logging Safety Pilot Time

[worm19]

This make come across as a stupid question since i belive i know the answer but im wondering if it is at all possible for one person to log Actual and the other person to log Hood time when in the clouds. (not the best thing to do in my view but just asking). Im aware of logging the PIC part just didt know if this could happen.

[Clocks]

If the airplane is in IMC a safety pilot is no longer a required crewmember.

So, no.

[MidlifeFlyer]

How many pilots can dance on the head of a pin, and how do they log the time?

You want a "yes"? Here you go. Whether in actual or not, if someone is wearing the hood, there has to be a safety pilot on board - the hooded pilot doesn't know whether he is in actual or not, so the safety pilot remains a required crewmember. But the unhooded pilot is in actual, so he gets to log it.

It works - a logical consequence if you start with the the regs and the existing interpretaions of it.

But I wouldn't take that to the bank.

Here's the catch. The whole idea of two pilots logging time when a safety pilot is based on the notion that it is an operation that requires more than one pilot. That, in itself is a bit of a fallacy. So I would hesitate taking using it as a basis for going much further with it.

[moxiepilot]

so, just curious worm, what did you think the answer was prior to the previous replies? I'm interested because as an instructor it can be helpful to see how people view the regs - and observe their initial take on things - so that I can address questions prior to being asked.

[worm19]

no promblem moxie.... Basically, why i asked this is beacuse my instrument time is a little short right now than i would like, so i was trying to find a way to increase that time using the safety pilot to cut the cost, but yet both log it. Granted if i was in an aiplane that requires two pilots then yea we could both log it and not have the hood on, but that wont be the case. Thus, i knew the answer was no, just didt have a FAR too look it up. So i thought id post to see if i got an answer real quick.

[moxiepilot]

neat. good luck saving $$ and building your time

[exleardriver]

worm..look for a cfii who could call you up on those cloudy days when they don't have a student and ask to get a call if he/she would like to fly. i have a few of those. even instrument-rated, go ahead and do it..log the dual. it only helps to get even more critique when you don't fly actual a lot. you're going to be getting plenty of criticism when you begin part 135/121 training anyway, may as well get used to it. thickens your skin and makes you a better pilot at the same time. i leave my ego on the ground when i fly.

[CDVdriver]

Don't log more then a couple of hours of safety pilot time anyway.
I get these questions all the time.
It's not going to look good if you log time staring out the window, even if the FAR's allow it.

[SkiHigh2002]

I've always been somewhat troubled by the fact that someone could log hundreds of hours of multi "safety pilot PIC" time and never touch the controls!

Yeah, get a few hours of safety pilot time here and there--its a good experience. Hell, the first time I flew a Cirrus was as a safety pilot. It's a great way to fly different airplanes and meet different people around the airport. BUT -- it is not a way to get to the magical number of flight time needed to get whatever job you covet.

The point: DON'T use safety pilot time to pad your logbook. Just pad your logbook, its not as obvious to the hiring managers. (that was sarcasm... in case people don't see that)

[Fly_Unity]

Originally Posted by SkiHigh2002

I've always been somewhat troubled by the fact that someone could log hundreds of hours of multi "safety pilot PIC" time and never touch the controls!

Yeah, get a few hours of safety pilot time here and there--its a good experience. Hell, the first time I flew a Cirrus was as a safety pilot. It's a great way to fly different airplanes and meet different people around the airport. BUT -- it is not a way to get to the magical number of flight time needed to get whatever job you covet.

The point: DON'T use safety pilot time to pad your logbook. Just pad your logbook, its not as obvious to the hiring managers. (that was sarcasm... in case people don't see that)

Well at least when your building time with another student using the safety pilot thing, you fly 50% of the time, whereas when your an instructor you log all of that PIC and you pretty much fly 0% of the time. Whats the difference?
I cant tell you how valuable it was for me when I did the safety pilot thing in the twin, you can learn alot just watching!

[v1valarob]

I have a questions semi-related to this one. Im a CFI, no II. A guy I know owns his own Cessna and wants to start instrument training. He needs 15 hours with a II but needs 40 hours of instrument time. Can I sit right seat, go IFR under my name, since Im rated. Both of us can log PIC since he is manipulator and Im safety pilot, but can the other guy log any actual, or approaches? I would guess not because I am not a II, so I cant sign his log book for this training.

