Another logging question non-PIC non-Dual

Can I interject a question? Where in the regulations (or AIM) do I find the words "sign for the airplane"?

When I was a renter pilot, long before most of you were born, I signed rental agreements. They were not specific to tail number, just forms attesting to my certificates, etc that would satisfy the insurance company.

Then I became an instructor...the school had a matrix of time blocks and tail numbers and my name was written in an appropriate block by me or one of the desk personnel. When the time arrived, I just took the keys and headed for the airplane...didn't sign anything.

As a 135 pilot, i may have signed a manifest...just can't remember at this late date.

So when do Part 91 pilots "sign for the airplane" for any regulatory purpose?

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
Can I interject a question? Where in the regulations (or AIM) do I find the words "sign for the airplane"?

When I was a renter pilot, long before most of you were born, I signed rental agreements. They were not specific to tail number, just forms attesting to my certificates, etc that would satisfy the insurance company.

Then I became an instructor...the school had a matrix of time blocks and tail numbers and my name was written in an appropriate block by me or one of the desk personnel. When the time arrived, I just took the keys and headed for the airplane...didn't sign anything.

As a 135 pilot, i may have signed a manifest...just can't remember at this late date.

So when do Part 91 pilots "sign for the airplane" for any regulatory purpose?

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...
I asked the same thing earlier in the thread and was told that it may have been a holdover from the military. I think that was the answer, anyway. Others have said they have heard it used frequently. I have only heard it used on internet boards and have never hear a person say it in real life even though I work for a company which does 135 and I have worked with a number of former military pilots.
 
If you have to ask, you're a fake pilot and can only log fake PIC.
 
Kritchlow said:
I agree with this for the most part, but I'm not sure it's totally inconsequential. For the masses it is, but for the professional...??

I lived the 91K/135 life for 20 years prior to my current 121. All our FO's were typed in the airplane. If during the 5 years prior to upgrade they logged 2000 hours PIC is not inconsequential IMO (5 years, 800hrs/yr, 1/2 time sole manipulator). Airlines even more so. 10 years SIC at the controls of a 747 at 1000 hrs a year... You get the picture.
Again, most guys don't do this to that extent so I agree in most circumstances it is indeed inconsequential.
Click to expand...
So long as they don't try to falsely claim the 2000 hours was time acting as the pilot in command of the flight with all of its requirements and responsibilities, it's still inconsequential. Especially for the professions who, of course, would not make that claim (since it would be unprofessional to do so).
 
EdFred said:
I have less than 50hrs of "fake" PIC time. In fact, I may have less than 40hrs of "fake" PIC time. My safety pilots have never been qualified to act as PIC, and I never safety-pilot for anyone.
Click to expand...
I have some. I do some instruction for pilots in their own aircraft and, unless they are not qualified to perform the operations, we make it clear they are PIC in their own aircraft. But I log PIC because I'm instructing.
 
bobmrg said:
...

So when do Part 91 pilots "sign for the airplane" for any regulatory purpose?

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Bob, that's just shorthand for saying "are you the PIC as defined in FAR 1" ?

Back in the Cold War Air Force the PIC did sign a form at the duty desk to that effect when we 'stepped' (to the airplane).

If you are a sole owner, you could say you 'signed for the airplane' when you signed the check that bought the airplane.

In every operation there should be one and only one pilot who meets this definition at any given time during a flight:

Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;
(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and
(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.
Click to expand...

If you have two pilots and you're not sure who is really in charge, then you have serious safety issue.

And of course, being the FAA, in reality the FAA may determine that the most qualified pilot on the airplane (according to somebody sitting at a desk at the time) is the real PIC, even if he or she did not 'sign for the airplane' and was not 'manipulating the controls'.

Because the FAA considers that the FARs are whatever they say they are at any given moment in time.
 
Everyone is avoiding the real issue here.... "How do you feel". Last thursday 16 FAA lawyers sat down with 15 internet lolyers and they played pokemon with various legal interpretations then took the winning interpretation and marched it to the supreme court who then conducted a 15 hour statistical analysis of cost/benefit of logging PIC time.

The result was: Log PIC time if you feel you were PIC deep down in your heart. Even if you were on the ground and saw an airplane fly over, but you felt deep down inside you could use magical powers to manipulate the controls, you are PIC.

