA nor did I say that I agreed with the system.
Agreed that by your watch it aint but by the UK CAAs it is...
Thats the way they issue un-frozen ATPLs to cadets or ab-initio pilots who have operated commercial airliners since release from flightschool once they have the minimum requirements.
How else would you get a minimum of 500hrs PIC to qualify?
Hence the P1 U/S or PICUS route/rule...
Hope this clarifies.
By the way, am not from the CAA nor did I say that I agreed with the system.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ....
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the interesting and varied responses to my thread.
I have spoke with the CAA and manage to get an answer roughly as follows...
Whilst different companies and indeed captains may have ideas about what, when and with who you can log PICus, it is, as previously said, largely a means for FO's to claim their ATPL.
The CAA seem fairly relaxed about it and prepared to accept signatures against flights logged as PI(us).
Its not really a question of an FO trying to dent the "ego" of the captain, just the guy is trying to get his ATPL issued and for some reason JAR put this, in my opinion, rather stupid requirement.
Ultimately any type-rating in JAR is assessed as PIC irrespective of the licence you hold (CPL/ATPL) and whether flying as FO or Capt. You will notice that when you do get a command upgrade there is no distinction on JAR license between P1 and P2. Therefore it seems a bit stupid to make this requirement. In anycase they do and so we have to try and satisfy it!
Happy landings
I have spoke with the CAA and manage to get an answer roughly as follows...
Whilst different companies and indeed captains may have ideas about what, when and with who you can log PICus, it is, as previously said, largely a means for FO's to claim their ATPL.
The CAA seem fairly relaxed about it and prepared to accept signatures against flights logged as PI(us).
Its not really a question of an FO trying to dent the "ego" of the captain, just the guy is trying to get his ATPL issued and for some reason JAR put this, in my opinion, rather stupid requirement.
Ultimately any type-rating in JAR is assessed as PIC irrespective of the licence you hold (CPL/ATPL) and whether flying as FO or Capt. You will notice that when you do get a command upgrade there is no distinction on JAR license between P1 and P2. Therefore it seems a bit stupid to make this requirement. In anycase they do and so we have to try and satisfy it!
Happy landings
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultimately any type-rating in JAR is assessed as PIC irrespective of the licence you hold (CPL/ATPL) and whether flying as FO or Capt.
I just think the UK CAA took a quite sensible approach and is pretty relaxed about stuff like that and rather concentrates on more important issues.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ....
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some JAA countries do seem to ignore JAR a little - for example in Ireland if you go to the authority with a type-rating from a middle-east airline - they will add the type-rating to your JAA licence with a "middle east" restriction. However this procedure is not recognised under JAR-FCL at all.
Equally from my reading of JAR-FCL i cannot find any mention of differentiation between P1/P2 or Capt/Co-pilot as is done in some non-JAA states.
I stand to be corrected still but as far as I'm aware JAR doesn't allow for any distinction - of course a local authority will still for the moment largely apply this rules as they wish but i suspect EASA will change all of that.
Equally from my reading of JAR-FCL i cannot find any mention of differentiation between P1/P2 or Capt/Co-pilot as is done in some non-JAA states.
I stand to be corrected still but as far as I'm aware JAR doesn't allow for any distinction - of course a local authority will still for the moment largely apply this rules as they wish but i suspect EASA will change all of that.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 59
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its just a set of rules which because of the range of different methods of meeting them become just hoop jumps.
There is nothing stopping a pilot of these companys which control PICUS going out and flying a spam can and building hours PIC on holiday or in 3 axis microlight Would cost about 3k for the machine and then 15 quid an hour. All done vfr and none of the hassels of doing it with the company.
If all applicants had to do 250 picus and everything was controlled and to a standard there would be some point of fighting the good cause. The current setup means the requirment is pointless to make a fuss about. You have pilots with 500 multi crew getting green books on there first LPC and pilots with 2500 hours CAT struggling and bleeding through the eyes to jump through the company hoops.
There is nothing stopping a pilot of these companys which control PICUS going out and flying a spam can and building hours PIC on holiday or in 3 axis microlight Would cost about 3k for the machine and then 15 quid an hour. All done vfr and none of the hassels of doing it with the company.
If all applicants had to do 250 picus and everything was controlled and to a standard there would be some point of fighting the good cause. The current setup means the requirment is pointless to make a fuss about. You have pilots with 500 multi crew getting green books on there first LPC and pilots with 2500 hours CAT struggling and bleeding through the eyes to jump through the company hoops.
