Fudging the logbook

[aeroscout]

The General Helicopter Forum statistics count my reply as reply 200, even though it shows up as 201, I guess one count's the OP, and one doesn't.

Edited August 31, 2012 by aeroscout

[C of G]

200th reply makes it the 201st post. The first post isn't a reply.

[nightsta1ker]

200th reply makes it the 201st post. The first post isn't a reply.

 

Thanks for clearing that up

[aeroscout]

Thanks for clearing that up

I believe someone got all my credit for the 200th reply ?

[nightsta1ker]

I believe someone got all my credit for the 200th reply ?

 

You can take it all back if you want. I don't give a fart in the wind!

[aeroscout]

You can take it all back if you want. I don't give a fart in the wind!

Well at least the thread got pushed to 11 pages. Not many go that much.

[zippiesdrainage]

Did you know if you click the "like this" button three times it'll give a negative like? That's amazing!

[nightsta1ker]

No wonder my posts are always rated so low... everyone wants to give it more stars but they inadvertently take them away!

[aeroscout]

Did you know if you click the "like this" button twice it'll give a negative like? That's amazing!

I was going to like your post, but you already liked it yourself.

[avbug]

Know that all flight physicals will be electronic by October and flight times listed on these forms along with verification by previous employers, 135 records, insurance forms and 8710s must all agree.

 

This is untrue.

 

There is no requirement to cite flight times when completing the medical form, or to list them on an 8710; this is voluntary. One can put whatever one wishes; there's no way to verify it at the time (or later) and it isn't checked.

 

Insurance forms are not checked by the FAA, nor do employers past or future have access. PRIA records apply for pilots operating under Part 121 and 135, but Part 91 employes are not required to respond or report.

 

One can list one's flight times on an 8710, but only what's required for the particular certificate or rating is required; nothing more. Some pilots will list their times and use a copy of that form as a backup for later reference in the event their pilot records (logbook, etc) are lost or destroyed. However, it's not required. I put the times down when I filled out the paperwork during my last type rating: I was ordered to re-do the paperwork and include no flight times.

 

As for falsification of logs, the FAA does take it seriously. However, it's not uncommon, and I've known a number of individuals who did it. Some quite blatantly. I know one designated examiner who has always counseled applicants upon completing their practical test to falsify their time in order to get a job. He counseled them to stop logging for a time later on, if it helped their conscience.

 

I don't falsify my times; I know a lot of others that do. It's improper, it's illegal, and it's morally incorrect, but it goes on throughout the industry, and always has.

 

I know more about a pilot before we ever reach the aircraft than I'll discover during a flight. Lack of experience is readily apparent. Time means nothing. It can be falsified and even falsified well. Experience, however, is invaluable, and there is no substitute.

 

Build experience. Not hours.

[Mikemv]

This is untrue. What is untrue? I never said these times were required!

 

There is no requirement (where in my partial quote did I say this?)to cite flight times when completing the medical form, or to list them on an 8710; this is voluntary. One can put whatever one wishes; there's no way to verify it at the time (or later) (There certainly is later and it can be checked, figure how how) and it isn't checked. When a pilot is under investigation about logging flight time it is checked, that is what happens in an investigation. Forms of like dates or nearly so can be compared!

 

Insurance forms are not checked by the FAA, How do you know what the FAA or civilian attorneys check? nor do employers past or future have access. Employers do have access, especially when they call for references and discuss pilot quals. You really do not know what you are talking about here. PRIA records apply for pilots operating under Part 121 and 135, but Part 91 employes are not required to respond or report. But when suspected and investigated times have been questioned part 91 records can be found. Hopefully you know where they would come from. There are times when Part 91 flights beyond logging for a Certificate or rating are required. Figure out when!

