Knikflyer

Active Member
The 50nm cross country is only for private, instrument, and commercial, otherwise it’s every time you go to a different airport. I believe it’s 61.1
 

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
The 50nm cross country is only for private, instrument, and commercial, otherwise it’s every time you go to a different airport. I believe it’s 61.1
Almost but not quite.

The >50NM requirement is for private, instrument, commercial and ATP in an airplane (>25 for rotorcraft). Private, instrument, and commercial require a landing >50 NM from where the flight started; ATP does not require the remote landing.

Yes, all of the cross country definitions are in 61.1.
 

Knikflyer

Active Member
(C) That includes a landing at a point other than the point of departure; and
(D) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to the landing point.
(ii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements (except for a rotorcraft category rating), for a private pilot certificate (except for a powered parachute category rating), a commercial pilot certificate, or an instrument rating, or for the purpose of exercising recreational pilot privileges (except in a rotorcraft) under §61.101 (c), time acquired during a flight

It’s doesn’t mention ATP, am I missing something? I was about to redo my logs but don’t want to have a mess when I go for ATP.
 

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
(C) That includes a landing at a point other than the point of departure; and
(D) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to the landing point.
(ii) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements (except for a rotorcraft category rating), for a private pilot certificate (except for a powered parachute category rating), a commercial pilot certificate, or an instrument rating, or for the purpose of exercising recreational pilot privileges (except in a rotorcraft) under §61.101 (c), time acquired during a flight

It’s doesn’t mention ATP, am I missing something? I was about to redo my logs but don’t want to have a mess when I go for ATP.
Yes. You are missing reading the rest of the regulation. It's long, with subparagraphs applicable to certificates and ratings other than the ones I bolded in the part you did read. Including this part:

(vi) For the purpose of meeting the aeronautical experience requirements for an airline transport pilot certificate (except with a rotorcraft category rating), time acquired during a flight—

(A) Conducted in an appropriate aircraft;

(B) That is at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure; and

(C) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems.
 

A300Capt

Freight Dawg
Guess I prefer the KISS principle here. If you're not soley responsible for the aircraft, nor the principle and final decision maker of/for that aircraft during the time it's being operated, than you're not the PIC and can't/shouldn't be logging it as PIC time during 135/121 operations. How you and your buddy log flying around the grass strip in a single engine Cessna is up to you. 135/121 ops becomes a clear case of who's PIC vs SIC vs nobody.

Now if you're the type to spent endless hours searching the FAR's looking for what the meaning of *is* is in search of a loophole to log PIC, even though you know you weren't the acting or the assigned PIC of the flight, I would harshly question and scrutinize logging it as such if I were interviewing you. In my opionion, regardless of some loophole, you're either the PIC, SIC or in the "dual given/received" column. Shouldn't be a grey area...
 

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
Guess I prefer the KISS principle here. If you're not soley responsible for the aircraft, nor the principle and final decision maker of/for that aircraft during the time it's being operated, than you're not the PIC and can't/shouldn't be logging it as PIC time during 135/121 operations. How you and your buddy log flying around the grass strip in a single engine Cessna is up to you. 135/121 ops becomes a clear case of who's PIC vs SIC vs nobody.

Now if you're the type to spent endless hours searching the FAR's looking for what the meaning of *is* is in search of a loophole to log PIC, even though you know you weren't the acting or the assigned PIC of the flight, I would harshly question and scrutinize logging it as such if I were interviewing you. In my opionion, regardless of some loophole, you're either the PIC, SIC or in the "dual given/received" column. Shouldn't be a grey area...
You are making two big assumptions here.

One is that your rules are more important than the FAA's rules and should apply when logging flight time toward FAA certificates, ratings, flight privileges and currency. The second is that something the FAA set up and consistently interpreted for 40 years or more is a "loophole."

OTOH, if you would need "endless hours" to decipher a few sentences written in pretty plain English, I'd avoid that interview too :D, although I know that "acting as PIC" and "logging PIC flight time" being two distinct and separate things is not exactly the most intuitive concept to grasp.
 
