Its time for the FAA to change the terminology

[SkyHog]

CFIs around the country are giving out incorrect information, pilots take the information blindly, then become CFIs and spread the information. Its unfortunate, but because there are some CFIs (who really shouldn't be them, IMHO) that refuse to read the FARs, and instead just guess at them, I think the FAA needs to change PIC into two categories:

Sole Manipulator time, being time in which the pilot was physically moving the controls during flight

Flight Responsibility time, being time in which the pilot was in charge of the actions of the flight, supervising a pilot who is sole manipulator, or is otherwise a required crewmember in a situation where he is not the sole manipulator.

That'd do it. Then I don't have to lose respect for any more CFIs.

 

[TMetzinger]

Hey wait, if you're an airline pilot it gets worse! Let's say you're a typed FO, so you're fully rated in the CRJ you're flying for Ron'sRegional Airline. You duly keep track of all your time in accordance with FAA regs, which means you log your time as PIC when you're flying, and SIC when the Captain is flying.

With me so far?

Now you've got 1000 hours of turbine PIC time according to the FAA. The insurers will generally see it the same way, if you're going to buy a bizjet.

Go apply to SWA (or other major carrier). You have NO turbine PIC time in their eyes, because THEY feel that PIC comes with being the captain who signs for the airplane and ACTS as PIC.

I see the airline's point. Any moron with reasonable math and hand-eye coordination can become a pilot. Being a pilot-in-command is a whole different story. Non-aviation judgement and character (in the fullest sense of the word) make the difference.

This is why the career path is RJ/FO -> RJ/Capt - Major/FO -> Major Capt and not RJ/FO -> Major/FO.

There ARE exceptions, but they are few.

 

[Everskyward]

Go apply to SWA (or other major carrier). You have NO turbine PIC time in their eyes, because THEY feel that PIC comes with being the captain who signs for the airplane and ACTS as PIC.

Then when you go onto more career-oriented pilot forums you will hear similar arguments that you hear here. There is a certain percentage of pilots who will say that you should not log PIC time unless you are the designated PIC for the flight even if you are typed in the airplane and flying that leg.

 

[TMetzinger]

I've got no problem with the airlines, or with those you say "shouldn't" when it comes to logging time. "Can't" is the word I have issue with. Only the FAA gets to say "can't".

 

[Greg Bockelman]

There is a certain percentage of pilots who will say that you should not log PIC time unless you are the designated PIC for the flight even if you are typed in the airplane and flying that leg.

I don't say that. But that is what I do. It is just easier for me to log it all as SIC even though I am entitled to log some of it as PIC. To me it just doesn't matter.

Having said that, I fully understand what I am doing. My issue is with those that don't know the difference.

 

[Everskyward]

I don't say that. But that is what I do. It is just easier for me to log it all as SIC even though I am entitled to log some of it as PIC. To me it just doesn't matter.

Having said that, I fully understand what I am doing. My issue is with those that don't know the difference.

I did it the way you do it for a couple years until someone convinced me I was cheating myself out of PIC time so I switched to the other way but never went back and changed the old entries.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I did it the way you do it for a couple years until someone convinced me I was cheating myself out of PIC time so I switched to the other way but never went back and changed the old entries.

Well...

1) Given how most airlines view PIC time, I don't really think PIC 777 time is of THAT much value.

2) There are logistical issues for me to split out times when I am on break, taxi time and all that other stuff. If this were in something like a Lear or Citation, I can see the value, but the next airline I fly for, heaven forbid it come to that, won't count it anyway. So it is just easier to ignore it and log SIC.

 

[TMetzinger]

Well...

1) Given how most airlines view PIC time, I don't really think PIC 777 time is of THAT much value.

2) There are logistical issues for me to split out times when I am on break, taxi time and all that other stuff. If this were in something like a Lear or Citation, I can see the value, but the next airline I fly for, heaven forbid it come to that, won't count it anyway. So it is just easier to ignore it and log SIC.

Yanno, I just thought of one reason - if you ever apply for a fed flying job , they want so much PIC in the last couple of years. If you've been SICing it all along you may find yourself not making the cut or being ranked lower than you would like.

