Would or How to log this?

EdFred said:
Taxiing to the runway the plane is moving for the purpose of taxiing. When you start the take off roll it is moving for the purpose of flight.

Let's just take the "as soon as it moves" to it's (il)logical conclusion.

I have 86 usable gallons in the Comanche. I pull it from the hangar, get in, start it up, let it roll slightly, do my brake check, and let it idle for the next 35 hours as it idles burning 2.3gph. (I probably sleep for a while as this goes on) I then resume taxiing to the runway, fly one lap around the pattern land, and put the plane away.

Are you really going to log 35.1 hours of flight time in your log book?
Click to expand...

Taking one argument to insanity does not make the opposite sane.
 
ahkahn said:
Boy, I must come from a different "old" school. I was taught in 1993 to log engine on to engine off.
Click to expand...

Just do you brake test right after engine start...roll it a foot and hit the brakes, you've now "moved" for the purposes of flight...clock starts!
 
JeffDG said:
Just do you brake test right after engine start...roll it a foot and hit the brakes, you've now "moved" for the purposes of flight...clock starts!
Click to expand...


Common sense needs to dictate.....:yes:

If I pull my plane out of the hangar and start the motor, I have EVERY intention of going flying.....
 
nosehair said:
OK, my favorite pet peeve: people who log hobbs time as if it were flight time.
Flight time is time in the air, not taxi and preparation time for the flight.
FAR 1.1 defines it as "from the time the airplane moves under it's own power for the purpose of flight until it comes to rest after landing."
Did you land?
In the spirit of the rule, the time you move for the purpose of flight is when you have completed your run-up and decided to take flight. So when you have been cleared for take-off, or cleared yourself at a non-towered airport, and taking the runway, then you are moving forward for the purpose of flight.
The culture has determined that Hobbs time is the rule, because that's how we pay on a rental, but it ain't flight time.
Just my 2c.
Old school rules.
Click to expand...

It's Pilot in Command time....the time you're in command of the aircraft which starts when it first moves for purpose of flight. Proper ground handling is as important a skill as flight skills. Hence, the well-accepted practice of logging Hobbs time.

That said, if a flight is aborted before flight, I don't log any of it. But if I get airborne, only to abort and land on the same runway, I'd log it.
 
LDJones said:
That said, if a flight is aborted before flight, I don't log any of it. But if I get airborne, only to abort and land on the same runway, I'd log it.
Click to expand...
That is pretty much how I log. If I get the wheels off the ground, I'll log it.

I once was doing a checkout in a Citabria. While doing the runup, we noticed that the fabric stitching on the right wing had apparently all rotted away and the fabric was flapping all over the place while the engine was running up. We went ahead and did a high speed taxi down the runway just for practice and then taxied back to the ramp. When all was said and done, total hobbs time was probably .3-.4. I did not log that.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That is pretty much how I log. If I get the wheels off the ground, I'll log it.

I once was doing a checkout in a Citabria. While doing the runup, we noticed that the fabric stitching on the right wing had apparently all rotted away and the fabric was flapping all over the place while the engine was running up. We went ahead and did a high speed taxi down the runway just for practice and then taxied back to the ramp. When all was said and done, total hobbs time was probably .3-.4. I did not log that.
Click to expand...

99%+ of all the flights don't get scrubbed so why not log Hobbs time..:dunno:

As for your Citabria deal... They are a tail dragger and a high speed taxi has led to several groundloops for pilots over the years , and could bite you in the ass real quick.. Plus. it was a checkout so at least you should have logged it as dual.

Personally I would have logged that .3 -.4 hours... But that is just me..;)
 
Jaybird180 said:
Taking one argument to insanity does not make the opposite sane.
Click to expand...

So what's acceptable? Idling for 20 hours and logging it? 2 hours?

And when you decide that x time is acceptable, why is x+1 minute not acceptable? The only logical conclusion is that you don't log taxi/idling time after moving, and only the time that you start your takeoff roll and actually proceed to lift off.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
So what's acceptable? Idling for 20 hours and logging it? 2 hours?

And when you decide that x time is acceptable, why is x+1 minute not acceptable? The only logical conclusion is that you don't log taxi/idling time after moving, and only the time that you start your takeoff roll and actually proceed to lift off.
Click to expand...

Well, it's the most logical conclusion, if you insist on mathematical binary logic.

It's not the only logical conclusion. Most of us work with continuum ("fuzzy") logic reasonably well.