Last edited:

JJ429PA

Well-Known Member
Best explanation I've heard on this is: if you were to no-show for the flight, could the flight still depart with just the remaining crewmember and be legal to do so under it's originally scheduled part (91/91k/135)? Forget company policy and insurance requirements. The only factor is whether the flight would be legal in the eyes of the FAA. If the answer is yes, you are not a required crewmember and should not log the time. If no, you are a required crewmember and should log the time. As for logging PIC on top of it...oooof. I wouldn't go down that rabbit hole.

Here's something else to consider: eventually, human beings will look at your logbooks for a job you really really want. The loopholes or interpretations that you come up with now are really just for you to convince yourself. Someone else may disagree. The regs aren't cheat codes. Logging PIC in a 135 op without a PIC qualification is going to raise eyebrows. Do you want to be defending your time based on a conditional interpretation of a 3-paragraph reg? Coming up with creative ways to log time you probably shouldn't be logging doesn't look so great and you ultimately hurt yourself at the end of the day. Maybe you can piece together a justification for logging PIC time as an SIC for an operation that doesn't require one, in an aircraft that doesn't require one...but that's a conversation I'd rather avoid altogether.

Strictly speaking, you can log anything you want. Go nuts. The question is whether anyone who matters will count it. Some people are happy to argue their case and it doesn't bother them. I'm not one. I like to keep things neat and clear cut.
 

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
Best explanation I've heard on this is: if you were to no-show for the flight, could the flight still depart with just the remaining crewmember and be legal to do so under it's originally scheduled part (91/91k/135)? Forget company policy and insurance requirements. The only factor is whether the flight would be legal in the eyes of the FAA. If the answer is yes, you are not a required crewmember and should not log the time. If no, you are a required crewmember and should log the time. As for logging PIC on top of it...oooof. I wouldn't go down that rabbit hole.

Here's something else to consider: eventually, human beings will look at your logbooks for a job you really really want. The loopholes or interpretations that you come up with now are really just for you to convince yourself. Someone else may disagree. The regs aren't cheat codes. Logging PIC in a 135 op without a PIC qualification is going to raise eyebrows. Do you want to be defending your time based on a conditional interpretation of a 3-paragraph reg? Coming up with creative ways to log time you probably shouldn't be logging doesn't look so great and you ultimately hurt yourself at the end of the day. Maybe you can piece together a justification for logging PIC time as an SIC for an operation that doesn't require one, in an aircraft that doesn't require one...but that's a conversation I'd rather avoid altogether.

Strictly speaking, you can log anything you want. Go nuts. The question is whether anyone who matters will count it. Some people are happy to argue their case and it doesn't bother them. I'm not one. I like to keep things neat and clear cut.
Strictly speaking you can't log anything you want. The FAA's standard penalty for intentional falsification of your logbook is revocation of all certificates and ratings.

But it really is interesting that so many people say the logging flight time in accordance with the FAA's long-standing rules will raise eyebrows at a 135 or 121 operator. Makes one wonder what other FAA rules they "raise eyebrows" at.

Would make an interest headline, eh? "Airline rejects pilots who follow FAA rules."
 

killbilly

Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
Strictly speaking you can't log anything you want. The FAA's standard penalty for intentional falsification of your logbook is revocation of all certificates and ratings.

But it really is interesting that so many people say the logging flight time in accordance with the FAA's long-standing rules will raise eyebrows at a 135 or 121 operator. Makes one wonder what other FAA rules they "raise eyebrows" at.

Would make an interest headline, eh? "Airline rejects pilots who follow FAA rules."
This reminds me the conversation we had about FSDO vs. OKC on reg interpretations.
 

JJ429PA

Well-Known Member
Strictly speaking you can't log anything you want. The FAA's standard penalty for intentional falsification of your logbook is revocation of all certificates and ratings.
Splitting hairs, but I always heard you could log anything. You can write your nanna's cookie recipe in your logbook if you wanted to. The violation would occur if you tried to use what you logged as the basis for currency, representing actual flight time, etc etc. Your logbook is yours, but what you report must be documented and must be accurate. Or I could be all wrong.
 

