Certificate revocation and civil penalties by the FAA for 61.69 falsification...
... and referral for criminal prosecution in extreme cases. 18 USC §1001
Say what? That’s crazy.
Section 61.[5]9 does not apply to all log book entries generally.
Not really. Just depends on whether or not the simulator that it runs on is FAA approved or not.
Do I remember rightly that the Redbird simulators use MSFS?
I agree, that's part of what I like about aviation, it demands intellectual capacity
That or X-Plane iirc
They improve significantly. Watching your student's mistake, and talking them through fixing them, leads to much better flying skills from the CFI as well as improvement in situational awareness.
I think the problem would come in with the requirement, from 61.51(a), to keep a your record in a manner that is acceptable to the Administrator. If your required entries are mixed with with a bunch of fraudulent entries, I don't think the logbook will pass that test.
Of course. However, it's a cautionary tale about what other people know about things you have done. This does not only have to do with aviation matters...
That also only apples to time required to be logged.
Of course not..Only the ones that count. There was one case where the pilot argued his padding time in type was irrelevant to his checkride because he exceeded requirements with the legitimate ones.
If you have a logbook, with a significant amount of fraudulent entries mixed in with the required legitimate ones, how do you tell them apart? How is a record with no way of knowing which entries are correct going to meet the 'acceptable to the Administrator' requirement?
No doubt. The question, and the post that started this sub thread, aren't about checkrides though.
You clearly annotate which ones are which.
As a general proposition, as stated, this is not necessarily true.
1.45 rounds to 1.5. 1.44 rounds to 1.4.
Doesn't even have to be dishonest. ASIs have told me when they investigate a pilot deviation, even an innocent one like the common IFR altitude bust, they often find others.
that’s a good theory, but it doesn’t necessarily average out in practice.
While it's theoretically possible for enough of the rounding errors to stack up in the same direction to throw off the cumulative total of logged time by a meaningful percentage, that would be an extremely rare event if the standard rules of rounding are applied. For one thing, adding up to greater than 5% of the total would require the average length of all the flights to be less than one hour.
I guess it depends on your definition of “all evens out”.
Indeed. And I wrote that backwards, meant to be "staying VFR while flying IMC" .. I bet there are a lot of people who always manage to "find a hole" .. there was a guy in a Mooney a few years ago blasting along in the clouds not talking to anyone and drilled into a mountain top.. looked like he was tracking the VOR
Oh for sure.. "same altitude, 3 o'clock, 2 miles, not talking to him" <- I love replying with a curt "we're IMC" to those.. which is usually followed by a climb or descent or turn heading X instruction
For each log book entry that may date months or even years in the past? Who has the time for that?
