logging complex, not rated...

farwellbooth · April 25th, 2003, 23:45

I flew a Cessna Centurion (fast sucker for me!) and wondering if and how I can log this time? I don't have any hours in complex aircraft. We filed and flew IFR (conditions were VFR) and I'm not quite IFR rated yet. I sat right seat and flew the majority of the trip.

I should know these regs! Half the trip we had a current CFI up front with me (however not positive he's current). Should I log half the trip dual, the other half SIC? All SIC? Any PIC? thanks

I_Money · April 25th, 2003, 23:53

The only bit you would be able to log is the bit with the CFI and that is only if he is current, and it would not be a bad idea to get him to sign your logbook too! I always think if you are not logging PIC you should have your dual signed.

Buzo · April 26th, 2003, 00:22

If you hold a ASEL rating you can log the entire time you were sole manipulator as PIC. Only one person can log PIC though. You must make sure the other pilots weren't logging it. If the CFI was current you can have them log it as dual for you as long as they sign your logbook

sbav8r · April 26th, 2003, 02:21

With no Complex endorsement how can he log it PIC?

What's the point in having the endorsement?

EatSleepFly · April 26th, 2003, 06:19

Because he's not ACTING as PIC, he's LOGGING it as PIC. In order to ACT as PIC, he'd have to have the endorsement (plus his high performance endorsement, for a 210).

sbav8r · April 26th, 2003, 07:44

I looked real close at CFR 61.51 and damn it if you aint right.

I always thought of it as acting and logging were one in the same.

I_Money · April 26th, 2003, 11:01

I think it is a bit Mickey Mousey (IMHO) saying their is a difference between logging and acting PIC. We all know our log books are records to show our flight experience, so by logging this time your records would not be accurate of your flight experience.

MikeD · April 26th, 2003, 12:43

SIC in a 210? Remember SIC can only be filed if either the aircraft certification requires an SIC, or if the company Ops Specs (if used commercially) requires it.

Regards the complex/HP signoff, he would need it if he wanted to fly the plane solo (in addition to, of course, the ASEL). Personally, even though someone has an ASEL and hours in a 172, I would reccommend getting trained on any aircraft one upgrades to. Saw one guy at an airport I was at a couple of weeks ago who had just purchased a PA-28RT after getting his P-ASEL in a Warrior with topoff in an Archer. Guy mentioned that learning "on the job" was "fun and interesting." He was working on understanding how the "the turbo thing worked" on the engine. Turns out he already had 12 hours in the plane.

Danger and bad idea written all over that operation. Danger and bad idea written all over that. Much like formation flying with no training and no knowlege of any regs governing such flying.

MD

EatSleepFly · April 26th, 2003, 15:11

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is a bit Mickey Mousey (IMHO) saying their is a difference between logging and acting PIC. We all know our log books are records to show our flight experience, so by logging this time your records would not be accurate of your flight experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there is a difference, no matter what you think of it. And the FAA agrees.

So, you wouldn't want to log it if you rode along with someone who let you do some of the flying, even though they were acting as PIC? Your loss...

A300Capt · April 26th, 2003, 16:36

farwellbooth,

Don't log it as SIC. The aircraft, nor the use of the aircraft under these circumstances requires a SIC. Can't log it as PIC since you don't have a complex endorsement and therefore not really qualified to fly it.

About the only thing you can log it under is dual received by the CFI onboard...assuming he is current.

A300Capt · April 26th, 2003, 16:42

[ QUOTE ]
Well, there is a difference, no matter what you think of it. And the FAA agrees.

[/ QUOTE ]

EatSleepFly,

I'm a little rusty, and too lazy to look it up, on what the FAA agrees is legal or not in this area (also, depending on who you speak with and what day of the week it is). Would you care to site specific regs and sources for your info which clearly state the difference between logging and acting as PIC.

EatSleepFly · April 26th, 2003, 17:12

Sure, I'll give it a whirl.

To act as PIC, you must: "Hold the appropriate category, class and type rating for the conduct of the flight."

Thats found in the definition of PIC under FAR 1.1.

If you look under 61.51(e) (Logging of Pilot-In-Command Flight Time), it says:

"A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log PIC 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".

Now, to ACT as PIC of an aircraft that is complex, high performance, tailwheel, pressurized, etc., you MUST HAVE the necessary endorsements. FAR 61.31. But if you're the sole manipulator of the controls in one of these aircraft, as long as someone else is ACTING as PIC, you can log it. (Provided you are rated in category and class).

