There's plenty to learn as PIC that is not in furtherance of a rating.
Where does it say that all dual must be with a CFI? Serious question. I was asked to check out and fly 5hrs with a guy in my buddy's Bonanza he sold that I had over 100hrs PIC (plus 400 in my Travelair by then), all approved by the insurance. I don't know if he logged it dual or not but would it matter?
The fact that you're flying with a CFI does not by itself make it "training time" (aka "dual received"). The CFI must actually be giving you training, and the training must be documented IAW 61.51 including the instructor's signature. Since there is no FAA requirement that a "checkout" be conducted as training, this isn't a given even if it's nearly universally done that way. Note that even a PP could conduct a "checkout" in his/her own plane before allowing another pilot to take it flying, and that certainly would not be "training".
Because the other pilot was not an "authorized instructor" as the FAA defines that term.Why wasn't it dual?
14 CFR 61.1 and 14 CFR 61.51. The only exception is ATP's designated as company instructors giving training to company pilots at a 121 or 135 operation (see the last paragraph under "Authorized Instructor").
Nothing wrong with that, but....
...it would indeed matter if that pilot logged it as "training time". That would be a 61.59 violation since it was not training received from authorized instructor.
Unless the flight in question is offered as official record in the requirements for a certificate, how does it violate a regulation that doesn't apply?Henning may do it that way, but that is not the way pilots generally do it, and it is not sufficient to meet regulatory requirements for things like flight reviews, IPC's, and additional training endorsements, not to mention insurance checkouts requiring training from a CFI, as well as many other situations.
Not exactly true. By law, it is the document you use to "document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:
14 CFR sections 61.59 and 61.51.What does it violate when not given as required training?
You really think you can tell the FAA "These entries which I have certified by my signature as being correct IAW the regulations are not really what they say they are so you should ignore them"?Unless the flight in question is offered as official record in the requirements for a certificate, how does it violate a regulation that doesn't apply?
Depends on whether or not the instructor gives you training on those flights. If s/he does, then it constitutes "training time" and may be logged and signed as such -- and if you paid for it, you probably want it logged accordingly, although nothing in the regulations says you must record it at all unless you want to use it for FAA purposes later. If s/he does not give you training, or s/he is not an authorized instructor, then it is not "training" under these regulations and is not legal to record in your pilot logbook as "training".
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on a lot of things, starting with the rental agency's rules, which probably (based on insurance requirements) prohibit the pilot from acting as PIC in their airplane until the checkout is complete.
Then there's no reason not to log it as training, but nothing wrong with not doing so, either. My original main point is that just because you had a CFI in the right seat, it is not automatically "training" (what we used to call "dual" a long time ago). OTOH, for it to be "training", you must have received that training from an authorized instructor who signed the logbook entry.
It may still be used to do that later on even if the future use is not immediately apparent. E.g., many insurers and rental agencies require some minimum amount of applicable training time even if the current one does not, and that training time you get now may be used to meet that requirement later, but only if it's "training time" signed in your logbook by an authorized instructor.
The term "dual" was deleted from the regulations a long time ago, so logging it as "dual" today would be inappropriate. However, "dual" entries from the past are considered to be "training" today, so if by the use of the term "dual" you really mean "training", then that's what I'm talking about, too.
Me, too. But that doesn't mean I'm always giving training when I'm in the right seat, as implied by two early posts in this thread which said in essence that any time a CFI is in the right seat, it's training and should be logged as such.
Would you be kind enough to cite the regulation which says that?
If you're paying for the CFI, you're paying for him to sign your logbook too. It's pretty tough to prove dual received without that signature. If it's an insurance company mandated checkout with a specified set of conditions, you'll need those signatures to make the insurance company happy.
Unforuntantely, "common friggin' sense" is not a valid argument in the interpretation of Federal regulations. So, I guess you do not have any regulation to support your statement. OTOH, I am a CFI, and I have been paid for flying with someone without giving them training, and I can assure you I did not sign their logbook for training in those cases.
Exactly. The fact that I also have a CFI ticket would be irrelevant. And that's not a "rogue air-taxi operation" if I'm not supplying the airplane. Example: Several times after completing an IR practical test, my trainee has felt too wiped out to fly home, and asked me to take that leg. No training, but I'm flying his/her plane from the right seat, so I log it but it doesn't go in the aircraft owner's log as training or anything else even though I'm still getting paid to do it.
I'm going to make the wild and crazy assumption that by
James is referring to events that are considered to be training that takes place in an aircraft in flight.
OTOH all of the checkouts I've received (and there have been a lot) have been logged and endorsed by the instructor as dual. Truthfully, I have never been checked out where I did not learn something from the instructor, even in aircraft that I've flown more hours than the instructor or even those I've taught in.