Night currency with co pilot?

D

DaveInPA

Pre-Flight
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
51
Display Name
Display name:
Dave
I have lots of hours in my plane (Seneca 3) but still haven’t flown at night in it. Getting CFIs these days with multi currency willing to do night flying is very hard.

is it legal to get my 3 TOs and landings with a fellow pilot and owner of the plane? Figured they know the plane well enough to call a go around if they don’t like what they see.
 
Pretty sure you know the answer to that question.
 
Presuming that:
a) Your friend is not a CFI, and
b) You are not either, or not giving your friend dual instruction if you are one, and
c) You're not night current, then:
Your friend needs to:
i) be qualified to act as PIC (y'know, BFR/med/endorsed/etc)
ii) be current to carry passengers at night as PIC, and
iii) agree to be PIC for the flight. <--for instance, on the insurance, etc.
 
my friend is legal in cat, class, and day current In type. Neither of us cfi.

so one of us needs to be night current for this to work?
 
Yep- you can't carry a passenger for your night currency. If both of you are not current, then neither is qualified to be PIC with a passenger.
 
You could attempt to argue that neither of you are passengers, since each of you
- is a pilot
- co-owns the airplane
- is a crewmember (not to be confused with required crewmember) under FAR 1.1; one person's task is to fly, the other to supervise

Would your argument be successful under legal scrutiny? No idea.
 
If you think your friend is more qualified, why not just have him do three stop and goes or 3 landing/taxi back. He's now qualified then he can go with you..
 
Hang 4 said:
If you think your friend is more qualified, why not just have him do three stop and goes or 3 landing/taxi back. He's now qualified then he can go with you..
Click to expand...
Agreed, a pilot doesn't have to be night current to fly solo at night under FAA regs. Night currency is only required when you're carrying passengers.
 
dmspilot said:
You could attempt to argue that neither of you are passengers, since each of you
- is a pilot
- co-owns the airplane
- is a crewmember (not to be confused with required crewmember) under FAR 1.1; one person's task is to fly, the other to supervise

Would your argument be successful under legal scrutiny? No idea.
Click to expand...
Probably not. Only one of them - the PIC - is required crew, the non-current pilot is basically a passenger the PIC is allowing to fly and land.

Neither CFI nor student needing to be night current because neither is considered to be a passenger is kind of a special case. One of those situations where the FAA has created special CFI exceptions. I doubt they would apply it to a non-CFI.
 
DaveInPA said:
my friend is legal in cat, class, and day current In type. Neither of us cfi.
so one of us needs to be night current for this to work?
Click to expand...

To fly together, yes.
Or, to be more precise... one of you needs to be acting as the PIC for the flight, and whoever that person is needs to be night-current.
Because the non-PIC is a "passenger," even if they have their hands on the controls and are making the landings.
 
kath said:
To fly together, yes.
Or, to be more precise... one of you needs to be acting as the PIC for the flight, and whoever that person is needs to be night-current.
Because the non-PIC is a "passenger," even if they have their hands on the controls and are making the landings.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting. I was always under impression that it was solo or with CFI. So you don’t have to be PIC to make those landings count?
 
Ok so if I get someone rated for the plane and night current they can act as PIC while I do my 3 landings. They don’t need to be a CFI….
 
DaveInPA said:
my friend is legal in cat, class, and day current In type. Neither of us cfi.

so one of us needs to be night current for this to work?
Click to expand...
What do you think currency is for?
 
DaveInPA said:
Ok so if I get someone rated for the plane and night current they can act as PIC while I do my 3 landings. They don’t need to be a CFI….
Click to expand...
That person needs to also be willing to act as PIC and accept responsibility if things don't go according to plan.
 
Or you can get night current solo. If not confident to do that, let friend get current solo, then fly with you with him PIC.
 
If you have a MEI, he does not need 5 hours make / Model for a night currency.
 
You could just go up by yourself and do 3 landings. If you’re nervous, start just after sunset and do several full stop landings and ease into the dark. An hour after sunset, they start counting.

you’re not a student, right? You have flown at night before?
 
benyflyguy said:
That’s interesting. I was always under impression that it was solo or with CFI. So you don’t have to be PIC to make those landings count?
Click to expand...
That's right, you don't. (You do have to have whatever rating is appropriate for the aircraft.)
Being PIC (aka "acting as" PIC) is governed by 14 CFR 1.1.
Logging PIC is governed by 14 CFR 61.51(e).