Example: Joe owns an Arrow, and is properly endorsed, etc. to fly it. Jim is a private pilot with no endorsements. Jim goes flying with Joe some morning. Once they get aloft, Joe lets Jim take the controls for a bit. Joe is ACTING as PIC, but since Jim is sole manipulator of the controls, he can LOG it as PIC, and so can Joe since he is acting as such.

...and, as a closing, this is an excerpt from the FAR's Explained book, which is an FAA Chief Counsel Opinion (the excerpt, not the book):

"A private pilot may log PIC time, in a complex or HP airplane for those portions of the flight when he or she is the sole manipulator of the controls because the aircraft being operated is SEL and the private pilot holds a SEL rating. However, while the private pilot may log this time as PIC, he or she may not ACT as PIC unless he or she has the appropriate endorsement under FAR 61.31."

Just whatever you do, do NOT log it as SIC or dual received if the instructor doesnt endorse it. You're going to have a hard time explaining that if you do...

...and my headache just got worse. I hate reading FAR's...

sbav8r · April 26th, 2003, 17:28

I'll anser the question since I did look it up and as I see it Eatsleep was correct.

CFR 61.51

(e) Logging pilot in command flight time.
1. A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot in command time only for that flight time during which that person is-
(i) Is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated.

In this case the pilot is "rated" ASEL. This is all that is necessary for logging pilot in command flight time, an endorsement for high performance/ complex is not a rating.

CFR 61.31
(e) Additional training for operating complex airplanes.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (e) (2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a cmplex airplane, unless the person has
(i) received and logged ground instruction and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane and has been found profecient in the operation and systems of the airplane; and
(ii) Recieved a one-time endorsement in the pilots logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person proficient to operate a complex airplane.

note: in (2) it states that if any pilot has logged time in complex aircraft prior to August 4, 1997 the endorsement is not needed.

So by this he may not solo the airplane or act as pilot in command of it, but may log pilot in command flight time for the time for which he was sole manipulator of the controls. Someone else in the aircraft is needed to act as pilot in command to make the flight legal, if that person has the proper endorsement.

sbav8r · April 26th, 2003, 17:29

Sorry eatsleep you beat me to it while I was writing that.

EatSleepFly · April 26th, 2003, 17:36

Hahaha...no prob. Just that if I had known you were going to do it, I wouldn't have bothered!

A300Capt · April 26th, 2003, 17:50

Okay, thanks guys.

Doug Taylor · April 27th, 2003, 11:49

If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it!

MikeD · April 27th, 2003, 15:51

[ QUOTE ]
If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it!

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true.

EatSleepFly · April 27th, 2003, 16:00

[ QUOTE ]
If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it!

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you figure? I dug out the FAR's just to prove that you could log it...

MikeD · April 27th, 2003, 16:15

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it!

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you figure? I dug out the FAR's just to prove that you could log it...

[/ QUOTE ]

What Doug means is that, generally speaking, if one needs to refer to the regs for exact terms regarding logging flight time, then more than likely, you're "walking the line", so to speak, on the legality of the issue. It's not as "cut and dried", if you get my drift.

I personally disagree with the whole "acting" versus "logging" PIC. I know that some FAA types have interperted the issue, but to me, you're either PIC, or you're not. Plain and simple. Just because someone in the FAA interperted it one way doesn't change how I personally would log it; that's just me, because it could come up later when someone asks the question on it (interview, etc), and it's better to log flight time that's "cut and dried", than possibly questionable (whether legal or not, I'm talking if it even raises eyebrows. It's the same thing with logging time as PIC in a 135 op when one leg is being flown under 91 (such as reposition leg). Legal? Yes. Yet I've seen some of my friends get questioned on this during hiring processes, and even though he answered to it, it's best not to have questions like that come up.

So far as the FAA goes, try this: Find a question (certification, maintenance, otherwise...somewhat an obscure question about the FARs) and take it to 3 different FSDOs and ask the same exact question verbatim. I'll bet dollars to donuts that you get two or three different answers.

Tried it myself and it worked. Just need to remember the exact certificate question I was asking since this was 1993.

So much for Flight Standards District Office.

MD

EatSleepFly · April 27th, 2003, 16:26

Oh yeah, I knew what he meant. I'm just being an ass, sorry.

It really boils down to what companies/airlines see as "OK". You can have 3000 hrs. of PIC time as safety pilot and I'm quite sure they'd toss your app. w/ out taking a second look at it. But the FAA says its ok....

By the way, pardon my ignorance, but who is that in the picture in your posts? Just curious...

MikeD · April 27th, 2003, 16:30

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah, I knew what he meant. I'm just being an ass, sorry.