 

One can list one's flight times on an 8710, but only what's required for the particular certificate or rating is required; nothing more. Some pilots will list their times and use a copy of that form as a backup for later reference in the event their pilot records (logbook, etc) are lost or destroyed. However, it's not required. I put the times down when I filled out the paperwork during my last type rating: I was ordered to re-do the paperwork and include no flight times.

 

As for falsification of logs, the FAA does take it seriously. However, it's not uncommon, and I've known a number of individuals who did it. Some quite blatantly. I know one designated examiner who has always counseled applicants upon completing their practical test to falsify their time in order to get a job (what did you do about this?). He counseled them to stop logging for a time later on, if it helped their conscience.

 

I don't falsify my times; I know a lot of others that do. It's improper, it's illegal, and it's morally incorrect, but it goes on throughout the industry, and always has.

 

I know more about a pilot before we ever reach the aircraft than I'll discover during a flight. Lack of experience is readily apparent. Time means nothing. It can be falsified and even falsified well. Experience, however, is invaluable, and there is no substitute.

 

Build experience. Not hours.

 

You come on the internet and chastise people about doing something that you say is what a 14 year old does but do not understand how items work on the forum! You also need to read what people write before you tell anyone things are wrong or incorrect, it just makes you look foolish.

 

Mike

[avbug]

What is untrue? I never said these times were required!

 

You stated that insurance forms, 8710 times, hours reported on the medical application, 135 records, and times recorded by previous employers must all match, and that this will be verified.

 

That's untrue.

 

(what did you do about this?).

 

Counseled them, refused to hire them in several cases, and in several cases, saw that they were fired. Why do you ask?

 

Employers do have access, especially when they call for references and discuss pilot quals. You really do not know what you are talking about here.

 

In most cases, employers do not, and beyond what is required for PRIA, most employers are very reluctant to release information about former employers. The release of that information can be used in a law suit, and often is. When one employer calls another employer, generally HR personnel are reluctant to say any more than required by law. This is why we have PRIA. PRIA requires employers (under certain regulations, not all) to check, and it requires employers (under certain regulations, not all) to respond. Employers who are not required to respond usually do NOT.

 

You also need to read what people write before you tell anyone things are wrong or incorrect, it just makes you look foolish.

 

I read it. You were (and are) wrong, and you were quoted. Hard for me to look "foolish" when I quoted you giving bad information, isn't it?

 

It is, which is why I don't look foolish.

 

When you say that "flight times listed on these forms along with verification by previous employers, 135 records, insurance forms and 8710s must all agree," you say incorrectly. Attempting to argue otherwise makes you appear foolish. You should stop.

 

How do you know what the FAA or civilian attorneys check?

 

Because I've been involved with, and have experience with that process. How about you?

 

The fact is that a pilots logbook doesn't need to match a medical application, because one need not report one's flight time on the medical application if one doesn't desire to do so

 

The fact is that a pilot's logbook doesn't need to match a form 8710 because one doesn't need to report one's times on the 8710 beyond what's specific to the rating.

 

The fact is that a pilot's logbook doesn't need to match insurance paperwork, because there's no mechanism for the FAA to compare the two, nor does the FAA concern itself with a pilot's dealing with the insurance company.

 

The fact is that the FAA isn't concerned about matching a pilot's recorded experience under Part 121 or 135 with insurance paperwork. An employer under Part 121 or 135 already has an initial obligation under existing regulation to verify the applicant's experience and background insofar as the regulation permits and requires. Asked and answered.

[Mikemv]

Avbug,

 

Look, not trying to be argumentative. You state times on forms and logs do not have to match or even be entered and as you stated it you are absolutely CORRECT.

 

However, when pilots try hard to bluff their way into jobs with fattened times in log books and resumes and people/employers ask questions and the FAA/attorneys/etc. investigate because the pilot DID enter times on all the mentioned forms and they did not match and his employment history/calendar, work history do not match and someone is questioning all of this, it does not work.

