What does a Safety Pilot do?

[AuntPeggy]

Last evening, Hubby decided to get IFR current, so we both quit work early and set out to BDR before the sun got low on the horizon. New York approach was too busy to handle practice approaches, so Hubby worked with Waterbury-Oxford tower for some GPS approaches. On one occasion, tower was handling us on a straight-in approach and a Saratoga coming in from base for the same runway. He was number 1 and we were number 2. I was looking for him and then saw an airplane nearly 1000' feet below us also on a straight-in final. Without talking to Hubby, I keyed the mike with "Tower, 07Romeo has traffic below".

After a moment of silence, he responded with, "Is it a low wing?" and I responded affirmative. He said, "It probably is my Saratoga. Follow him."

Since our separation from the Saratoga was only vertical, I asked Hubby to slow down a little for the sake of safety, which he did and there was no further issue.

Later, at the same airport, Hubby decided to go into the hold and tower asked us to report leaving the hold. At first, tower reported our altitude (3500) holding over the waypoint to incoming traffic, but on our third circuit, an aircraft reported approaching the waypoint at 3000 and tower didn't mention us, so once again I keyed the mike and reminded tower "3407R is still holding at 3500 over the waypoint".

We have discussed the responsibilities of a Safety Pilot recently and decided two things:
1) We never got any training in being a safety pilot.
2) The safety pilot is responsible for the safety of the flight (and so is the PIC).

Do you agree? Do you have other examples?

 

[dmccormack]

Good questions, and I think it's important to work out who does what when doing the Safety Pilot thing.

When I'm under the hood, I'll do everything I'm expected to do IMC.

That doesn't include calling out traffic.

So the SP responds to traffic calls.

The SP also will alert of any other hazards I can't see.

The SP will also say "My airplane" if the hazard requires immediate response.

And I do the same when SP.

 

[ScottM]

Good questions, and I think it's important to work out who does what when doing the Safety Pilot thing.

When I'm under the hood, I'll do everything I'm expected to do IMC.

That doesn't include calling out traffic.

So the SP responds to traffic calls.

The SP also will alert of any other hazards I can't see.

The SP will also say "My airplane" if the hazard requires immediate response.

And I do the same when SP.

Pretty much what I was going to say and what I do when I am SP. It is also what I expect out of my SPs when I am under the hood.

The key is to make sure that the pilot flying and the SP have discussed this all prior to engine start.

 

[chucky]

Last evening, Hubby decided to get IFR current, so we both quit work early and set out to BDR before the sun got low on the horizon. New York approach was too busy to handle practice approaches, so Hubby worked with Waterbury-Oxford tower for some GPS approaches.

Bradley approach was pretty quiet yesterday evening. I shot an ILS into BAF - Hartford's not that far from Bridgeport, and they don't get swamped quite as quickly as the New York folks do.

 

[COFlyBoy]

Don't forget the SP is in charge of any visual reporting points that ATC directs.

This got me the first time I was SP, ATC asked us to report over X road. My buddy under the hood responded. It never really entered my brain that I should be doing that reporting, not my buddy, so we failed to report as requested. We were the only ones in the pattern and ATC never said anything about it, but now I am careful to pay attention to that in addition to watching for traffic.

 

[TMetzinger]

Good questions, and I think it's important to work out who does what when doing the Safety Pilot thing.

When I'm under the hood, I'll do everything I'm expected to do IMC.

That doesn't include calling out traffic.

So the SP responds to traffic calls.

The SP also will alert of any other hazards I can't see.

The SP will also say "My airplane" if the hazard requires immediate response.

And I do the same when SP.

That's how I do it, and that's all I expect my safety pilot to do for me UNLESS we brief other duties.

 

[EdFred]

Safety pilot would act as if it were single pilot VFR ops, and the person under the hood were a non-pilot passenger you were letting fly the plane.

(Most radio communication being an exception)

 

[dmccormack]

Safety pilot would act as if it were single pilot VFR ops, and the person under the hood were a non-pilot passenger you were letting fly the plane.

(Most radio communication being an exception)

Nah -- I don't want to SP grabbing the airplane from me everytime he/she thinks we should be doing something different.

With a "non-pilot pax" we expect little to no knowledge.

 

[EdFred]

Nah -- I don't want to SP grabbing the airplane from me everytime he/she thinks we should be doing something different.

With a "non-pilot pax" we expect little to no knowledge.

You knew what I meant.

 

[dmccormack]

You knew what I meant.

didnotdidnotdidnot

 

[AuntPeggy]

didnotdidnotdidnot

The sort of response I usually can expect from my non-pilot passenger.