What you might run into trouble with is deciding what's a violation. That's a dichotomy. But for purposes of logging, it's pretty easy to come up with a reasonable strategy different from what you said. Like, normal taxi and runup count, but shutting the engine off doesn't (i.e., use the Hobbs meter). Neither does abusing your airplane and making safety hazards like extended idling. The regulation dances around the edge of a definition, but really doesn't give one adequate to make the determination.

No one will get a violation or have time disallowed in an 8710 for the very common practice of using the Hobbs meter for logging.
 
MAKG1 said:
Well, it's the most logical conclusion, if you insist on mathematical binary logic.

It's not the only logical conclusion. Most of us work with continuum ("fuzzy") logic reasonably well.

What you might run into trouble with is deciding what's a violation. That's a dichotomy. But for purposes of logging, it's pretty easy to come up with a reasonable strategy different from what you said. Like, normal taxi and runup count, but shutting the engine off doesn't (i.e., use the Hobbs meter). Neither does abusing your airplane and making safety hazards like extended idling. The regulation dances around the edge of a definition, but really doesn't give one adequate to make the determination.

No one will get a violation or have time disallowed in an 8710 for the very common practice of using the Hobbs meter for logging.
Click to expand...

So again, where is the demarcation? .2 of taxi is acceptable but .3 is not? Why not .3, and if .3 is ok, why not .4? Etc...
 
EdFred said:
So again, where is the demarcation? .2 of taxi is acceptable but .3 is not? Why not .3, and if .3 is ok, why not .4? Etc...
Click to expand...

Why does there have to be one?

There are other reasonable strategies, like normal = OK, not normal = not OK.

No one is going to get their 8710 rejected by counting a reasonable taxi.
 
N801BH said:
But to expand on your comment..... I have a beef...
Click to expand...

What kind of work do you do? Because I'd like the opportunity to take a dishonest example and use that to make broad generalizations about your entire workforce.

I have never, nor have I ever flown with anyone that has, pushed from a gate any earlier than necessary for the purposes of making money. In most cases I don't even have the choice. Even with an EDCT time over an hour away, the company will usually have me push because they need the gate, the agents are needed elsewhere, etc. And occasionally it's nice to wait it out close to the end of the runway anyway, because if a departure slot opens and they need you in the air in 5 minutes, you can fire up the engines and get everyone out of there early.

Sometimes we don't have an EDCT, it's just the middle of a big departure push and the taxiways are a mess. I've sat at LGA for 1.5 hours for this reason, and when it's first come first serve, and there's no option but to get in line and tough it out.

Anyway, while I freely admit that getting paid by the minute lessens the blow of off the gate delays, or getting slowed down because of traffic while in the air, it's never a driving force for making decisions that effect my passengers. If I'm ever flying off profile, it's to go faster - not the other way around. ;)
 
EdFred said:
So what's acceptable? Idling for 20 hours and logging it? 2 hours?

And when you decide that x time is acceptable, why is x+1 minute not acceptable? The only logical conclusion is that you don't log taxi/idling time after moving, and only the time that you start your takeoff roll and actually proceed to lift off.
Click to expand...

I'm unable to find the story, but I'm sure I posted here on PoA about a situation that was not legit, fitting your story. It's integrity.

The story was a foreign commercial student who had the practice of going to an airport a few miles away and sat there with the engine idling. He would fall asleep. Apparently he wasn't the only one who was asleep, as the school didn't notice for quite awhile. I forget how the whistle was blown.

That is not loggable as it violates the spirit and intent.
 
EdFred said:
So what's acceptable? Idling for 20 hours and logging it? 2 hours?

And when you decide that x time is acceptable, why is x+1 minute not acceptable? The only logical conclusion is that you don't log taxi/idling time after moving, and only the time that you start your takeoff roll and actually proceed to lift off.
Click to expand...

What if you abort your takeoff? Restart the clock?
What if you do not land but crash? Do you log that (assuming you live)?
What if you take off, lose your engine, and come back down on the same roll out. Would you log that?

In my opinion (and what I would actually do), if the idling for 20 hours is due to no fault or motive of my own (ie. ATC ground hold on tarmac, terror incident with ground stop, something else far-fathomed), I am logging it. Why? It's experience that should be documented.

If it's starting the engine out of the hangar, idling it for 20 hours, taking a nap, and burning up go-juice for no real reason other than to run up the logbook, I'm not logging it. That's not experience, it's abuse (and stupid!).
 
ahkahn said:
What if you abort your takeoff? Restart the clock?
What if you do not land but crash? Do you log that (assuming you live)?
What if you take off, lose your engine, and come back down on the same roll out. Would you log that?

In my opinion (and what I would actually do), if the idling for 20 hours is due to no fault or motive of my own (ie. ATC ground hold on tarmac, terror incident with ground stop, something else far-fathomed), I am logging it. Why? It's experience that should be documented.

