logging PIC vs. acting

R

Rose2012

Pre-Flight
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
75
Display Name
Display name:
Rose2012
I hate asking this question, but this isn't really looking for the answer as much as how to deal with the situation.

Background: I've been working at getting back into flying for the past few months now, although not as quickly as I'd hoped. I've logged about 15 hours this summer. Have a commercial certificate and current medical, no current BFR.

I just realized the CFI I've been flying with hasn't been logging my training in my logbook as PIC. Since I'm rated in the category and class of the aircraft and sole manipulator of the control, I can log it (yes?). Am I missing something? If I'm correct, how do I bring this up to him? Is there any reason he'd be logging it as dual received only?
 
Force of habit. Fix it. And from now on, you fill out the times, and have him fill in the remarks.
 
I guess I'll make corrections when we're all done. Last time I questioned a CFI (regarding the 1 hour of ground for a BFR), it did not go well, so I'm a little gun shy about it.
 
Rose2012 said:
I guess I'll make corrections when we're all done. Last time I questioned a CFI (regarding the 1 hour of ground for a BFR), it did not go well, so I'm a little gun shy about it.
Click to expand...
Question authority! :D

Seriously, look it up in the FARs and formulate your argument. You'll be teaching your CFI something. If he or she doesn't listen, oh well, but at least you'll know you're right.
 
Everskyward said:
Question authority! :D
Click to expand...

Last time I questioned a CFI's authority, it was telling the the one doing my BFR that I was exempt from the hour of ground under §61.56 (f). He accused me of making it up and refused to fly with me again, much less sign off my BFR. :mad2:

Confidence is an issue with me right now - I never know if I'm right anymore.
 
Rose2012 said:
Last time I questioned a CFI's authority, it was telling the the one doing my BFR that I was exempt from the hour of ground under §61.56 (f). He accused me of making it up and refused to fly with me again, much less sign off my BFR. :mad2:

Confidence is an issue with me right now - I never know if I'm right anymore.
Click to expand...

I think he did you a favor. Sounds like someone with whom you shouldn't waste your time.
 
Last edited:
Rose2012 said:
Last time I questioned a CFI's authority, it was telling the the one doing my BFR that I was exempt from the hour of ground under §61.56 (f). He accused me of making it up and refused to fly with me again, much less sign off my BFR. :mad2:
Click to expand...
How could he accuse you of making it up if you showed him the reg?
 
Everskyward said:
How could he accuse you of making it up if you showed him the reg?
Click to expand...

I didn't. The discussion happened on the ramp and he stormed off once we got inside. Ancient history though - I just brought it up to explain why I'm hesitant to correct this guy. I feel like people know something I don't...
 
Rose2012 said:
I didn't. The discussion happened on the ramp and he stormed off once we got inside. Ancient history though - I just brought it up to explain why I'm hesitant to correct this guy. I feel like people know something I don't...
Click to expand...
Rose. If the guy won't acknowledge the source material, why do you want to fly with that guy? WALK. You can't rescue him.
 
Rose2012 said:
I didn't. The discussion happened on the ramp and he stormed off once we got inside. Ancient history though - I just brought it up to explain why I'm hesitant to correct this guy. I feel like people know something I don't...
Click to expand...
You could do it in a non-confrontational way. Say, "I was under the impression that X is true because [insert appropriate regulations here]. What do you think?"
 
bbchien said:
Rose. If the guy won't acknowledge the source material, why do you want to fly with that guy? WALK. You can't rescue him.
Click to expand...
Different CFI. The 1 hour of ground thing happened years ago.

Everskyward said:
You could do it in a non-confrontational way. Say, "I was under the impression that X is true because [insert appropriate regulations here]. What do you think?"
Click to expand...

I like this, thanks. I have a hard time not being confrontational, so a lot of times I just back down. :wink2:
 
Rose2012 said:
I like this, thanks. I have a hard time not being confrontational, so a lot of times I just back down. :wink2:
Click to expand...
Then if he still disagrees change your logbook later. ;)

You aren't going to change everyone's mind even if you are right but at least you will have said your piece.
 
Rose2012 said:
Last time I questioned a CFI's authority, it was telling the the one doing my BFR that I was exempt from the hour of ground under §61.56 (f). He accused me of making it up and refused to fly with me again, much less sign off my BFR. :mad2:

Confidence is an issue with me right now - I never know if I'm right anymore.
Click to expand...
JOOC, how was it you were exempt from the ground training? I'm not seeing that in this thread.
 
Ron Levy said:
JOOC, how was it you were exempt from the ground training? I'm not seeing that in this thread.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh, and now the lack of confidence is back.

I had renewed my CFI not two months before that happened.
 
For some reason, plenty of CFIs seem to have trouble with this one. I had to diplomatically correct a very experienced CFI/DPE on a similar point (a PP training for high performance endorsement, instructor wanted to log it as dual only).
 
Rose2012 said:
I hate asking this question, but this isn't really looking for the answer as much as how to deal with the situation.

Background: I've been working at getting back into flying for the past few months now, although not as quickly as I'd hoped. I've logged about 15 hours this summer. Have a commercial certificate and current medical, no current BFR.

I just realized the CFI I've been flying with hasn't been logging my training in my logbook as PIC. Since I'm rated in the category and class of the aircraft and sole manipulator of the control, I can log it (yes?). Am I missing something? If I'm correct, how do I bring this up to him? Is there any reason he'd be logging it as dual received only?
Click to expand...

You state you don't have a current BFR.. Every chart I've looked at and Reg I have looked at states you cannot act as PIC of an aircraft without a current flight review... So I'm confused as to why everyone is saying it's "okay" for him to log his time as PIC... What regs or charts are you guys looking at that allows a pilot without these requirements to act as pilot in command of an aircraft? Maybe I'm missing something.
 
Last edited:
Kevin H. said:
You state you don't have a current BFR.. Every chart I've looked at and Reg I have looked at states you cannot act as PIC of an aircraft without recency of experience requirements met and a current flight review... So I'm confused as to why everyone is saying it's "okay" for him to log his time as PIC... What regs or charts are you guys looking at that allows a pilot without these requirements to act as pilot in command of an aircraft? Maybe I'm missing something.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is 14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(i). Read it and see what you think, and remember that logging PIC time is a separate regulatory issue from acting as PIC.
 
...and remember, Kevin, that the distinction works both ways. Just as there are situations where a pilot may lo PIC without acting as PIC, there are also situations in which a pilot is clearly acting as PIC but is not authorized to log it as PIC.
 
Kevin H. said:
Ahh you are correct Ron.. Thanks for the refresher.
Click to expand...
FWIW, a lot of folks with temporary medical issues use this clause to keep logging PIC time and events for landing and instrument currency (as well as a flight review, if due) while flying with an instructor or other qualified person acting as PIC so they can just jump back in and go when their medical issue is resolved.
 
Make sure though, if you are not legal to be PIC, that the instructor is. I have my BFR Saturday, but the instructor called and pointed out he also needs a BFR so I had better be current.
 
midlifeflyer said:
...and remember, Kevin, that the distinction works both ways. Just as there are situations where a pilot may log PIC without acting as PIC, there are also situations in which a pilot is clearly acting as PIC but is not authorized to log it as PIC.
Click to expand...

That is just so confusing to me that it's baffling in my opinion. Why did they differentiate the two? Wouldn't it be more simple to say that if you are not current to act as pilot in command you shouldn't be able to log time as pilot in command, period? I mean, how can it be okay to log PIC time if you are not even current to act as PIC of an aircraft, or even vise versa... That just leaves a very confusing door open to un-intentionally make an error in the PIC realm. Even as a commercial pilot, that just drives me crazy about stuff like that.
 
Don't know, but LOGGING PIC and BEING PIC have always been distinct since I started flying in 1981.
 
Kevin H. said:
That is just so confusing to me that it's baffling in my opinion. Why did they differentiate the two? Wouldn't it be more simple to say that if you are not current to act as pilot in command you shouldn't be able to log time as pilot in command, period? I mean, how can it be okay to log PIC time if you are not even current to act as PIC of an aircraft, or even vise versa... That just leaves a very confusing door open to un-intentionally make an error in the PIC realm. Even as a commercial pilot, that just drives me crazy about stuff like that.
Click to expand...
Two different goals.

Acting as PIC is about authority and responsibility. Logging PIC is about meeting certificate, rating and currency requirements (I personally use the phrase "about writing numbers on a piece of paper with a beer in your hand").

The separation of the two is historical. Although the "PIC" term was not used, I've seen the difference between "authority" and "meeting requirements" in regs going back to the 1940's.

The problem is one of semantics. If the FAA had used the term "gloopy time" for the time needed to meet certain FAA requirements and replaced "pilot in command time" with "gloopy time" everywhere in Part 61 that talks about anything other than acting as PIC, chances are no one would have a problem with it (except those who believe that the FAA should not be allowed to define requirements for FAA certificate, ratings and currency).

Unfortunately, the FAA didn't use gloopy and we are left with the requirement to do the mental exercise of recognizing that logging PIC is unrelated to acting as PIC. For those new to the concept, it can be a difficult initial transition but most of us get used to it pretty easily.
 
FWIW, the military uses "Aircraft Commander" to talk about who's commanding the flight and "First Pilot" to talk about time spent with hands stick and throttles.
 
Ron Levy said:
FWIW, the military uses "Aircraft Commander" to talk about who's commanding the flight and "First Pilot" to talk about time spent with hands stick and throttles.
Click to expand...

And if you are NASA you pronounce those SEE DEE ARR and PEE ELL TEE
(I understand calling Mission Specialist #1 EMM ESS ONE, but PEE ELL TEE actually takes longer to say than PILOT).
 
Ron Levy said:
FWIW, the military uses "Aircraft Commander" to talk about who's commanding the flight and "First Pilot" to talk about time spent with hands stick and throttles.
Click to expand...

The U.S. Army doesn't. They use the terms Pilot in Command (PC) and Pilot (PI) with regard to who is in command and who is just the other pilot.

With regard to wiggling sticks, it's Pilot Flying (PF or P*) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF or just P). Most current documentation uses P* and P to differentiate between the pilot on the controls and the pilot not on the controls.

The ideas are the same, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top