 

[dmccormack]

The sort of response I usually can expect from my non-pilot passenger.

I get that alot.

 

[AuntPeggy]

Later, at the same airport, Hubby decided to go into the hold and tower asked us to report leaving the hold. At first, tower reported our altitude (3500) holding over the waypoint to incoming traffic, but on our third circuit, an aircraft reported approaching the waypoint at 3000 and tower didn't mention us, so once again I keyed the mike and reminded tower "3407R is still holding at 3500 over the waypoint".

So, since I didn't see the traffic in my vicinity, would you think in this instance I stepped over the line as safety pilot?

 

[RMCN172RG]

So, since I didn't see the traffic in my vicinity, would you think in this instance I stepped over the line as safety pilot?

Never hurts to send a freindly reminder.

 

[dmccormack]

So, since I didn't see the traffic in my vicinity, would you think in this instance I stepped over the line as safety pilot?

Nope -- it's ok to query when you're not sure.

Unless it gets outta hand. For example: you're a Cessna, you don't see the gofast ATC tells you about, then you hear ATC tell the Gofast, "Cessna no factor..."

If you then say, "Traffic in sight" it's rather pointless.

 

[Matthew]

The times I've been SP we've spent a good amount of effort briefing each other prior to flight. I haven't run into anything that's been out of the ordinary, yet.

I keep my eyes open and call out traffic - and stay situationally aware. I find myself watching the airspeed indicator a lot. Mostly, I've tried to pretend I'm not there, or act like I'm just someone who will hold an approach plate for convenience. I do pay attention to the approaches, though, so I can explain what I saw after the flight, or after the hood comes off if we go below minimums. I figure that I'm the only one who can see those s-turns on approach/final and the pilot under the hood might want to know about it later. I'm not IR, so there's not a lot of other post-flight critiques that I can add. Oh, and I note the Hobbs just in case the pilot wants to know how much hood time there was.

 

[Palmpilot]

Aunt Peggy sounds like an expert safety pilot to me.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

>What does a Safety Pilot do?

-traffic
-terrain
-obstacles
-weather (don't wander into imc if vfr, avoid tzs please)
-airspace (don't let us wander into)
-monitoring a/c control (make sure he keeps it right side up)
-location (don't let him get lost/cross the border etc)
-noise abatement
-comm if requested
-compliance with atc instructions, ensure they are advised appropriately (unplanned missed etc)
-I would also keep an eye on fuel and monitor engine and that configuration is suitable for flight regime.

It's just like you are flying, but you only have responsibilities; no control! (Ron will likely point out the difference between what I assume as a responsibility vs what the law says [as he did last time I posted this])

 

[gismo]

So, since I didn't see the traffic in my vicinity, would you think in this instance I stepped over the line as safety pilot?

No. If you consider the title "safety pilot" you could easily (and correctly IMO) come to the conclusion that your duties center around making the flight safe. Under that umbrella comes things like avoiding close encounters of the paint swapping kind, CFIT, and loss of control. That includes both tactical (e.g. maneuvering the plane to avoid a midair) and strategic (reminding tower and traffic when you're holding on the approach and an airplane is closing in).

SP duties do not include things like giving "hints" and other instruction to the hooded pilot. Of course if that pilot requests your input on such matters you can do that in addition to your SP duties but it's a lower priority.

 

[gprellwitz]

My take on it.

1. Safety pilot is to watch for any imminent traffic, terrain, or cloud convergence and warn me if practicable, take control if not. This includes getting so close to an obstacle or terrain that the SAFETY OF THE FLIGHT IS IN DOUBT. If safety isn't in doubt, make note of it and tell me on the ground or after we go missed.

2. Safety pilot is to respond to any traffic notifications from ATC and to respond or prompt me anytime we are near a VISUAL reporting point.

Remember, I can't see anything visually, but ATC expects me to act as if I can. The safety pilot is my proxy for this. Also, remember that this training is to get me and keep me at to a point where I'm capable of and comfortable doing this single pilot.

So Peggy, your response to seeing the other aircraft was appropriate, IMHO. As to the aircraft entering the hold, I'd have recommended holding off. It's a situational awareness item that he should have been able to pick up on. If he didn't, then prompt him, not ATC. Again, IMHO.

 

[AuntPeggy]

The times I've been SP we've spent a good amount of effort briefing each other prior to flight. I haven't run into anything that's been out of the ordinary, yet.