 

I was asking what you did about the DPE, not the pilots, that was suggesting dishonest practices and really it does not matter to me. I was trying to get you to show your leadership to the up & comers that read our posts.

 

I have almost no experience after 45+ years in helicopter aviation so pay absolutely no attention to anything I post as I am always totally wrong, incorrect, etc.

 

You and Merchado are always correct.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Mike

[avbug]

You and Merchado are always correct.

 

That's a different thread. Try to keep up. Perhaps 45 years has been just a little too long for you.

 

I've a few decades under my belt, too. Big deal.

 

I was asking what you did about the DPE, not the pilots, that was suggesting dishonest practices and really it does not matter to me. I was trying to get you to show your leadership to the up & comers that read our posts.

 

Perhaps you can speak for yourself, and not for me. I really don't need your help getting employed, showing leadership, leading, following, flying, turning wrenches, or doing anything else. I'm able to do that all by myself, thanks. You might have done better to describe what you might have done, had you the same experience.

 

with regard to the designated examiner, I did nothing. The FAA has a poor, monopolized system in which most qualified individuals who could act as designated examiners are not allowed, and only a select few get to rape the system, charge ridiculous fees, and play that game. Whether the designee elects to counsel applicant to paint themselves green, falsify their logs, or eat bananas is irrelevant to me.

 

If the applicant seeks employment with me, that's another matter.

 

One who falsifies one's log, or advocates that others do so, indicates a tendency toward dishonesty. That said, if all one wants are hours, then by all means, pencil whip away, because that's all the time in the log is worth; the cost of a pen.

 

Experience can't be duplicated or falsified, and that's what counts. It's what shows. If one thinks hours are where it's at, more power to them. When the rubber meets the road, the rotor the air, and the wing moves over the runway, lack of experience becomes painfully obvious. For those who would falsify their logs, good luck. They'll need it.

 

The rest of us don't depend on luck.

[aeroscout]

I'm not sure I agree that it is a good general rule to say experience shows. I have seen many high time pilots be as ham fisted and marginally able to adhere to PTS standards for the certificate they carry, even lesser certificates. I have seen more than a few natural stick pilots who have beautiful control touches I would put light years ahead of the aforementioned. Also, I don't know how much you can accurately gauge experience prior to the flight. If you mean knowledge there are those with high knowledge levels with low experience. Maybe you could point out a more accurate gauge for experience prior to the flight ?

Edited September 6, 2012 by aeroscout

[nightsta1ker]

I agree that there is a difference between skill and experience. As has already been mentioned, 2500 hours of flying the same tour route does not exactly provide the most opportunity for growth and experience. Others have struggled to find work where they can, changing jobs often, flying different types doing different things. These pilots often gain valuable skills and knowledge faster and could run laps around pilots with 3 times their 'experience'.

 

Of course, I believe that was kind of what avbug was trying to convey. The logbook, in his opinion, really doesn't matter. How you fly and what you know does.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I still think that fudging time to get a job, whether you have the desired skills or not, is loathsome. But I also disagree with the current hiring minimums in place. If you can pass a company check ride and they like you and think you will be a good fit, what does it matter if you have 3000 hours or 300? (My teeth are clenched. Fire when ready!)

[eagle5]

With regards to experience, piloting ability, or knowledge, hours don't mean sh*t! Fat logbooks don't necessarily make good pilots and thin logbooks don't necessarily make poor pilots!

 

For some pilots all they need is a chance to prove themselves and a fudged logbook can do that. A fat logbook can open a door, it won't get you the job, but it can give you the chance to prove you have the skills they want! This is why some pilots fudge their books. Its no different than sleeping with your boss to get promoted, or having a friend in the company get you an interview even though you don't meet their minimums! You still won't be able to get/keep the job unless you can prove yourself in the field!

[nightsta1ker]

Ah. There's that slippery slope again. Better watch your step!