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
Splitting hairs, but I always heard you could log anything. You can write your nanna's cookie recipe in your logbook if you wanted to. The violation would occur if you tried to use what you logged as the basis for currency, representing actual flight time, etc etc. Your logbook is yours, but what you report must be documented and must be accurate. Or I could be all wrong.
We "hear" all sorts of things.

Yes, you can use your logbook as a scrapbook or recipe book. So far, I haven't met anyone who did the cookie recipe thing, but I have known folks who have done the scrapbook thing.

But when you put a number in one of the boxes, the FAA is entitled to say you intended to count it, as you put it, "as the basis for currency, representing actual flight time, etc etc" unless you indicate in some way in the entry it is not being used for that.
 

Autothrust Blue

"I’d make a suggestion but you won’t listen”
Here's something else to consider: eventually, human beings will look at your logbooks for a job you really really want. The loopholes or interpretations that you come up with now are really just for you to convince yourself. Someone else may disagree. The regs aren't cheat codes. Logging PIC in a 135 op without a PIC qualification is going to raise eyebrows. Do you want to be defending your time based on a conditional interpretation of a 3-paragraph reg? Coming up with creative ways to log time you probably shouldn't be logging doesn't look so great and you ultimately hurt yourself at the end of the day. Maybe you can piece together a justification for logging PIC time as an SIC for an operation that doesn't require one, in an aircraft that doesn't require one...but that's a conversation I'd rather avoid altogether.
Any job (that was really worth having, that is) only did a cursory glance at mine to make sure I was roughly telling the truth about my experience.

Of course, that was after I got a lot of experience.
 

nibake

Powder hound
There seems to be a lot of angst on here regarding PIC in 121/135 ops

If you are not PIC you can log PIC time per the regs.

Industry standard is to separate that.

When you go to an interview, whether you choose to log that time as PIC or not, be clear that you were NOT acting as PIC if indeed you were logging and not acting.

It took me a bit to come around, but since the industry wants me to log SIC as SIC even though I could log it as PIC sometimes, that is how I do it.

Why the angst?
 

Avalon781ML

Well-Known Member
From an employers perspective.... if I were interviewing you and I reviewed your logbook you better believe that I’m going to ask about this PIC you are logging. Moreover if you use it to qualify for an interview you might find yourself being shown the door because you are alleging, on paper, that your current employer has hired you to operate the aircraft as a PIC which unless I’m mistaken... you have not. Be very careful if you decide to log the time for the purposes of applications/resumes... and be ready to defend your decision to log the time in a potential interview situation.
 

jtrain609

I'm a carnal, organic anagram.
You are making two big assumptions here.

One is that your rules are more important than the FAA's rules and should apply when logging flight time toward FAA certificates, ratings, flight privileges and currency. The second is that something the FAA set up and consistently interpreted for 40 years or more is a "loophole."

OTOH, if you would need "endless hours" to decipher a few sentences written in pretty plain English, I'd avoid that interview too :D, although I know that "acting as PIC" and "logging PIC flight time" being two distinct and separate things is not exactly the most intuitive concept to grasp.
Two things.

First, the people who do interviews are pilots. Pilots are not lawyers. Pilots don't commonly understand subtlety, even when it's not so subtle.

Second, one of my Dad's favorite phrases is, "Being right can get you killed."

An interview isn't the time for litigation.
 

xdashdriver

Well-Known Member
From an employers perspective.... if I were interviewing you and I reviewed your logbook you better believe that I’m going to ask about this PIC you are logging. Moreover if you use it to qualify for an interview you might find yourself being shown the door because you are alleging, on paper, that your current employer has hired you to operate the aircraft as a PIC which unless I’m mistaken... you have not. Be very careful if you decide to log the time for the purposes of applications/resumes... and be ready to defend your decision to log the time in a potential interview situation.
In the 5 interviews I've been to in my career, no one has asked me a single question about it.
 
Top