I keep my eyes open and call out traffic - and stay situationally aware. I find myself watching the airspeed indicator a lot. Mostly, I've tried to pretend I'm not there, or act like I'm just someone who will hold an approach plate for convenience. I do pay attention to the approaches, though, so I can explain what I saw after the flight, or after the hood comes off if we go below minimums. I figure that I'm the only one who can see those s-turns on approach/final and the pilot under the hood might want to know about it later. I'm not IR, so there's not a lot of other post-flight critiques that I can add. Oh, and I note the Hobbs just in case the pilot wants to know how much hood time there was.

What do you cover in the pre-flight briefing? Hubby briefed me on the approaches he wanted to practice, but once in the air he wasn't able to do those, so we were making it up on the fly.:smile:

What else do you cover in your briefing?

 

[Matthew]

What do you cover in the pre-flight briefing? Hubby briefed me on the approaches he wanted to practice, but once in the air he wasn't able to do those, so we were making it up on the fly.:smile:

What else do you cover in your briefing?

We've talked about the approaches - doesn't mean a lot to me, since I'm not IR, but it does give me a heads-up on what to expect. Who handles what on the radio. When to speak up about altitudes. How control of the aircraft will be handled if I feel a need to intervene. Some other things I can't think of right now.

I'll watch out for everything as if I were flying, but I've tried to keep quiet unless spoken to. Maybe not having the IR helps, I don't know, because the pilots I've helped have talked their way through the approaches like they are explaining to me what they are doing - that probably helps them through it themselves.

I try to make notes of things I see that I don't understand, or something that just seemed out of sorts. I've asked about that after the flight as sort of a debriefing.

I enjoy it, I think I learn a lot.

 

[midlifeflyer]

So, since I didn't see the traffic in my vicinity, would you think in this instance I stepped over the line as safety pilot?

No. Remember that as safety pilot the FAA considers you second in command on a flight. The lists of basic see and avoid tasks, providing a reality check on navigation, and acting in an emergency, don't mean that there are no other tasks.

As with any division of flight responsibility in the multi-pilot crew, it's a mater of flexibility, communication, and how well the pilots know each other.

Your reminder call over the line? Depends. Is getting forgotten something this pilot sometimes forgets? If so, you "could have" let it go longer to see if the pilot picks up on it (learning experience). But no big deal.

One example from my end: I was working my may into a Piper Comache. Took a friend (my regular) safety pilot so I could do some work under the hood. While being vectored to the approach, I reached to switch tanks and turned the fuel off. I troubleshooted with the hood on, in the process getting it restated and then turning it off by moving the selector too far the other way. Finally got it working properly. My safety pilot just sat there. He knew the terrain, new our altitude, knew we were safe, had already figured out what I had done and made the second-in-command safety decision that he could safety let it go for a while. But that's a 2-pilot relationship that's been there for a long time and has a lot of built in trust.

Asking whether you acted too soon on the communication is sort of like acking whether my friend acted too late.

It really depends.

 

[poadeleted20]

We have discussed the responsibilities of a Safety Pilot recently and decided two things:
1) We never got any training in being a safety pilot.

That's right -- there's nothing in the PP or any other pilot certificate requirement about how to perform the duties of safety pilot per 91.109(b).

2) The safety pilot is responsible for the safety of the flight (and so is the PIC).

Disagree. The safety pilot's legal responsibility per the FAR's is limited to that specified in 91.109(b) -- looking out for other aircraft and making sure the PIC knows about any aircraft spotted. Beyond that, it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each.

While it's certainly possible that the safety pilot could act as PIC for the flight (and thus be required to meet all the requirements to be PIC in that operation/aircraft), it's not required. The safety pilot's responsibility could be limited to merely spotting other aircraft and advising the PIC who is under the hood of those other aircraft. In this situation, the PIC flying pilot still remains responsible for the safe operation of the flight, but has delegated the duty of spotting other aircraft to the SIC safety pilot. Keep in mind that while duties may be delegated, responsibility cannot -- but it can be shared. So, if the SIC safety pilot screws up and a midair collision results, the PIC flying pilot remains legally responsible for that collision but the SIC shares that responsibility.

Thus, when contemplating simulated instrument flight, it is critical that before the engine is started, the two pilots involved have a briefing/discussion about roles and responsibilities. You should first decide who will be the legal PIC -- the person with the final authority responsible for the safety of the flight (and any legal issues which might arise, like a flight violation). You should talk about every cockpit duty, and who will perform it, including lookout, radio comm, control manipulation in various circumstances, transfer of control, operation of nav equipment, emergency procedures, etc. Only then are you ready to go up in a 2-pilots-required situation.

