Log book lies

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

We obviously disagree about what we are certifying with our signature.

Maybe.

You've already told us what you think the CFI is =not= certifying with that signature - not the time, not the maneuvers that were covered, not whether it was a cross country flight. So, exactly what do you think the CFI is certifying with his =only= required signature anywhere other than on an 8710? That he gave at least 1 second of instruction on unspecified stuff?

I'm saying that the CFI signature is certifying training was done. I forget how the actual reg reads but essentially we are signing that we did training. It is not our job to log the time, or write what we did. Most of us do, especially for student and private pilots, because they don't know much, but it's not our job, IMO.

You apparently think that as instructors the FAA would not look very closely at us if it were discovered that a student pilot's logbook had padded training time and training coverage entries. Again, all I can say is we can agree to disagree.

No I think we agree . I never said the FAA wouldn't look at us, I said a good lawyer could shoot holes in a student's logbook because it has since left our hands, and we have no way of ensuring that the entries that are in it stay correct.

Your question "The owner of the logbook, or the CFI?" suggests you think that it's one or the other. I think the answer is "both."

I disagree here, but that is OK . I don't think it's the CFI's logbook, I think it's the students. They are "each person" according to the regulations. It's not "each person and their authorized instructor" or something to that effect, just "each person".

So at that inquiry, you are asked, "Didn't you see that your student added 3 hours to that dual cross country flight?" If you are satisfied with the answer, "Yeah, I saw it. I didn't ask for a correction. Didn't cross out my signature. Instead, I continued to add my signature to new entries. I figured what the ****. Not my problem," you're welcome to go for it.

I'm not satisfied with that answer. As I stated above, I agree in principle with not signing a student's obvious incorrect entry. If they fill it out in front of me and put something else (extremely highly unlikely to say the least, why we are even arguing about this blows my mind) of course I'd say something.

My point is that just because there is a CFI's signature there, doesn't mean it's "legit" time. We can't certify something we have no control over.

BTW, you ask, "Who signs the logbook on each page to verify it's validity?" Can you show us the regulation that requires the logbook owner to sign each page? Or anything in the logbook for that matter?

As far as signing each page, I have no idea if there is a regulation that requires it. My guess is there is some legal reason outside of the FAR's that makes it a good idea.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by wheelsup

As far as signing each page, I have no idea if there is a regulation that requires it. My guess is there is some legal reason outside of the FAR's that makes it a good idea.

None that I'm aware of. I don't sign mine (or enter totals) unless someone asks me to, such as an FBO that wants a copy for their rental records.

[Chief Captain]

Originally Posted by wheelsup

Chief, since you aren't an instructor I'm going to give you a home work assignment.

Why does an instructor sign a logbook entry? Is it:

A) To certify the logbook entry is correct?
B) Or merely to certify that he/she gave the student instruction on that flight?

Again, keep in mind you cannot control what the pilot does with the logbook once it leaves your hands.

I'll assume you're a CFI, so I'll take your word for it. But consider this situation- you need 15hr dual for the IFR rating. Say you go do a 1hr instrument lesson, and the student changes it to 15 hours. Is that still ok?

My point is that yes, the sig may only be required to state that SOME instruction was given, but unless the numbers are right, the signature is meaningless. The CFI may as well not sign. How would one determine if a student got 1 minute of instruction, or 1 hour.

I'm not a CFI (or even a CPL yet), but I have to disagree with your interpretation of the law.

[Chief Captain]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

None that I'm aware of. I don't sign mine (or enter totals) unless someone asks me to, such as an FBO that wants a copy for their rental records.

Examiner asked me to sign mine before he inspected it.

[Chief Captain]

I went and checked the regs. It's not explicitly stated, a signature verifies the authenticity of a statement, and so the administrator would reasonably expect the statement to be true at the time of signing.

It's made me very nervous, because I wouldn't want a CFI to be found guilty of violating § 61.59- remember it doesn't single out the owner of the logbook, it says "no person".

§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.

(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.
(b) A flight instructor must maintain a record in a logbook or a separate document that contains the following:
(1) The name of each person whose logbook or student pilot certificate that instructor has endorsed for solo flight privileges, and the date of the endorsement; and
(2) The name of each person that instructor has endorsed for a knowledge test or practical test, and the record shall also indicate the kind of test, the date, and the results.
(c) Each flight instructor must retain the records required by this section for at least 3 years.

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by Chief Captain

I'll assume you're a CFI, so I'll take your word for it.

You are going to be a CFI. What does the reg say?

But consider this situation- you need 15hr dual for the IFR rating. Say you go do a 1hr instrument lesson, and the student changes it to 15 hours. Is that still ok?

Ok for who? The CFI? How can the CFI control what the student does once the logbook is out of their hands?!?