 

So what you're saying is, if I fudge my logbook, and I manage to get through the hiring process, I will get weeded out through natural selection if I don't have the skills it takes? I thought that's what the hour minimums were supposed to be about preventing?

[Pohi]

Ah. There's that slippery slope again. Better watch your step!

 

So what you're saying is, if I fudge my logbook, and I manage to get through the hiring process, I will get weeded out through natural selection if I don't have the skills it takes? I thought that's what the hour minimums were supposed to be about preventing?

 

Odds are you won't get weeded out, they will just have to spend more time training you.

 

From what I have seen, if you are hired already and in the process of being trained and can't fly, it's cheaper for them to keep training than to start over looking for another pilot.

[eagle5]

Ah. There's that slippery slope again. Better watch your step!

 

So what you're saying is, if I fudge my logbook, and I manage to get through the hiring process, I will get weeded out through natural selection if I don't have the skills it takes? I thought that's what the hour minimums were supposed to be about preventing?

 

I got an interview and you didn't despite being below posted minimums because;

 

I had a recommendation and you didn't.

I just happen to walk in the door when they needed someone.

I'm sleeping with the owners daughter.

My dad owns the company.

The chief pilot and I are old friends.

I fudged my book.

 

There are many ways a pilot can get through the door without having the published minimums, but without the ability to fly to company standards they probably won't be offered the job!

 

Hour minimums only prevent capable pilots with no contacts, who are honest, but struggling to build time, from getting job interviews! They don't prevent bad pilots from getting jobs, that's what the interview/probation period are for!

 

I heard that Tempsco (one of the places a new 1000hr pilot goes to get turbine experience) requires their new hires to go through 135 training. If you got there below minimums for one of the above reasons, but couldn't pass their 135 training, I doubt they would keep you,...but that's only a guess!

[avbug]

Hiring minimums only prevent unqualified pilots for that position from applying, or if applying, from receiving consideration. Hiring minimums are just that: minimums. Hiring minimums are not what is important when seeking a job.

 

Competitive minimums are what's important. A pilot must be competitive.

 

If a company is advertising hiring minimums of 1,000 hours, and everyone who applies has 10,000 hours, the competitive minimums just went to 10,000 hours. What's advertised is irrelevant.

[eagle5]

There's a job ad with a minimum of 1000hrs to fly tours in an R44. One pilot has only 500hrs, but has been flying tours in an R44 2-3hrs/day, 5 days a week, for that last 200hrs. Another pilot has 5000hrs, but has never flown tours, has no R44 time, and only flies 1-3hrs a month.

 

Who is really more "qualified" for that job?

 

 

On a side note; Every so often (it just happened again) when I click on this site (doesn't matter where) that damn boatpix site automatically comes up! Am I the only one who experiences this?

[avbug]

Who is really more "qualified" for that job?

 

The only person qualified to answer that is the person doing the selecting on the day that the hiring takes place.

[DS_HMMR]

You can take it all back if you want. I don't give a fart in the wind!

 

if you happen to be "downwind"…..then, "you care"….

[DS_HMMR]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I really hate stories like yours!

 

They hired you with no time in type or specific job experience over others that did simply due to who you know! They even trained you in an R44 FOR FREE, to meet their insurance, who does that?

 

This makes me think that it doesn't matter how hard I work, how dedicated I am, how much I persevere, How many resumes I hand deliver, how much experience I have, how many hours I have, what I've flown, or the type of flying I've done! ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHO I KNOW!

 

This thread has it all wrong! Its not the logbook that needs fudging, its the resume, under "references"!

 

 

It's not like that. Matter of fact, its almost "never" like that. FWIW, look at it the other way: If you can represent yourself, your training, and your work ethic; as being superior…….then the hours a pilot has will become slightly-secondary to the skill set he or she can demonstrate.

 

and that is really the take home message (to me). TRAIN your butt off, don't worry about hours, worry about proficiency. If you can show up for an interview with the skill set , then the job is yours.