In fact, that's a darn good idea even when you've just got two pilots aboard, and the second pilot is not required. When I get in someone else's plane even just for a ride, I always ask if they want me to be a flight instructor, a pilot, a co-pilot, or just a passenger, and then we cover those issues before engine start. And if I don't like what the other pilot has to say, I tell them thanks for the offer of the ride, but that I will decline the opportunity, and then I get out.

BTW, I would point out that until you get to the ATP level, the issues of crew coordination in multi-piloted aircraft is not part of the FAA legal requirements for a pilot certificate, and even at the ATP level, it's not well taught outside air carrier-type training programs.

 

[Matthew]

In fact, that's a darn good idea even when you've just got two pilots aboard, and the second pilot is not required.

Good point - I rarely fly with another pilot. But when it happens, we do cover the PIC/SIC responsibilities and duties. I don't like surprises.

 

[Ted]

Good point - I rarely fly with another pilot. But when it happens, we do cover the PIC/SIC responsibilities and duties. I don't like surprises.

The first time I flew with another pilot I learned just how bad it can be. He was doing all kinds of things I didn't ask him to and wouldn't listen to "Don't do that." I don't fly with him anymore.

Since I do primarily single-pilot ops and am used to it, the general pre-flight lecture is along the lines of "I will do everything for the flight. If I want assistance from you, I'll let you know ahead of time." Thing is, since I have my single pilot routine down, I pretty much do everything except in low workload conditions. When I have another good pilot who I have a good relationship with, I really enjoy multi pilot ops.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Disagree. The safety pilot's legal responsibility per the FAR's is limited to that specified in 91.109(b) -- looking out for other aircraft and making sure the PIC knows about any aircraft spotted.

I'll disagree with that. The safety pilot logs SIC time because the FAA considers her to be acting as second in command of the flight. The change a few years ago about safety pilots and IFR flights (even in VMC) makes that abundantly clear.

While certainly true that the primary responsibility of the safety pilot qua safety pilot relates to things that the safety pilot can see but the hooded pilot cannot, to suggest that the duties are in the absence of specific regulation limited to just that is a bit misleading. It's like saying that the SIC on a two-pilot crew has no responsibilities because the FAR doesn't specify what they are.

 

[Palmpilot]

Disagree. The safety pilot's legal responsibility per the FAR's is limited to that specified in 91.109(b) -- looking out for other aircraft and making sure the PIC knows about any aircraft spotted. Beyond that, it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each.

As indicated in your last sentence, a safety pilot's responsibilities are not limited to his or her legal responsibilities. I also think there can be responsibilities that the pilots don't happen to think of discussing before the flight.

 

[poadeleted20]

As indicated in your last sentence, a safety pilot's responsibilities are not limited to his or her legal responsibilities.

I'm not sure what that means. Moral responsibilites? Ethical responsibilites? In any event, the FAA and the courts concern themselves only with legal responsibllities.

I also think there can be responsibilities that the pilots don't happen to think of discussing before the flight.

Of that I am certain, which is why it's important to think this through carefully well ahead of time and develop a briefing guide for such situations, and obtain some third-party review to ensure you didn't miss anything significant.

 

[AuntPeggy]

That's right -- there's nothing in the PP or any other pilot certificate requirement about how to perform the duties of safety pilot per 91.109(b).
Disagree. The safety pilot's legal responsibility per the FAR's is limited to that specified in 91.109(b) -- looking out for other aircraft and making sure the PIC knows about any aircraft spotted. Beyond that, it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each.

While it's certainly possible that the safety pilot could act as PIC for the flight (and thus be required to meet all the requirements to be PIC in that operation/aircraft), it's not required. The safety pilot's responsibility could be limited to merely spotting other aircraft and advising the PIC who is under the hood of those other aircraft. In this situation, the PIC flying pilot still remains responsible for the safe operation of the flight, but has delegated the duty of spotting other aircraft to the SIC safety pilot. Keep in mind that while duties may be delegated, responsibility cannot -- but it can be shared. So, if the SIC safety pilot screws up and a midair collision results, the PIC flying pilot remains legally responsible for that collision but the SIC shares that responsibility.

Thus, when contemplating simulated instrument flight, it is critical that before the engine is started, the two pilots involved have a briefing/discussion about roles and responsibilities. You should first decide who will be the legal PIC -- the person with the final authority responsible for the safety of the flight (and any legal issues which might arise, like a flight violation). You should talk about every cockpit duty, and who will perform it, including lookout, radio comm, control manipulation in various circumstances, transfer of control, operation of nav equipment, emergency procedures, etc. Only then are you ready to go up in a 2-pilots-required situation.

