FAA PIC Time
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA PIC Time
Following a recent discussion about FAA PIC time, I was interested when I saw the following in a Jetblue advertisement....
Is this becoming the norm in the USA?
For those in JAR-LAND... under the FAA system, if you are type rated, you can log 50% of the flight time in that aircraft as PIC.
JetBlue will only consider PIC time when the Pilot has signed for the aircraft. Please use only this time when completing the areas of the application asking for PIC time to be entered.
For those in JAR-LAND... under the FAA system, if you are type rated, you can log 50% of the flight time in that aircraft as PIC.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA requirement for logging PIC time is defined in FAR 61.51. I'm not sure when JetBlue means "signed for the aircraft" but I can imagine if you were previously flying 135/121 it means you had to be assigned the PIC duty position for that flight.
Generally on two-crew aircraft pilots will swap legs, but regardless of who is flying the company only assigned one pilot as PIC and he bears all duties and responsibilities associated with the position. Many times I've found SIC's that had a high amount of PIC time and when queried these pilots said they were Pilot Flying, which while meeting the FAA definition of PIC is not considered PIC by most companies.
Generally on two-crew aircraft pilots will swap legs, but regardless of who is flying the company only assigned one pilot as PIC and he bears all duties and responsibilities associated with the position. Many times I've found SIC's that had a high amount of PIC time and when queried these pilots said they were Pilot Flying, which while meeting the FAA definition of PIC is not considered PIC by most companies.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally on two-crew aircraft pilots will swap legs, but regardless of who is flying the company only assigned one pilot as PIC and he bears all duties and responsibilities associated with the position. Many times I've found SIC's that had a high amount of PIC time and when queried these pilots said they were Pilot Flying, which while meeting the FAA definition of PIC is not considered PIC by most companies.
Many times these First Officers have a glorified opinion of themselves, and of their 'abilities'.
Most are found out, pronto.
Many times I've found SIC's that had a high amount of PIC time and when queried these pilots said they were Pilot Flying, which while meeting the FAA definition of PIC is not considered PIC by most companies.
For those in JAR-LAND... under the FAA system, if you are type rated, you can log 50% of the flight time in that aircraft as PIC.
Last edited by MarkerInbound; 29th Dec 2010 at 18:38.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been common practice for many years that airlines only consider "left seat" time in 121 ops as PIC time, regardless of the FAA definition and/or logging rules.
The airlines can set whatever rules they want to use as screening tools. your job is to meet and substantiate them...
The airlines can set whatever rules they want to use as screening tools. your job is to meet and substantiate them...
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutt,
The regulation allows logging of PIC time if one is rated and sole manipulator of the controls, but most employers don't recognize this. Most employers only recognize time as PIC that one has actually spent as the pilot in command.
The reference to having signed for the aircraft supports this view. It's not a new trend; it's always been the case among the majority of US employers, particularly airlines where the pilot designated as PIC by the operator remains the PIC for the duration of the flight. A type-rated first officer is still expected to log only SIC for the duration of the flight, even if captain qualified.
The regulation allows logging of PIC time if one is rated and sole manipulator of the controls, but most employers don't recognize this. Most employers only recognize time as PIC that one has actually spent as the pilot in command.
The reference to having signed for the aircraft supports this view. It's not a new trend; it's always been the case among the majority of US employers, particularly airlines where the pilot designated as PIC by the operator remains the PIC for the duration of the flight. A type-rated first officer is still expected to log only SIC for the duration of the flight, even if captain qualified.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the finer details of this regulation aren't understood outside the USA..... Hence lots people with PIC time on specific aircraft who have never sat in the left seat 
Mutt
Mutt
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hence lots people with PIC time on specific aircraft who have never sat in the left seat
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA distinguishes between logging PIC and acing PIC. As was said earlier, 2 private pilots can log PIC time in a Cessna (with restrictions, of course). Jet Blue doesn't want that PIC time
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the finer details of this regulation aren't understood outside the USA..... Hence lots people with PIC time on specific aircraft who have never sat in the left seat
With respect to the FAA, the regulation differentiates between acting as pilot in command (actually being the PIC) and logging PIC. The two are not the same thing.
Employers are concerned not at all with logging of PIC time, but with actual pilot in command time. For this reason, many employers will discount any logged PIC time that isn't actually representative of pilot in command experience. For example, under the regulation, one can act as a safety pilot in a Cessna 172, while another pilot flies the airplane with a view-limiting device ("hood"), and both parties can log the time as PIC. The regulation allows this because the safety pilot, acting as pilot in command, can log PIC for acting as PIC of an aircraft requiring more than one crew member (he he becomes the other required crewmember as safety pilot, under 14 CFR 91.109(b)). The pilot wearing the hood may log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls. Most employers won't recognize both pilots as PIC, and tend to view this as "cheating."
If a pilot has been employed by a particular charter company or airline as SIC, but is logging PIC, nearly all employers in the US will view the employee who logs that time very narrowly. The perception of that employee will be of one who has falsified or cheated his times, and this tends to work against that employee when he shows up at an interview seeking a job. The employee will be viewed the same as if he claimed a thousand hours with his former employer, but had only flown 500. He or she will be viewed as making a false claim. At a minimum, that employee will lose a share of the time he or she claims, in being competitive for the job. If the employee logged a thousand hours of PIC time out of his total 5,000 hours, while acting as SIC, the employer may discount those thousand hours of time. If the applicant was claiming 2,000 hours PIC total, suddenly the applicant becomes a 1,000 hour PIC pilot, and may not qualify for the job at all.
Being rated for the aircraft does entitle the individual to log the time, when sole manipulator of the controls. It doesn't actually make that person a pilot in command, however, and unless that person is pilot in command, that person ought not be logging the time as such. While he or she can legally do so, it certainly doesn't pass the "smell test" for most employers (in the USA), and it tends to make the applicant look very bad.