Two different concepts using the term "PIC." No wonder people get confused.
 
bflynn said:
You could just go up by yourself and do 3 landings. If you’re nervous, start just after sunset and do several full stop landings and ease into the dark. An hour after sunset, they start counting.

you’re not a student, right? You have flown at night before?
Click to expand...


This is what I am thinking. You don't need anyone with you. Take off at dusk and do a landing after dark at your home airport. If you feel good about it do 2 more and your done.

This is the only way without a CFI for your plane.
 
benyflyguy said:
That’s interesting. I was always under impression that it was solo or with CFI. So you don’t have to be PIC to make those landings count?
Click to expand...
What do the words of the regulation say? Anything there about acting as PIC?
 
Jeez. The FAA doesn't no require insurance considerations to determine who is PIC or if the flight is legal. Insurance coverage issues are more than just a handshake about who is PIC, as well.

Who owns the airplane doesn't enter into whether someone is a passenger or not.

And no, 61.56 just requires the person wanting to be PIC to "make three takeoffs and landings." In fact, they didn't even need to be rated in the aircraft at the time they do that .
 
I see this type of thing all the time with people asking logging certain ways in a single pilot plane, and one part I feel always gets overlooked, maybe I’m wrong, but the airplane is type certificated for single pilot. Assuming you don’t have an FAA OpSec authorizing dual pilot (PIC/SIC) operations I don’t see how that could work.

how can one legally log the flight time and the landings if you are not the PIC, or receiving instruction, or one is acting as a safety pilot (which that would be under the hood so can’t land). So if both of you legally can not log it how can you possibly get night current this way?
 
Gary Ward said:
This is what I am thinking. You don't need anyone with you. Take off at dusk and do a landing after dark at your home airport. If you feel good about it do 2 more and your done.

This is the only way without a CFI for your plane.
Click to expand...
JustinD said:
how can one legally log the flight time and the landings if you are not the PIC, or receiving instruction, or one is acting as a safety pilot (which that would be under the hood so can’t land). So if both of you legally can not log it how can you possibly get night current this way?
Click to expand...
I think you need to go back and read the past 40 years of official FAA interpretations distinguishing logging PIC (and other types of) flight time from acting as PIC.

You can start with my article in IFR Magazine, "Logging vs. Being PIC." I tried to give all the historical references so you can verify them yourself.
 
Last edited:
DaveInPA said:
Getting CFIs these days with multi currency willing to do night flying is very hard.
Click to expand...

Is it really? Wow. Come on out to Oklahoma, I am very multi current and willing to fly at night.

Wait, is it mostly that there aren't any MEIs available near you, or is it that the ones that are, aren't willing to fly at night? That seems like an odd choice, given that "night flying is dangerous in a single-engine" is one of the reasons often given for why people buy twins. And heck, this time of year it's not like you even need to stay up THAT late anymore, not like 2 months ago.

In about a month I'll start getting a lot of calls for people wanting to go up to get night current in their aircraft. They're not required to do it with me as a CFI, of course. But many of them feel more comfortable that way, especially since for many of them it has been a year since they have landed at night, that being the last time we did this.
 
JustinD said:
So if both of you legally can not log it how can you possibly get night current this way?
Click to expand...

How did this turn into a discussion of both pilots trying to log time simultaneously?
 
kath said:
Because the non-PIC is a "passenger," even if they have their hands on the controls and are making the landings.
Click to expand...
Why? Why does the other rated pilot in the airplane have to be a "passenger"? Why can't there be two pilots on board?

JustinD said:
I see this type of thing all the time with people asking logging certain ways in a single pilot plane, and one part I feel always gets overlooked, maybe I’m wrong, but the airplane is type certificated for single pilot. Assuming you don’t have an FAA OpSec authorizing dual pilot (PIC/SIC) operations I don’t see how that could work.
Click to expand...
Again, why? Where does it say that "one pilot" is the maximum you can have.

Real world example. For long range flights, the FAA requires a rest pilot (RFO) for flights over 8 hours. Our contract with the company requires them to have an RFO for flights over 7+30. Note that this is not in our FOM--which would carry the weight of an FAR--it's in the pilot contract. So, our company puts an extra pilot on the plane even though the FAA says they aren't needed. All we need is two, but we have three. Is that third pilot now a "passenger"? Can we allow that "passenger/pilot" to sit in the seat while we're in the back snoozing?