In fact, that's a darn good idea even when you've just got two pilots aboard, and the second pilot is not required. When I get in someone else's plane even just for a ride, I always ask if they want me to be a flight instructor, a pilot, a co-pilot, or just a passenger, and then we cover those issues before engine start. And if I don't like what the other pilot has to say, I tell them thanks for the offer of the ride, but that I will decline the opportunity, and then I get out.

BTW, I would point out that until you get to the ATP level, the issues of crew coordination in multi-piloted aircraft is not part of the FAA legal requirements for a pilot certificate, and even at the ATP level, it's not well taught outside air carrier-type training programs.

Unless I misunderstand you, we are in agreement.

As I stated, we agreed (2) "The safety pilot is responsible for the safety of the flight (and so is the PIC)." I believe that is substantially the same as your statement, "Beyond [91.109(b)], it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each."

Along the same lines, my parenthetical statement is the same as "...while duties may be delegated, responsibility cannot -- but it can be shared. So, if the SIC safety pilot screws up and a midair collision results, the PIC flying pilot remains legally responsible for that collision but the SIC shares that responsibility."

Your statement, "That's right -- there's nothing in the PP or any other pilot certificate requirement about how to perform the duties of safety pilot per 91.109(b)." implies that training should not include anything beyond the FARs or certificate requirements. Certainly, training includes lots of how-tos. Other sources, including this board also further our training beyond the regulations.

Please explain further if I am misunderstanding you.

 

[Palmpilot]

I'm not sure what that means.

You said "it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each." Since those are responsibilities that are defined by the pilots themselves rather than by the law, it follows that those can include other than legal responsibilities, no?

Moral responsibilites? Ethical responsibilites?

Those also exist, even when they are not covered in the law or in the preflight briefing.

In any event, the FAA and the courts concern themselves only with legal responsibllities.

I'm not talking about what the FAA and the courts concern themselves with. I'm talking about responsibility in general, especially the responsibility to do what is necessary to avoid unnecessary death and/or destruction. If a safety pilot sees a significant threat that was considered in neither the law nor the preflight briefing, then I would consider the safety pilot to have a responsibility, as the term is generally understood, to take appropriate action.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[poadeleted20]

As I stated, we agreed (2) "The safety pilot is responsible for the safety of the flight (and so is the PIC)." I believe that is substantially the same as your statement, "Beyond [91.109(b)], it's a matter for the two pilots involved to establish before flight the roles and responsiblities of each."

I thought you were saying the safety pilot was automatically the PIC by virtue of his/her responsibility for lookout for other airplanes. That's a position I've heard in the past from some misinformed souls, and I wanted to make sure there was no confusion on the point -- the two pilots can agree that the safety pilot will be the PIC, but it's not automatic.

Your statement, "That's right -- there's nothing in the PP or any other pilot certificate requirement about how to perform the duties of safety pilot per 91.109(b)." implies that training should not include anything beyond the FARs or certificate requirements.

That wasn't my intent. I was merely pointing out that this is not an FAA requirement, and so is often neglected in training resulting in folks not understanding the issues.

Certainly, training includes lots of how-tos. Other sources, including this board also further our training beyond the regulations.

Regrettably, that's true, and the result is often sad when folks don't go that extra mile. Would that it were otherwise, and folks really learned all they need to know to do all the things their certificates authorize them to do, rather than just the minimum amount to pass the test.

 

[murphey]

The first time I flew with another pilot I learned just how bad it can be. He was doing all kinds of things I didn't ask him to and wouldn't listen to "Don't do that." I don't fly with him anymore.

One of the earliest times I flew with another pilot (CFI but this was a pleasure flight in my aircraft) the CFI started doing all sorts of things with the radio. Wouldn't listen to me. I slapped hand off radio. No more problems.

 

[murphey]

That wasn't my intent. I was merely pointing out that this is not an FAA requirement, and so is often neglected in training resulting in folks not understanding the issues.

Regrettably, that's true, and the result is often sad when folks don't go that extra mile. Would that it were otherwise, and folks really learned all they need to know to do all the things their certificates authorize them to do, rather than just the minimum amount to pass the test.

And that's why I'm incredibly discouraged and despise the current entry-level model of aviation training.

 

[poadeleted20]

And that's why I'm incredibly discouraged and despise the current entry-level model of aviation training.

What's your commercially-viable alternative?

 

[Michele]

Excellent thread Aunt Peggy. I'd always wondered exactly what a SP was and exactly what the responsibilities were.