If you're asking if it is OK that the CFI continue on their instruction with the assumption that the student now has completed the 15 hours of xcty I would say no, if there is reasonable expectation that the CFI knows the student did not complete that flight then he would be held partially accountable (just a guess). That's common sense.

If the student goes to another CFI however and there is no reasonable expectation that said CFI knew the student falsified the records, there would be no way in my mind it would come back on either CFI.

My point is that yes, the sig may only be required to state that SOME instruction was given, but unless the numbers are right, the signature is meaningless. The CFI may as well not sign. How would one determine if a student got 1 minute of instruction, or 1 hour.

Refer to my A/B multiple guess test I posted. Again I ask, what does the reg say? Does it say we are required to sign? When are we required to sign?

"How would one determine if a student got 1 minute of instruction, or 1 hour?"

By either the student or the instructor entering time in the "instruction received" column of the students logbook silly .

I'm not a CFI (or even a CPL yet), but I have to disagree with your interpretation of the law.

That's fine. If you want to be held accountable for whatever your student writes in THEIR logbook have at it. Personally I think a good lawyer could blow that one out of the water. "Is that your handwriting?" "No sir it is not".

Stop over thinking this.

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by Chief Captain

I went and checked the regs. It's not explicitly stated, a signature verifies the authenticity of a statement, and so the administrator would reasonably expect the statement to be true at the time of signing.

A signature confirms that training was done. It doesn't verify the authenticity of anything, just that training was done.

STOP

OVER

THINKING

THIS

PERIOD.

remember it doesn't single out the owner of the logbook, it says "no person"...

...shall make or cause to be made.

How would you, as a CFI, make a false entry simply be signing a logbook?!? If you don't enter false times you didn't make the false entry.

Logbooks are all on the honor system. That's why there are such stiff penalties for forgery.

[Chief Captain]

"How would one determine if a student got 1 minute of instruction, or 1 hour?"

By either the student or the instructor entering time in the "instruction received" column of the students logbook silly .

A signature confirms that training was done. It doesn't verify the authenticity of anything, just that training was done.

You stated that the sig doesn't verify the authenticity of the hours. If that is so, then in my mind, the DUAL column is meaningless, and it should just be a yes/no checkbox. By signing your name beside X hours, it means that you gave that much instruction.

Anyway, since you're the CFI, I'll defer to your experience. I guess I'll just have to be on the lookout for suspicious entries in the books I'm signing. Thanks for the info.

[wheelsup]

It can't be a yes/no checkbox. There are flights where the entire flight is not a dual flight (solo's for example). Plus how would you keep track of exactly how much dual you have? That would be a nightmare, going thru line by line to fill out the 8710. Honestly man in my 1500 hours of giving dual I never even gave this a thought. There are way too many other things to worry about at that level.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by wheelsup

A signature confirms that training was done. It doesn't verify the authenticity of anything, just that training was done.

And if someone thinks your interpretation is wrong, and that you are the one overthinking it to create a situation in which the signature has no meaning whatsoever and you create an excuse for avoid some professional responsibility... (which I definitely do)?

Like I said, we can agree to disagree.

[MFT1Air]

Originally Posted by faceof5

What keeps pilots from logging time that hasn't actually been flown?

Morals. . .

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

And if someone thinks your interpretation is wrong, and that you are the one overthinking it to create a situation in which the signature has no meaning whatsoever and you create an excuse for avoid some professional responsibility... (which I definitely do)?

Like I said, we can agree to disagree.

What responsibility am I avoiding? You lost me.

Where did I say the signature has no meaning?

It seems your position is that the signature validates the time logged. I see what you are saying and the principle behind it. Student logs the time, you validate by signing logbook.

I guess what I am saying is that just by having a signature there doesn't mean the time is correct. It doesn't validate anything. If it was a computer printout that couldn't be altered I suppose it would mean something more to me.

[germb747]

It really comes down to integrity. The more verifiable your time is, the more points you'll score at an interview. But if you went out and flew a 1.0 but logged a 1.5, especially if you were flying your own plane and there was no paper trail, there's probably nothing to disprove what you're claiming. However, like a previous poster said, if you're the kind of person who is dishonest like that, it will show up in other places and eventually catch up with you.

By the way, how many people log "Hobbs" time? I'm guessing probably all or most of you do, but that's not how the FAA wants it counted. They want the time the airplane moves under it's own power for the purpose of flight until the airplane comes to rest at the conclusion of the flight. So, sportsfans, how many .1s or .2s in your logbook are bogus because you were sitting in the chocks with the engine running doing checklists?? You're all SO busted!!

[minitour]

Originally Posted by germb747

So, sportsfans, how many .1s or .2s in your logbook are bogus because you were sitting in the chocks with the engine running doing checklists?? You're all SO busted!!

Except if I logged hobbs, I'd only be logging from the time weight comes off of the mains to the time the weight is back on 'em. I like the whole "moves under it's own power" thing better....makes for bigger pay checks.

-mini