-Rob

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by v1valarob

I have a questions semi-related to this one. Im a CFI, no II. A guy I know owns his own Cessna and wants to start instrument training. He needs 15 hours with a II but needs 40 hours of instrument time. Can I sit right seat, go IFR under my name, since Im rated. Both of us can log PIC since he is manipulator and Im safety pilot, but can the other guy log any actual, or approaches? I would guess not because I am not a II, so I cant sign his log book for this training.

Yes to everything, except that, if the pilot is in actual (no hood0 there's no need for a safety pilot. The only thing you can't do in this scenario is provide instrument training that counts towards any of the instrument training requirements for the rating.

I also think that you and the student can log the flights as dual, BUT for 2 things:
(1) your scenario says that you are there as a safety pilot, not as an instructor giving training.
(2) You want to avoid an entry that suggests that it is instrument training that counts toward IR requirements.

[v1valarob]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

Yes to everything, except that, if the pilot is in actual (no hood0 there's no need for a safety pilot. The only thing you can't do in this scenario is provide instrument training that counts towards any of the instrument training requirements for the rating.

I also think that you and the student can log the flights as dual, BUT for 2 things:
(1) your scenario says that you are there as a safety pilot, not as an instructor giving training.
(2) You want to avoid an entry that suggests that it is instrument training that counts toward IR requirements.

The way I see it, he can log PIC because he is sole manipulator, I can log PIC the whole time because I am acting PIC, seeing that we are on an instrument flight plan, and he is not instrument rated.

Basically what Im asking is, can he log actual or approaches? I cant find any FARs regarding it.

-Rob

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by v1valarob

The way I see it, he can log PIC because he is sole manipulator, I can log PIC the whole time because I am acting PIC, seeing that we are on an instrument flight plan, and he is not instrument rated.

Acting as PIC is never, by itself, a sufficient reason for logging PIC time. In the true safety pilot as PIC scenario, the safety pilot logs PIC because he is acting as PIC in an operation that requires more than one pilot not just because he's acting as PIC. In actual (no hood) there's only one pilot required so, unless you count it as a dual flight, there's no basis for the "real" PIC to log the time when the "student" is the sole manipulator.

Basically what Im asking is, can he log actual or approaches? I cant find any FARs regarding it.

Yes. Look at 61.51 for the "actual" and 61.57 for the approaches. And don't read extra things into them that aren't there.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by v1valarob

The way I see it, he can log PIC because he is sole manipulator, I can log PIC the whole time because I am acting PIC, seeing that we are on an instrument flight plan, and he is not instrument rated.

Basically what Im asking is, can he log actual or approaches? I cant find any FARs regarding it.

-Rob

first off, what's apparently an 'aside' here, but in my opinion as an experienced instructor - this person needs instrument instruction to start with - not simply a safety pilot. the instrument rating is arguably the toughest rating/certificate to earn. it is a mark of excellence. the spirit of being a safety pilot is most rewarded post-instrument rating in maintaining currency. in the beginning, a student needs to learn how to do things correctly..these are some of the most important lessons a pilot will ever assimilate, hands down. i wouldn't take them for granted to cut any corners for this rating.

having said that, i'll climb off of my soapbox and address your questions. refer to far 61.51(e)(1) (i) & (ii): logging pilot in command flight time. essentially, a private pilot may log pic time only for that flight time during which that person is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges...and...is the sole occupant of the aircraft.

this pilot, lacking an instrument rating, lacks 'privileges' in this case..and isn't sole occupant either. 'privileges' could mean 'solo privileges', as in the case of a student pilot soloing. he/she has been given the 'privilege' and is sole manipulator/occupant. this privilege is not granted to instrument students for the danger it presents to themselves and others. period.

on the other hand, this student may log dual received from an instructor in actual conditions or simulated under a hood. this time may not be counted towards his 15 hours required with an 'authorized instructor' for an instrument rating per midlife's reply.

your student may only log pic time when receiving dual in simulated ifr conditions with you..or when you don't provide dual, but provide your name in his logbook entry as safety pilot (far 61.51(g)(3)(ii). the moment you enter into imc the rules change and your student may not log pic time, only dual and actual..and approaches flown. you may log dual given, actual time and pic. hope this helps.