It really boils down to what companies/airlines see as "OK". You can have 3000 hrs. of PIC time as safety pilot and I'm quite sure they'd toss your app. w/ out taking a second look at it. But the FAA says its ok....

By the way, pardon my ignorance, but who is that in the picture in your posts? Just curious...

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree. And you're fully correct that, according to the regs, the FAA does say it's OK. But you also understand what else I'm talking about too.

Wish it didn't have to be that way. Someday if I'm ever King........

MD

Visceral · May 1st, 2003, 05:44

Well this is an interesting thread. Two guys riding around in an Arrow both logging PIC with no instruction going on and neither necessarily acting as safety pilot for instrument work. Wonder how long the FAA will let this loophole interpretation stand.

sbav8r · May 1st, 2003, 06:51

No, one person at any time logging PIC not two. This is not a loophole it is the regs and that is how it is written and interpreted by the FAA.

bluelake · May 2nd, 2003, 19:57

So.. ok. Let me see if I have this correct, because this is my exact situation:

1) I went back in my logbook. The first 7-8 hours of my commercial maneuvers training was done in a Piper Arrow. My CFI did not give me PIC time. But I was the sole manipulator of the controls and at the time was Private Pilot ASEL, so legally I could have logged PIC time. Yes?

2) Ditto on about 4 hours of dual recieved in a Super Cub (tailwheel) recieved while a Private Pilot. Yes??

I've read this thread with great interest, and thanks for all the opinions also the references to the FAR's. My (evolving) philosophy is that if I can legally log something I am going to, because I CAN and its a record of my experience.

Now, if I use a particular situation as a CRUTCH to build time, then that is the type of thing I imagine would be sniffed out at an interview later on. I figure that if I get passed up for a job 'cuz 1/3rd of my multi time is a bunch of .6 hr repositioning legs with a Part 135 operator, then I get whats NOT coming to me

April 25th, 2003, 23:45	#1
farwellbooth Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 316	logging complex, not rated... I flew a Cessna Centurion (fast sucker for me!) and wondering if and how I can log this time? I don't have any hours in complex aircraft. We filed and flew IFR (conditions were VFR) and I'm not quite IFR rated yet. I sat right seat and flew the majority of the trip. I should know these regs! Half the trip we had a current CFI up front with me (however not positive he's current). Should I log half the trip dual, the other half SIC? All SIC? Any PIC? thanks

April 25th, 2003, 23:53	#2
I_Money Moderator Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Socal Posts: 5,650	Re: logging complex, not rated... The only bit you would be able to log is the bit with the CFI and that is only if he is current, and it would not be a bad idea to get him to sign your logbook too! I always think if you are not logging PIC you should have your dual signed.

April 26th, 2003, 00:22	#3
Buzo Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Rockford, IL Posts: 254	Re: logging complex, not rated... If you hold a ASEL rating you can log the entire time you were sole manipulator as PIC. Only one person can log PIC though. You must make sure the other pilots weren't logging it. If the CFI was current you can have them log it as dual for you as long as they sign your logbook

April 26th, 2003, 02:21	#4
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: logging complex, not rated... With no Complex endorsement how can he log it PIC? What's the point in having the endorsement?

April 26th, 2003, 06:19	#5
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... Because he's not ACTING as PIC, he's LOGGING it as PIC. In order to ACT as PIC, he'd have to have the endorsement (plus his high performance endorsement, for a 210).

April 26th, 2003, 07:44	#6
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: logging complex, not rated... I looked real close at CFR 61.51 and damn it if you aint right. I always thought of it as acting and logging were one in the same.

April 26th, 2003, 11:01	#7
I_Money Moderator Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Socal Posts: 5,650	Re: logging complex, not rated... I think it is a bit Mickey Mousey (IMHO) saying their is a difference between logging and acting PIC. We all know our log books are records to show our flight experience, so by logging this time your records would not be accurate of your flight experience.