If it's starting the engine out of the hangar, idling it for 20 hours, taking a nap, and burning up go-juice for no real reason other than to run up the logbook, I'm not logging it. That's not experience, it's abuse (and stupid!).
Click to expand...


Yep. I restart the clock.
A crash is still a landing. Log it.
No.

Got it. Idling in a penalty box is flight experience. Doing the exact same thing at an uncontrolled field is not. Hypocrite much?

Flight time is time spent in the air. Not taxiing, not idling, not doing a run up. None of the latter three is experience towards flight time.
 
Jaybird180 said:
That is not loggable as it violates the spirit and intent.
Click to expand...

Why does it violate it? You (and others) have already said any time you start the engine and (plan to) head for the runway it's flight time. I can have my ATP in no time if I log according to your interpretation.

How about only log time in the air, since taxiing, idling, and run ups are not flying?
 
EdFred said:
Why does it violate it? You (and others) have already said any time you start the engine and (plan to) head for the runway it's flight time. I can have my ATP in no time if I log according to your interpretation.

How about only log time in the air, since taxiing, idling, and run ups are not flying?
Click to expand...

I do not agree with other interpretations including 20hrs idling. No way I'd do that, Hobbs is also depreciation on the perceived airframe value. I would shut down and wait. Terrorism event: I'm going home and will fly later, presuming the airplNe is OK.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I do not agree with other interpretations including 20hrs idling. No way I'd do that, Hobbs is also depreciation on the perceived airframe value. I would shut down and wait. Terrorism event: I'm going home and will fly later, presuming the airplNe is OK.
Click to expand...

What about 2 hours? Is two hours OK to log?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Except that there is an FAA legal interpretation that says differently.

See the Kania 2004 interpretation here. http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ations/?year=all&q=Flight+Time&bSubmit=Search

You are free to log it however you want, Ed, but the FAA acceptable method is from tiedown to tiedown.
Click to expand...

Well, I should have my ATP in a few months then, and a lot cheaper than doing the actual flying, since I only am lacking the total time. I already have all the othr requirements knocked out.
 
Everskyward said:
How about if you taxi out for the intention of flight but abort the takeoff on the runway? :D
Click to expand...
You said "on the runway," which suggests you never got airborne, in which case I would not log it since there was never a landing. If I got airborne, had a problem, pulled the power back, and landed straight ahead on the remaining runway, then I'd log it just like any other flight.
 
Fearless Tower said:
If that is really what you were taught, then it would appear you were taught wrong.

Here is the FAA's definition of what is loggable flight time:

FAA Regulations (14 CFR 1.1) defines flight time as “block time” as follows:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing

So, if you start the engine and sit in the tie down for 20+ minutes while tuning radios, entering flight plan into the GPS, waiting for the oil temp to warm up, that is NOT loggable flight time.
Click to expand...
That is legally correct, but nobody in the FAA ever seems to worry about it, especially since you could start, pull forward 3 inches, and then stop and do all that other stuff making it all legal light time from that first movement onward.
 
Ron Levy said:
You said "on the runway," which suggests you never got airborne, in which case I would not log it since there was never a landing. If I got airborne, had a problem, pulled the power back, and landed straight ahead on the remaining runway, then I'd log it just like any other flight.
Click to expand...
But there was certainly the intention to fly. :D

In all honesty I don't care if people log their taxi time. Or not. Or if Ed builds time for his ATP by idling. :rofl:
 
Ron Levy said:
You said "on the runway," which suggests you never got airborne, in which case I would not log it since there was never a landing. If I got airborne, had a problem, pulled the power back, and landed straight ahead on the remaining runway, then I'd log it just like any other flight.
Click to expand...

Thn in the case of not logging you are not consistent with what the FAA has decreed in Kania, posted above.
 
Everskyward said:
But there was certainly the intention to fly. :D

In all honesty I don't care if people log their taxi time. Or not. Or if Ed builds time for his ATP by idling. :rofl:
Click to expand...

The time it takes to prepare for a flight is the time it takes. As long as you don't dawdle, then no foul. But if you start the engine then grab the sports page, then you're not being honest.
 
Jaybird180 said:
The time it takes to prepare for a flight is the time it takes. As long as you don't dawdle, then no foul. But if you start the engine then grab the sports page, then you're not being honest.
Click to expand...