Now, you may have no interest in flying for the feds, but there are probably other employers that might do the same.

The nice thing about digital logbooks is that it's easy to create an FAA compliant logbook and then make alterations to fit your needs, like converting all your PIC time to "Airline-SIC" time for instance.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Yanno, I just thought of one reason - if you ever apply for a fed flying job , they want so much PIC in the last couple of years. If you've been SICing it all along you may find yourself not making the cut or being ranked lower than you would like.

I guess I will have to check that one out.

 

[Everskyward]

Well...

1) Given how most airlines view PIC time, I don't really think PIC 777 time is of THAT much value.

2) There are logistical issues for me to split out times when I am on break, taxi time and all that other stuff. If this were in something like a Lear or Citation, I can see the value, but the next airline I fly for, heaven forbid it come to that, won't count it anyway. So it is just easier to ignore it and log SIC.

Oh yeah, I understand that. The charter world is a little different, though. Even your employer wants you to show as much PIC time as you can because they are sometimes audited by customers and outside companies. They want to make their crews sound as experienced as possible. Also, when you look for another job, a type rating with PIC in that type is important.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Also, when you look for another job, a type rating with PIC in that type is important.

True. And when I get typed in the Lear and Citation, I will log all the Legally logable PIC that I can get.

 

[poadeleted20]

Part 11 of the FAR's tells you how to recommend this change to the FAR's.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Yanno, I just thought of one reason - if you ever apply for a fed flying job , they want so much PIC in the last couple of years. If you've been SICing it all along you may find yourself not making the cut or being ranked lower than you would like.

My contact in one branch of the FAA says that isn't an issue. Just be flying. Don't know about any other areas of the FAA

 

[Lance F]

I created a separate column in my logbook for SIC PF(pilot flying) vs. SIC PNF. I will use it as PIC time where that is allowed. (Don't really expect to be applying to the majors in this lifetime )

 

[TMetzinger]

My contact in one branch of the FAA says that isn't an issue. Just be flying. Don't know about any other areas of the FAA

I looked again - he's right - they look for time, NOT PIC time with the FAA.

I'll check with customs/DEA again - I'd swear I'd seen some PIC recency requirements, but I may be mistaken.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I created a separate column in my logbook for SIC PF(pilot flying) vs. SIC PNF. I will use it as PIC time where that is allowed. (Don't really expect to be applying to the majors in this lifetime )

Lance, are you typed? SIC PF can't be counted as PIC unless you are typed in the aircraft.

 

[TMetzinger]

I forget when that rewrite happened - I _think_ it used to say that a pilot could log PIC as sole manipulator for an aircraft in which he was rated in category and class, but with the rewrite it now says "rated or has privileges", which means category, class, and type.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I forget when that rewrite happened - I _think_ it used to say that a pilot could log PIC as sole manipulator for an aircraft in which he was rated in category and class, but with the rewrite it now says "rated or has privileges", which means category, class, and type.

I believe the "or has privileges" is a sport pilot thing.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

I forget when that rewrite happened - I _think_ it used to say that a pilot could log PIC as sole manipulator for an aircraft in which he was rated in category and class, but with the rewrite it now says "rated or has privileges", which means category, class, and type.

I believe the "or has privileges" is a sport pilot thing.

My test on that is that if it is written on your Pilot Certificate, you can log it as PIC unless it states otherwise.

 

[SkyHog]

Part 11 of the FAR's tells you how to recommend this change to the FAR's.

I was not aware of that....FAR 11.63 to be exact. That's exciting.

 

[alaskaflyer]

Yanno, I just thought of one reason - if you ever apply for a fed flying job , they want so much PIC in the last couple of years. If you've been SICing it all along you may find yourself not making the cut or being ranked lower than you would like.

Now, you may have no interest in flying for the feds, but there are probably other employers that might do the same.

I guess I will have to check that one out.

Typically Federal positions require as basic qualifications 1500 total time, but only 250 PIC. 100 hours within the last 12 months, though up to half of that may be waived for other experience.

But it doesn't specify 100 hours "PIC", only 100 hours "flying time" within last 12 months.