April 26th, 2003, 12:43	#8
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: logging complex, not rated... SIC in a 210? Remember SIC can only be filed if either the aircraft certification requires an SIC, or if the company Ops Specs (if used commercially) requires it. Regards the complex/HP signoff, he would need it if he wanted to fly the plane solo (in addition to, of course, the ASEL). Personally, even though someone has an ASEL and hours in a 172, I would reccommend getting trained on any aircraft one upgrades to. Saw one guy at an airport I was at a couple of weeks ago who had just purchased a PA-28RT after getting his P-ASEL in a Warrior with topoff in an Archer. Guy mentioned that learning "on the job" was "fun and interesting." He was working on understanding how the "the turbo thing worked" on the engine. Turns out he already had 12 hours in the plane. Danger and bad idea written all over that operation. Danger and bad idea written all over that. Much like formation flying with no training and no knowlege of any regs governing such flying. MD

April 26th, 2003, 15:11	#9
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] I think it is a bit Mickey Mousey (IMHO) saying their is a difference between logging and acting PIC. We all know our log books are records to show our flight experience, so by logging this time your records would not be accurate of your flight experience. [/ QUOTE ] Well, there is a difference, no matter what you think of it. And the FAA agrees. So, you wouldn't want to log it if you rode along with someone who let you do some of the flying, even though they were acting as PIC? Your loss...

April 26th, 2003, 16:36	#10
A300Capt Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 709	Re: logging complex, not rated... farwellbooth, Don't log it as SIC. The aircraft, nor the use of the aircraft under these circumstances requires a SIC. Can't log it as PIC since you don't have a complex endorsement and therefore not really qualified to fly it. About the only thing you can log it under is dual received by the CFI onboard...assuming he is current.

April 26th, 2003, 16:42	#11
A300Capt Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 709	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] Well, there is a difference, no matter what you think of it. And the FAA agrees. [/ QUOTE ] EatSleepFly, I'm a little rusty, and too lazy to look it up, on what the FAA agrees is legal or not in this area (also, depending on who you speak with and what day of the week it is). Would you care to site specific regs and sources for your info which clearly state the difference between logging and acting as PIC.

April 26th, 2003, 17:12	#12
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... Sure, I'll give it a whirl. To act as PIC, you must: "Hold the appropriate category, class and type rating for the conduct of the flight." Thats found in the definition of PIC under FAR 1.1. If you look under 61.51(e) (Logging of Pilot-In-Command Flight Time), it says: "A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log PIC 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". Now, to ACT as PIC of an aircraft that is complex, high performance, tailwheel, pressurized, etc., you MUST HAVE the necessary endorsements. FAR 61.31. But if you're the sole manipulator of the controls in one of these aircraft, as long as someone else is ACTING as PIC, you can log it. (Provided you are rated in category and class). Example: Joe owns an Arrow, and is properly endorsed, etc. to fly it. Jim is a private pilot with no endorsements. Jim goes flying with Joe some morning. Once they get aloft, Joe lets Jim take the controls for a bit. Joe is ACTING as PIC, but since Jim is sole manipulator of the controls, he can LOG it as PIC, and so can Joe since he is acting as such. ...and, as a closing, this is an excerpt from the FAR's Explained book, which is an FAA Chief Counsel Opinion (the excerpt, not the book): "A private pilot may log PIC time, in a complex or HP airplane for those portions of the flight when he or she is the sole manipulator of the controls because the aircraft being operated is SEL and the private pilot holds a SEL rating. However, while the private pilot may log this time as PIC, he or she may not ACT as PIC unless he or she has the appropriate endorsement under FAR 61.31." Just whatever you do, do NOT log it as SIC or dual received if the instructor doesnt endorse it. You're going to have a hard time explaining that if you do... ...and my headache just got worse. I hate reading FAR's...

April 26th, 2003, 17:28	#13
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: logging complex, not rated... I'll anser the question since I did look it up and as I see it Eatsleep was correct. CFR 61.51 (e) Logging pilot in command flight time. 1. A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot in command time only for that flight time during which that person is- (i) Is sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated. In this case the pilot is "rated" ASEL. This is all that is necessary for logging pilot in command flight time, an endorsement for high performance/ complex is not a rating. CFR 61.31 (e) Additional training for operating complex airplanes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e) (2) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a cmplex airplane, unless the person has (i) received and logged ground instruction and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane and has been found profecient in the operation and systems of the airplane; and (ii) Recieved a one-time endorsement in the pilots logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person proficient to operate a complex airplane. note: in (2) it states that if any pilot has logged time in complex aircraft prior to August 4, 1997 the endorsement is not needed. So by this he may not solo the airplane or act as pilot in command of it, but may log pilot in command flight time for the time for which he was sole manipulator of the controls. Someone else in the aircraft is needed to act as pilot in command to make the flight legal, if that person has the proper endorsement.

April 26th, 2003, 17:29	#14
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: logging complex, not rated... Sorry eatsleep you beat me to it while I was writing that.

April 26th, 2003, 17:36	#15
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... Hahaha...no prob. Just that if I had known you were going to do it, I wouldn't have bothered!

April 26th, 2003, 17:50	#16
A300Capt Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 709	Re: logging complex, not rated... Okay, thanks guys.

