Is it legal for a PPL flying in IMC on a IFR flight plan with someone IFR rated?

[Palmpilot]

Legal Interpretation # 84-29

November 07, 1984

Mr. Joseph P. Carr

Dear Mr. Carr:

This is in response to your letter asking questions about
instrument flight time.

First, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.51(c)(4) of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) regarding the logging of
instrument flight time. You ask whether, for instance, a flight
over the ocean on a moonless night without a discernible horizon
could be logged as actual instrument flight time.

Second, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.57(e)(2) of
the FAR, noting that Advisory Circular 61-65A, Certification:
Pilots and Flight Instructors, seems to contain advice contrary
to your understanding of the rule.

As you know, Section 61.51(c)(4) provides rules for the logging
of instrument flight time which may be used to meet the
requirements of a certificate or rating, or to meet the recent
flight experience requirements of Part 61. That section
provides, in part, that a pilot may log as instrument flight time
only that time during which he or she operates the aircraft
solely by reference to instruments, under actual (instrument
meteorological conditions (i.m.c.)) or simulated instrument
flight conditions. "Simulated" instrument conditions occur when
the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally
restricted, such as by a hood or goggles. "Actual" instrument
flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it
necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order
to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these
conditions involve adverse weather conditions.

To answer your first question, actual instrument conditions may
occur in the case you described, a moonless night over the ocean
with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is
necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. The
determination as to whether flight by reference to instruments is
necessary is somewhat subjective, and based in part on the sound
judgement of the pilot. Note that, under Section 61.51(b)(3),
the pilot must log the conditions of the flight. The log should
include the reasons for determining that the flight was under
actual instrument conditions in case the pilot later would be
called on to prove that the actual instrument flight time logged
was legitimate.

To answer your second question, your understanding of Section
61.57(e) is correct. Section 61.57(e) provides currency
requirements for acting as pilot in command (PIC) under
instrument flight rules (IFR) or in weather conditions less than
the minimums for visual flight rules (VFR). No pilot may act as
PIC under those conditions unless she or he has, within the last
six months, logged the number of hours of instrument flight time,
including the number of approaches, indicated in Section
61.57(e)(1)(i) or (ii). When that six-month currency period
lapses, that is, on the day the pilot no longer has the required
instrument flight time within the last six months, the pilot may
in the next six months regain her or his currency simply by
logging the required instrument flight time. Note that, during
this second six-mont period, Section 61.57(e)(1) prohibits the
pilot from acting as PIC under IFR or below VFR minimums
(i.m.c.). If that second six-month period runs without the pilot
regaining currency, she or he may only again become qualified to
act as PIC under IFR or in weather below VFR minimums (i.m.c.) by
passing an instrument competency check as described in Section
61.57(e)(2).

Advisory Circular 61-65A, paragraph 15a, explained in part that a
pilot failing to meet the recency of instrument experience
requirements for a period of 12 months must pass an instrument
competency check. This simply meant that, when a pilot becomes
qualified to act as PIC under the instrument conditions
described, he or she has at least a 12-month period in which
currency may be maintained or regained by logging the required
instrument flight time. After that 12-month period, if currency
has not been maintained or regained, the pilot must pass an
instrument competency check. Advisory Circular 61-65A was not
intended to expand the second six-month "grace" period to 12
months. As you note, the Advisory Circular has been changed, and
paragraph 15 was rewritten to more accurately reflect the
requirements of Section 61.57(e)(2).

Sincerely,

John H. Cassady
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations & Enforcement Division

 

[Palmpilot]

By the way, I got that letter from a compendium of logging interpretations that I saved in January of 2018. I also saved a link to it. I think I remember Midlifeflyer posting it.

http://www.offhand.org/amb/pic-time.txt

 

[Hugh Despenser]

Nonsense. An instrument rating on the instructor certificate is only needed to log instrument instruction for certain certificates/ratings and IPCs. A regular CFI is free to instruct otherwise in actual conditions. Further, an instructor rating is not required at all for a pilot in command to allow someone else to manipulate the controls in any meteorological conditions.

Yes.
So I was wrong in my post about a non-instrument rated pilot being able to log instrument time while in IMC. I stand corrected. Thank You.
The OP asked, “Can I be PIC?”

I’m sorry. I understand that is a loaded question, but the answer is no.
While, as you guys corrected me, he can log PIC, he can’t BE PIC.

Further, that Speranza letter with the FAA legal interpretation sounds goofy to me.
A flight is operating in IMC. Pilot A is letting pilot B manipulate the controls so, according to the FAA legal, Pilot A cannot log PIC for that time simply because only one pilot is required for the type of airplane they are flying?
That is one of the dumbest interpretations I have ever heard. It doesn’t even begin to make sense.
Pilot A is the only one on board fully qualified to be there given the nature of the operation.

I would argue that if nothing else, in this scenario, Pilot A is acting as a safety pilot for pilot B since Pilot B is not qualified to be in those conditions by him/herself. So Pilot A can most certainly log PIC time while B is flying.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
“A regular CFI is free to instruct otherwise in actual conditions.”

Instruct what exactly? Toward what goal?
None of what a non CFII “instructs” in actual conditions is logable towards anything so what’s the point besides just splitting hairs?

 

[Hugh Despenser]

Might want to let that CFII expire because, damn, there's a lot of wrong being said.

As I stated above, I stand corrected.
As for your comment Fred, you might want to learn how to post something constructive and informative, or be otherwise quiet.

Have a great day.

 

[flyingron]

There is only ONE time the regulations talk about safety pilot and that is 91.119. Having a second pilot along because the pilot flying isn't eligible to be the pilot in command doesn't make second pilot a "safety pilot." It merely makes him the pilot in command. In the case where there isn't "more than one pilot required by type certificate or under the regulations" he can't log it. As we've been saying all along: Being PIC is not a necessary nor sufficient condition to log PIC.

A CFI for a student training for his private could go and do the three hours of "flight by instruments" in actual if they wanted. When I was doing some type-specific training, I flew with a non-II in acutal. Perfectly legal. He was teaching me how to fly this particular aircraft, not training me for an instrument rating or the the ten hours for the commerical.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Further, that Speranza letter with the FAA legal interpretation sounds goofy to me

Some of the results of disassociating logging from acting will definitely sound goofy until you get used to it. But they are based on the words of 61.51 as consistently applied by the FAA for decades. If you go through the logging reg, you won’t find anything that allows the acting PIC in Speranza to log a single minute.

Sometimes this helps: officially, logging is just a record to show that you meet the FAA‘s requirements for the FAA’s certificates, the FAA ‘s ratings, and currency as defined by … yep … the FAA. So the FAA gets to say what time counts for those and what times don’t.

 

[EdFred]

As I stated above, I stand corrected.
As for your comment Fred, you might want to learn how to post something constructive and informative, or be otherwise quiet.

Have a great day.

Oh you mean like the sticky on this entire subject at the top of this forum?

The definitive PIC thread.

There is some definite confusion of what PIC (Pilot In Command) is, who is PIC, when one logs PIC, why the PIC can’t log PIC in some situations, and why someone who can’t act as PIC can log PIC. So let’s see if we can break it down and try to grasp that elusive concept of Acting PIC vs logging...

www.pilotsofamerica.com

That kind of informative? Read it and learn something, before opening your yap about me.