Right now binder and binder are on the case to try and get more legalese distributed to the community for the benefit of us all
 
midlifeflyer said:
So long as they don't try to falsely claim the 2000 hours was time acting as the pilot in command of the flight with all of its requirements and responsibilities, it's still inconsequential. Especially for the professions who, of course, would not make that claim (since it would be unprofessional to do so).
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
JimNtexas said:
Because Ron, I live the actual real world called 'planet earth'.
Click to expand...
IOW, you're making up your own answers without regard for the regulations. Thanks.

As I said earlier, your "pilot logbook" is prepared for the FAA by the FAA's rules (14 CFR 61.51, to be exact). Use that for all FAA purposes when the FAA asks for "PIC time". If you log PIC time when you are the PIC ("signed for the airplane") but not authorized by the FAA to log PIC time per 14 CFR 61.51(e)), you're risking the FAA's wrath, including a potential 61.59 violation and the inevitable revocation that comes with it. So fill your FAA pilot logbook out by the FAA's rules.

OTOH, an application for aviation employment should be filled out according to the stated instructions of the potential employer. If that requires you to keep some extra column(s) properly labeled as such in your logbook to keep track of various sorts of time that employer wants tracked in a particular manner, then do so. And don't try to put the regular 14 CFR 61.51(e) PIC time from your logbook on that application form if the employer wants something else lest you not get the job you want.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
Probably tongue-in-cheek but just in case...
Most DPEs who make the flight entry in your logbook will enter it as PIC time. They also typically don't do the entry until after announcing you've passed. And if they don't, just do it when you get home if you care.
Click to expand...

I just looked at my last three checkrides and the DPEs logged them all as PIC.
 
Henning said:
I just looked at my last three checkrides and the DPEs logged them all as PIC.
Click to expand...
Me too (actually just my private counts since, having only ASEL ratings, I was entitled to log PIC on the others). Just like I said.
 
Ron Levy said:
IOW, you're making up your own answers without regard for the regulations. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Ron, at this point I think most people understand the FAA rules about logging (I did NOT completely understand it until I came here), but that doesn't mean people feel it's a the right thing to do, or more importantly a good assessment of true "Pilot in Command" experience. Yes, we know it's legal and proper. Still, in many people's mind, does not make it the best representation of ones experience.
 
Kritchlow said:
Ron, at this point I think most people understand the FAA rules about logging (I did NOT completely understand it until I came here), but that doesn't mean people feel it's a the right thing to do, or more importantly a good assessment of true "Pilot in Command" experience. Yes, we know it's legal and proper. Still, in many people's mind, does not make it the best representation of ones experience.
Click to expand...
I think it's your statement about "the right thing to do" which annoys some people here. I personally don't care what others do but if anything is "right" then it's the FAA way unless you are filling out a form with other instructions.
 
Kritchlow said:
Ron, at this point I think most people understand the FAA rules about logging (I did NOT completely understand it until I came here), but that doesn't mean people feel it's a the right thing to do, or more importantly a good assessment of true "Pilot in Command" experience. Yes, we know it's legal and proper. Still, in many people's mind, does not make it the best representation of ones experience.
Click to expand...
I've never said otherwise. But the question was about logging PIC time, and the FAA's answer is pretty clear no matter what SWA wants or any of us think should constitute "PIC time". The rest is just whining.
 
Everskyward said:
I think it's your statement about "the right thing to do" which annoys some people here. I personally don't care what others do but if anything is "right" then it's the FAA way unless you are filling out a form with other instructions.
Click to expand...

The quote is "people feel it's the right thing to do". Huge difference in my opinion.

But I do understand your point..
 
Ron Levy said:
I've never said otherwise. But the question was about logging PIC time, and the FAA's answer is pretty clear no matter what SWA wants or any of us think should constitute "PIC time". The rest is just whining.
Click to expand...

True, but you know as well as anyone that the original question by an OP morphs throughout the thread.
 
I think "the right thing to do" and the FAA don't belong in the same sentence. The FAA only cares about liability, and nothing more.
 
EdFred said:
If you have to ask, you're a fake pilot and can only log fake PIC.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should update your flowchart to help identify "Fake PIC" time.

Make sure you include PIC when with a DPE.
 
SkyHog said:
I think "the right thing to do" and the FAA don't belong in the same sentence. The FAA only cares about liability, and nothing more.
Click to expand...
The FAA is a governmental entity. Although some operational activities carry some liabilities (because the government has agreed in can be sued about those), generally speaking Regulatory functions do not have potential liabilities assiciated with them.

IOW, ATC vectirs two airplanes into a crash = liability. Family of 4 killed because the currency rules aren't strict enough = no liability.

Google "governmental immunity."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top