[v1valarob]

Well I would be instructing him on instrument flying. I wouldnt be sitting there just looking out the window being a safety pilot, my name is on the flight plan and its my license on the line.

So I can log dual given during simulated conditions only, and I can log in his logbook any approaches done? Sorry if Im asking the same questions over and over again. I just wouldnt want to sign a logbook or something and get myself into trouble or him into trouble because Im a new idiot CFI. I just know that this cannot count toward the 15 hours since Im not a II.

-Rob

[butt]

Originally Posted by exleardriver

the moment you enter into imc the rules change and your student may not log pic time, only dual and actual..and approaches flown. you may log dual given, actual time and pic. hope this helps.

whoa whoa whoa, got a reference for that? I don't believe the part that says "or has privileges" applies to instrument ratings.

Originally Posted by v1valarob

Well I would be instructing him on instrument flying. I wouldnt be sitting there just looking out the window being a safety pilot, my name is on the flight plan and its my license on the line.

So I can log dual given during simulated conditions only, and I can log in his logbook any approaches done? Sorry if Im asking the same questions over and over again. I just wouldnt want to sign a logbook or something and get myself into trouble or him into trouble because Im a new idiot CFI. I just know that this cannot count toward the 15 hours since Im not a II.

-Rob

The CFII rating is, for the most part, pretty powerless. All it does is give you the ability to legally do IPC's and do instruction that counts towards the 15 hours required for the instrument rating, and the 15 hours (or however many hours are required, I'm too lazy to look it up) required for the commercial certificate.

If you aren't intending to log the flight for any of the above, a CFII is not required. If you're instructing in the clouds, it's treated (and logged) exactly the same as if you were instructing in VFR. Just make sure you place a note in the student's logbook that the instruction was not done by a CFII, and should be ignored when it's time to do the 8710.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by butt

whoa whoa whoa, got a reference for that? I don't believe the part that says "or has privileges" applies to instrument ratings.

i gave it. far 61.51(e)(1)(i) & (ii). ever 'soloed' a 'sole manipulator' instrument student into imc conditions?? there's a new 'boundary' for you to explore.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by v1valarob

So I can log dual given during simulated conditions only, and I can log in his logbook any approaches done? Sorry if Im asking the same questions over and over again. I just wouldnt want to sign a logbook or something and get myself into trouble or him into trouble because Im a new idiot CFI. I just know that this cannot count toward the 15 hours since Im not a II.

-Rob

no. you may log 'dual given' for both actual and simulated conditions if you're giving instruction. and yes, he may log approaches flown in both actual and simulated as well. an instrument student may only log pic time in simulated conditions, as it's the only time in which they're properly rated..or sole occupant of the aircraft, which they cannot legally be in real imc. and certainly get your cfii. it's a very valuable rating to add to your cfi ticket. best wishes.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by exleardriver

having said that, i'll climb off of my soapbox and address your questions. refer to far 61.51(e)(1) (i) & (ii): logging pilot in command flight time. essentially, a private pilot may log pic time only for that flight time during which that person is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges...and...is the sole occupant of the aircraft.

this pilot, lacking an instrument rating, lacks 'privileges' in this case..and isn't sole occupant either. 'privileges' could mean 'solo privileges', as in the case of a student pilot soloing. he/she has been given the 'privilege' and is sole manipulator/occupant. this privilege is not granted to instrument students for the danger it presents to themselves and others. period.

Why are people having so much trouble with the word "or?"

"You can have the cookie or the candy bar."
"Oh goody, that means I get both!"

Sometimes they even write and "and" where the reg says "or"

==============================
(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time.
(1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person--

(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or* has privileges;

(ii) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or**

(iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted.
==============================

* =not= "and."
* =not= "and." Besides, if you really read it this way then no one may log PIC time unless they are solo.

It's truly amazing. And it's not even Regulese. I learned the difference between "and" and "or" in elementary school.

(BTW, "privileges" was written into the reg in orfer to allow Sport Pilots to log PIC time - they don't have ratings, just privielges)

You're arguing against something that has been settled for a long, long time.

[nosehair]

*or* has privileges means being qualified in the airplane in a legal way other than *rated* on the certificate, such as...a government pilot, or a pilot authorized by the federal government, including the FAA, to pilot an airplane without the usual pilot certificate, such as the military or foriegn, or special purpose, and so on.

The point is, as Midlife says, *or* is not *and*.