Logging of Flight Time
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: topspot
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to join the forum late however.
Logging of flight time while not actually being airborne is potentially misleading, and you generally get low performers that turn up with lotsa padding in the LOG BOOK
Example. At our facility we have a 206 "Legend" that is responsible for contract maintenance. He has approx 3000 hrs of flight time which he advises at least 2000 have been spent on the ground. Check and TRG on this individual has revealed he files like a 200 hr pilot but got the job b/c of min hr requirements of 2500 hrs. The hrs he displays relates very little to his ability.
Point is NOT VERY COMPETENT but employed in a flying role. No I'm not responsible for his CHECK & TRG.
GIS
Logging of flight time while not actually being airborne is potentially misleading, and you generally get low performers that turn up with lotsa padding in the LOG BOOK
Example. At our facility we have a 206 "Legend" that is responsible for contract maintenance. He has approx 3000 hrs of flight time which he advises at least 2000 have been spent on the ground. Check and TRG on this individual has revealed he files like a 200 hr pilot but got the job b/c of min hr requirements of 2500 hrs. The hrs he displays relates very little to his ability.
Point is NOT VERY COMPETENT but employed in a flying role. No I'm not responsible for his CHECK & TRG.
GIS
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Pierre et Miquelon
Age: 68
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PF#1,
You occasionally make some good points, but spoil this by your continual condescending and arrogant manner of expressing them. You are the one who is haughty and pompous, not Nick Lappos. Like
This of course is incorrect, because if it were so, one would log flight time every time one did a ground run in a helicopter. Depending on the type, there is normally only a requirement to log engine starts, for cycle counting purposes, in the aircraft technical log, but no flight time, as this has traditionally been from the time the aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of flight . The new rule merely makes it from the time the blades start turning (presumably still, with the intention if flight.
In the last few companies I have worked for, the technical log has two parts, one for block times, to coincide with the time the crew file, and one for actual flight times, used for timing maintenance and component changes.
Many clients are well aware of the difference and some will pay only for actual flight time, rather than block time. Many operators having to use this scheme just revise their hourly contract rates to maintain the same profit level.
You occasionally make some good points, but spoil this by your continual condescending and arrogant manner of expressing them. You are the one who is haughty and pompous, not Nick Lappos. Like
When the blades are turning, the airframe is moving. When the airframe is moving, you are logging time. Period. Why there needs to be any discussion about this is astounding.
In the last few companies I have worked for, the technical log has two parts, one for block times, to coincide with the time the crew file, and one for actual flight times, used for timing maintenance and component changes.
Many clients are well aware of the difference and some will pay only for actual flight time, rather than block time. Many operators having to use this scheme just revise their hourly contract rates to maintain the same profit level.
Nigerian In Law
What about the use of "Davtron", where the tech log and commercial times are controlled by switches on the collective and c-box, i.e. airborne, but the crew record rotors start to rotors stopped in their log books ?
An anomaly perchance ?
Cheers,
NEO
An anomaly perchance ?
Cheers,
NEO
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pprune eating Fan#1.5,
The point you so poorly make is that logging flight time is for pilots, and nothing else in the system matters. You are simply wrong.
The logged time becomes the measure of when to overhaul the aircraft, when to inspect it, when to change its expensive parts, how much you pay to insure it, when to tell the pilots to go home and when to scrap it. It is the single biggest measure of how much we spend to operate the machine.
If you change the way you measure flight time by adding the time not flying (stay with me here, this is getting complex) the amount of flight time measured will go up while you carry no more, and go no farther. (Are you still with me?) Time vs productivity is vastly changed.This means the entire system just got more expensive.
I once suggested to Sikorsky that we wire a squat switch on every gear, and log only the actual time in the air. In an experiment, we tracked 5% less flight time using this system. 5% makes or breaks whole markets, prunefan!
The point you so poorly make is that logging flight time is for pilots, and nothing else in the system matters. You are simply wrong.
The logged time becomes the measure of when to overhaul the aircraft, when to inspect it, when to change its expensive parts, how much you pay to insure it, when to tell the pilots to go home and when to scrap it. It is the single biggest measure of how much we spend to operate the machine.
If you change the way you measure flight time by adding the time not flying (stay with me here, this is getting complex) the amount of flight time measured will go up while you carry no more, and go no farther. (Are you still with me?) Time vs productivity is vastly changed.This means the entire system just got more expensive.
I once suggested to Sikorsky that we wire a squat switch on every gear, and log only the actual time in the air. In an experiment, we tracked 5% less flight time using this system. 5% makes or breaks whole markets, prunefan!
Nick,
5% is a very conservative figure for commercial ops. NEO mentions the Davtron (on the B-212) and I can vouch that typically the pilot flying time was about 30% greater than the recorded airborne (tech log) time. Interestingly, when we introduced the EC-155 (on which airborne time is logged by HUMS), this proportion changed even further to more like 60%! This was because the sector time went down by a third but the turnround times increased (harder to load baggage and pax simultaneously.) Obviously sector length and numbers are the key points and the longer and fewer the sectors, the smaller the difference.
5% is a very conservative figure for commercial ops. NEO mentions the Davtron (on the B-212) and I can vouch that typically the pilot flying time was about 30% greater than the recorded airborne (tech log) time. Interestingly, when we introduced the EC-155 (on which airborne time is logged by HUMS), this proportion changed even further to more like 60%! This was because the sector time went down by a third but the turnround times increased (harder to load baggage and pax simultaneously.) Obviously sector length and numbers are the key points and the longer and fewer the sectors, the smaller the difference.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick - yabbut - if you charge the customer flight time for the time on the ground, then you can easily afford to do the overhauls/retirements a little sooner, and possibly be a little safer while doing it, with more profit. There are two sides to every position, and there are reasons for the operators wanting to log flight time for all operations. To quote a badly overused phrase, "follow the money".
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like to think about PIC-time in the same way as one of my instructors did a couple of years ago when he said something like "If someone gets hurt by the spinning parts, I'll take the blame, so when it's turning I'm logging the time and getting the money."
This is not to be confused with airborne time that goes into the books.
Economics is not my strong side, so I won't comment on that.
/2beers
This is not to be confused with airborne time that goes into the books.
Economics is not my strong side, so I won't comment on that.
/2beers