April 27th, 2003, 11:49	#17
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,225 Blog Entries: 1	Re: logging complex, not rated... If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it!

April 27th, 2003, 15:51	#18
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it! [/ QUOTE ] Very true.

April 27th, 2003, 16:00	#19
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it! [/ QUOTE ] How do you figure? I dug out the FAR's just to prove that you could log it...

April 27th, 2003, 16:15	#20
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you've got to dig out the FARs to see if you can log experience, chances are, you can't log it! [/ QUOTE ] How do you figure? I dug out the FAR's just to prove that you could log it... [/ QUOTE ] What Doug means is that, generally speaking, if one needs to refer to the regs for exact terms regarding logging flight time, then more than likely, you're "walking the line", so to speak, on the legality of the issue. It's not as "cut and dried", if you get my drift. I personally disagree with the whole "acting" versus "logging" PIC. I know that some FAA types have interperted the issue, but to me, you're either PIC, or you're not. Plain and simple. Just because someone in the FAA interperted it one way doesn't change how I personally would log it; that's just me, because it could come up later when someone asks the question on it (interview, etc), and it's better to log flight time that's "cut and dried", than possibly questionable (whether legal or not, I'm talking if it even raises eyebrows. It's the same thing with logging time as PIC in a 135 op when one leg is being flown under 91 (such as reposition leg). Legal? Yes. Yet I've seen some of my friends get questioned on this during hiring processes, and even though he answered to it, it's best not to have questions like that come up. So far as the FAA goes, try this: Find a question (certification, maintenance, otherwise...somewhat an obscure question about the FARs) and take it to 3 different FSDOs and ask the same exact question verbatim. I'll bet dollars to donuts that you get two or three different answers. Tried it myself and it worked. Just need to remember the exact certificate question I was asking since this was 1993. So much for Flight Standards District Office. MD

April 27th, 2003, 16:26	#21
EatSleepFly Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: ?? Posts: 4,600	Re: logging complex, not rated... Oh yeah, I knew what he meant. I'm just being an ass, sorry. It really boils down to what companies/airlines see as "OK". You can have 3000 hrs. of PIC time as safety pilot and I'm quite sure they'd toss your app. w/ out taking a second look at it. But the FAA says its ok.... By the way, pardon my ignorance, but who is that in the picture in your posts? Just curious...

April 27th, 2003, 16:30	#22
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: logging complex, not rated... [ QUOTE ] Oh yeah, I knew what he meant. I'm just being an ass, sorry. It really boils down to what companies/airlines see as "OK". You can have 3000 hrs. of PIC time as safety pilot and I'm quite sure they'd toss your app. w/ out taking a second look at it. But the FAA says its ok.... By the way, pardon my ignorance, but who is that in the picture in your posts? Just curious... [/ QUOTE ] Agree. And you're fully correct that, according to the regs, the FAA does say it's OK. But you also understand what else I'm talking about too. Wish it didn't have to be that way. Someday if I'm ever King........ MD

May 1st, 2003, 05:44	#23
Visceral Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 293	Re: logging complex, not rated... Well this is an interesting thread. Two guys riding around in an Arrow both logging PIC with no instruction going on and neither necessarily acting as safety pilot for instrument work. Wonder how long the FAA will let this loophole interpretation stand.

May 1st, 2003, 06:51	#24
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: logging complex, not rated... No, one person at any time logging PIC not two. This is not a loophole it is the regs and that is how it is written and interpreted by the FAA.

May 2nd, 2003, 19:57	#25
bluelake Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Redding, CA Posts: 619	Re: logging complex, not rated... So.. ok. Let me see if I have this correct, because this is my exact situation: 1) I went back in my logbook. The first 7-8 hours of my commercial maneuvers training was done in a Piper Arrow. My CFI did not give me PIC time. But I was the sole manipulator of the controls and at the time was Private Pilot ASEL, so legally I could have logged PIC time. Yes? 2) Ditto on about 4 hours of dual recieved in a Super Cub (tailwheel) recieved while a Private Pilot. Yes?? I've read this thread with great interest, and thanks for all the opinions also the references to the FAR's. My (evolving) philosophy is that if I can legally log something I am going to, because I CAN and its a record of my experience. Now, if I use a particular situation as a CRUTCH to build time, then that is the type of thing I imagine would be sniffed out at an interview later on. I figure that if I get passed up for a job 'cuz 1/3rd of my multi time is a bunch of .6 hr repositioning legs with a Part 135 operator, then I get whats NOT coming to me

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode