Safety pilot required under actual weather condition?

J

John777

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
199
Display Name
Louis
Home Airfield
KIAD
Part91.109 states that you require safety pilot under simulated instrument condition but is silent about actual wx condition. So, IAW 91.109, a pilot with instrument rating can still go out fly by himself under actual wx condition to comply 66HIT and be current again?
 
is this a serious Q? The safety part is not to save you from Spatial-D, the safety is for not hitting another airplane legally traversing through VMC while you're essentially playing the equivalent of driving on an open public road blindfolded.

As to the notion there might be an IMC pirate out there, well, neither you nor a safety pilot would help avoid that, so that's more of a "are you gonna get out the house today" existential question.
 
The way I read it is, the pilot will need to be current so they can file IFR to fly in the actual IMC WX conditions. In this instance the pilot can fly and log the approaches for currency under actual conditions.

If the pilot is beyond the 6 month / 6 approach currency and before the 1 year IPC required limit, they will need to fly with a Safety Pilot under simulated conditions to regain currency. After the 1 year limit they would need an IPC to restart the clock.
 
The purpose of a safety pilot is to comply with the requirement to see and avoid while in VMC and the pilot is simulating instrument conditions.

So, no. A safety pilot is not needed if you are in
IMC on an IFR flight.
 
Nope. The catch is in the OPs words "current again." This implies that the pilot has fallen out of currency, which means that s/he cannot legally fly in IMC. That means you gotta do 66HIT in VMC, with the safety pilot. If the pilot were still current, then yes, s/he could just go fly in IMC to stay current. Heck, everytime I can find some IMC, I go shoot 66HIT all at once, just in case I don't get any more IMC for a while. (California)
 
Rykymus said:
Nope. The catch is in the OPs words "current again." This implies that the pilot has fallen out of currency, which means that s/he cannot legally fly in IMC. That means you gotta do 66HIT in VMC, with the safety pilot. If the pilot were still current, then yes, s/he could just go fly in IMC to stay current. Heck, everytime I can find some IMC, I go shoot 66HIT all at once, just in case I don't get any more IMC for a while. (California)
Click to expand...
If that is what the OP truly meant, then the pilot needs an Instrument current PIC to fly with him in IMC, not a safety pilot.
 
Assuming the PIC is current and want to start clock again for currency and goes out in actual IMC to do that. What kind of IMC will be required to satisfy currency requirements ? Does it have to be such that approaches are flown at minimums?
 
John777 said:
So, IAW 91.109, a pilot with instrument rating can still go out fly by himself under actual wx condition to comply 66HIT and be current again?
Click to expand...

I don't understand how you drew that conclusion from the premise. The currency requirement in Part 61 and the safety pilot requirement of 91.109 have no relationship to each other.
 
Fearless Tower said:
If that is what the OP truly meant, then the pilot needs an Instrument current PIC to fly with him in IMC, not a safety pilot.
Click to expand...

True. I was thinking in the terms of what you could legally do with a safety pilot at that point, which would of course be VMC.
 
As far as the regulations go, a safety pilot is there because the pilot flying is wearing a view limiting device. It makes not one whit of difference what the meteorological conditions are. The only way to be sure the pilot is complying with the see-and-avoid rules is to have a safety pilot if he's hooded.

If he's not hooded there's no regulatory need for a safety pilot. If the conditions are less than VMC, someone who is legal to be pilot in command under IFR needs to be operating the flight under IFR.

To answer the original question, if the pilot is STILL legal to fly IFR, he can gain currency solo in actual.
If he's not current, then he's conducting an illegal flight. A "safety" or other additional pilot won't fix that unless the additional pilot is legal and willing to be pilot in command under IFR.
 
But that's not to say you can't have a safety pilot in IMC. As long as s/he is instrument rated and current, category/class, etc, it should be loggable.
 
If the pilot is not wearing a view limiting device, the other pilot isn't a "safety pilot." If you're flying in IMC and are not eligible to be PIC and you bring along another pilot who is, that pilot is just simply THE PILOT IN COMMAND.

And if you need an additional pilot because you're not safe enough to fly without one, perhaps that additional pilot should be an instructor.
 
labbadabba said:
But that's not to say you can't have a safety pilot in IMC. As long as s/he is instrument rated and current, category/class, etc, it should be loggable.
Click to expand...
The only situation where this is legal (in terms of logging PIC time) is if the "safety pilot" is a CFII and is providing instruction. Otherwise there are no provisions for having a non-CFII safety pilot in IMC where both pilots are logging PIC time. The regulations on this matter are sufficiently clear.

66HIT apparently stands for 6 within 6 months. The only place I've seen people spell out 66HIT is on this board. Everyone else I know just calls it "being IFR current."
 
Harold Rutila said:
The only situation where this is legal (in terms of logging PIC time) is if the "safety pilot" is a CFII and is providing instruction. Otherwise there are no provisions for having a non-CFII safety pilot in IMC where both pilots are logging PIC time. The regulations on this matter are sufficiently clear.

66HIT apparently stands for 6 within 6 months. The only place I've seen people spell out 66HIT is on this board. Everyone else I know just calls it "being IFR current."
Click to expand...

That's not how it's been described to me. There's no provision that restricts the use of a safety pilot to VMC. For purposes of logging, the safety pilot cannot log the approach but they can still log the time. The FARs state that if on a instrument flight plan the safety pilot should be instrument rated however they don't differentiate between VMC and IMC only VFR and IFR.
 
Again, the safety pilot rule has nothing to do with the METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS. It only matters that the flying pilot is wearing a view limiting device.
 
Harold Rutila said:
The only situation where this is legal (in terms of logging PIC time) is if the "safety pilot" is a CFII and is providing instruction. Otherwise there are no provisions for having a non-CFII safety pilot in IMC where both pilots are logging PIC time. The regulations on this matter are sufficiently clear.

66HIT apparently stands for 6 within 6 months. The only place I've seen people spell out 66HIT is on this board. Everyone else I know just calls it "being IFR current."
Click to expand...
A current pilot can fly in IMC to get a non current pilot current. The current pilot is PIC but cannot log anything. The noncurrent pilot is sole manipulator and logs the time and the approaches.
 
dmspilot said:
A current pilot can fly in IMC to get a non current pilot current. The current pilot is PIC but cannot log anything. The noncurrent pilot is sole manipulator and logs the time and the approaches.
Click to expand...
This is the first I've heard of that. Will have to go back to the books and read up on it.
 
Which part hadn't you heard of?

The pilot in command must be current. There's no requirement that the pilot flying be the pilot in command. Being pilot in command isn't necessary or sufficient to log pilot in command time. To gain instrument currency there is no requirement that you be or even log PIC. It is only required that you PERFORM the approaches, holding procedures, and intercept/tracking tasks.
 
Thanks for the references. I've never heard of flying with a non-CFI in actual as a means of gaining the required instrument experience to be considered current, but this makes sense after reading the regs and the intepretation letter. It's just not something I have seen routinely done in GA.
 
Harold Rutila said:
Thanks for the references. I've never heard of flying with a non-CFI in actual as a means of gaining the required instrument experience to be considered current, but this makes sense after reading the regs and the intepretation letter. It's just not something I have seen routinely done in GA.
Click to expand...
It's not the typical way. In the usual situation, the non-current pilot is going to be in the left seat. The average non-CFII will not be comfortable with PIC responsibility on the right.

But it happens.
 
flyingron said:
Again, the safety pilot rule has nothing to do with the METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS. It only matters that the flying pilot is wearing a view limiting device.
Click to expand...
I suspect most are using "safety pilot" in a broader, generic way, than "FAR 91.109 Safety Pilot". Even the FAA does that.

But if they are talking about the 91.109 version, you are absolutely right.
 
The FAA mentions safety pilot in the regs or AIM nowhere other than 91.109.
If you want to use the term safety pilot to "a guy I through in the right seat of a crutch" you're going to have to define just what role he's playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top