What says you can't put extra pilots on an airplane without them being passengers?
 
Sluggo63 said:
Why? Why does the other rated pilot in the airplane have to be a "passenger"? Why can't there be two pilots on board?

Again, why? Where does it say that "one pilot" is the maximum you can have.

Real world example. For long range flights, the FAA requires a rest pilot (RFO) for flights over 8 hours. Our contract with the company requires them to have an RFO for flights over 7+30. Note that this is not in our FOM--which would carry the weight of an FAR--it's in the pilot contract. So, our company puts an extra pilot on the plane even though the FAA says they aren't needed. All we need is two, but we have three. Is that third pilot now a "passenger"? Can we allow that "passenger/pilot" to sit in the seat while we're in the back snoozing?

What says you can't put extra pilots on an airplane without them being passengers?
Click to expand...

In this case the Seneca isn't certified as nor is it being operated under 135 or 121 or anything else approved by the FAA that would allow it to be a two (or more) pilot crew. There's also an interpretation letter that addresses a similar case: IFR and VFR pilot flying under IFR.
 
I have no experience with airlines, so I can’t speak to contracts and SOPs. But, the FAA answer is “required crew member”. A 172 doesn’t REQUIRE more than one pilot, unless that pilot is under the hood. So, any humans (certificated or not) in the plane with an un-hooded pilot are pax. (Unless they’re a CFI giving instruction; I think we’ve covered that one)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
P51_B_1800x1800.jpg


Night currency.?? Not a problem with the right pen...

https://www.atlasstationers.com/pro...MItY2G_Jr88gIVDh6tBh15UQoSEAQYByABEgJKGvD_BwE




(no, of course not. Get current the legal way)
 
crash7 said:
I have no experience with airlines, so I can’t speak to contracts and SOPs. But, the FAA answer is “required crew member”. A 172 doesn’t REQUIRE more than one pilot, unless that pilot is under the hood. So, any humans (certificated or not) in the plane with an un-hooded pilot are pax.
Click to expand...

There is no such definition of passenger as "not a required crewmember". If there was, there would be no need for the FAA to distinguish between crewmembers and required crewmembers.
 
EdFred said:
In this case the Seneca isn't certified as nor is it being operated under 135 or 121 or anything else approved by the FAA that would allow it to be a two (or more) pilot crew. There's also an interpretation letter that addresses a similar case: IFR and VFR pilot flying under IFR.
Click to expand...
I get it. I read a couple interpretations that show that I'm incorrect. It just seems like the FAA is forcing people to be less safe. You can go out solo and get yourself current all by yourself, but if you take another (non-CFI) pilot with you who is rated and current, they are all of a sudden a passenger and you can't do the takeoffs and landing. Seems counter intuitive.

It's funny how POA wraps itself around the axle on the minutia of some of these issues, but on others it is more than happy to "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" itself into "what nobody knows won't hurt you."
 
dmspilot said:
There is no such definition of passenger as "not a required crewmember". If there was, there would be no need for the FAA to distinguish between crewmembers and required crewmembers.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure if we’re saying the same thing or not. If a human is in a 172 and they’re not a “required crew member”, then what are they?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
dmspilot said:
There is no such definition of passenger as "not a required crewmember". If there was, there would be no need for the FAA to distinguish between crewmembers and required crewmembers.
Click to expand...
I agree. In the military and (sort of) the airlines, there's the concept of ACM (additional crew member). We would often fly in the AF with a couple extra pilots on board, that were above and beyond the "required" crew compliment of "two pilots." They weren't passengers just because they weren't required, they were crewmembers. Same with my airline example. We often fly with pilots who aren't "required" but are still there. In fact, I know of one airline (United) who classifies jumpseaters as "additional crew members" even though I don't fly for that company or am even qualified to fly that airplane.

It just seems like a weird stance for the FAA to take. You would think they would see the benefit of having an additional rated pilot on board, even if they weren't a CFI.
 
crash7 said:
I’m not sure if we’re saying the same thing or not. If a human is in a 172 and they’re not a “required crew member”, then what are they?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
If they are a rated pilot, I'd call them an "additional crewmember."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top