I think this is kind of like pornography - it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it. :D
 
Jaybird180 said:
The time it takes to prepare for a flight is the time it takes. As long as you don't dawdle, then no foul. But if you start the engine then grab the sports page, then you're not being honest.
Click to expand...
True. You're not being honest. But there's nothing I can do about it. Which is why I'm not losing any sleep over it.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
But there was certainly the intention to fly. :D
Click to expand...
As I read the regulation, intent to fly is only half the issue, and without a landing as well as intent to fly, there is no flight time. I mean, does it make sense to have flight time if you didn't fly?
 
Jaybird180 said:
Thn in the case of not logging you are not consistent with what the FAA has decreed in Kania, posted above.
Click to expand...
Kania is irrelevant to the question at hand. It discussed flight time only as it applies to Part 121 crew duty limitations, not the logging of flight time for Part 61 purposes.
 
All of these interpretations are influenced by our own self serving motivations.
I try to live by, and teach, what would the jury do?
A jury of 12 people, not self-serving pilots, but 12 street people depending on pilots to fly them in public transportation, would they be ok with
documenting taxi / and run-up and wait time.as.flight time?
And all the other pilot training.and experience requirements, ie, currency in landings and instrument approach currency proficiency, etc.Ask yourself what would.a regular person who is.dependent on you for his life, what would he think.
 
nosehair said:
All of these interpretations are influenced by our own self serving motivations.
I try to live by, and teach, what would the jury do?
A jury of 12 people, not self-serving pilots, but 12 street people depending on pilots to fly them in public transportation, would they be ok with
documenting taxi / and run-up and wait time.as.flight time?
And all the other pilot training.and experience requirements, ie, currency in landings and instrument approach currency proficiency, etc.Ask yourself what would.a regular person who is.dependent on you for his life, what would he think.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I don't really CARE what they think because most of the time they don't have a flipping clue.
 
Sorry but appealing to nonpilot standards doesn't make sense. Are you going to use nonpilot standards for maintenance and weather?
 
Yeah, those who won't have eyes to see and ears to hear cannot be taught.
We do not live in an exclusive society.
If it was your exclusive club, I wouldn't be here trying to represent the public we serve. But we do serve, or at least exist within a public society.
They/ we expect us to be responsible for their safety.
Logged time And currency/proficiency requirements reflect the expected safety and proficiency that we all should impose upon our selves.
Regardless of your personal self respect.and self integrity, in the case of an accident and subsequent civil lawsuit, consider the opinions of others in your personal opinions of your self serving methods of twisting the spirit of the rule- which is to be proficient in all that you.do.
 
nosehair said:
Yeah, those who won't have eyes to see and ears to hear cannot be taught.
We do not live in an exclusive society.
If it was your exclusive club, I wouldn't be here trying to represent the public we serve. But we do serve, or at least exist within a public society.
They/ we expect us to be responsible for their safety.
Logged time And currency/proficiency requirements reflect the expected safety and proficiency that we all should impose upon our selves.
Regardless of your personal self respect.and self integrity, in the case of an accident and subsequent civil lawsuit, consider the opinions of others in your personal opinions of your self serving methods of twisting the spirit of the rule- which is to be proficient in all that you.do.
Click to expand...

Awesome, where is the webpage that generates those canned rants? Cracks me up, funny stuff.
 
nosehair said:
I try to live by, and teach, what would the jury do?
A jury of 12 people, not self-serving pilots, but 12 street people depending on pilots to fly them in public transportation, would they be ok with
documenting taxi / and run-up and wait time.as.flight time?
Click to expand...
Why would that even matter to them? When I am a passenger on an airline I couldn't care less how the pilots are logging their time.
 
Everskyward said:
Why would that even matter to them? When I am a passenger on an airline I couldn't care less how the pilots are logging their time.
Click to expand...

Good point Mari...

How do airline pilots log their time.... Push back to pull in :dunno:.... wheels up to wheels down :dunno:... start of the take off roll to end of landing roll:dunno:...
 
N801BH said:
How do airline pilots log their time.... Push back to pull in :dunno:.... wheels up to wheels down :dunno:... start of the take off roll to end of landing roll:dunno:...
Click to expand...

I log push back to pull in. I have yet to meet an airline pilot that does it any differently. My FAR flight time restrictions are based on this, as is my company's tracking software, so it just makes sense to keep it consistent.

This assumes we actually left the ground and have a recorded 'off' time. If we return to the gate, I won't log it.
 
kayoh190 said:
I log push back to pull in. I have yet to meet an airline pilot that does it any differently. My FAR flight time restrictions are based on this, as is my company's tracking software, so it just makes sense to keep it consistent.

This assumes we actually left the ground and have a recorded 'off' time. If we return to the gate, I won't log it.
Click to expand...

Interesting.... So airline pilots log flight time, even if they sit on the taxi way for hours.......

Thanks for the info...:thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top