Jump to content

Babysitting Flights?


eagle5

Recommended Posts

Respectfully, I'd be real carful. A part 91 "joy ride" has no flightcrew requirement. Like mentioned above, company policy cannot supersede the FAR's. Thus, by the regulations, you are not required to be there. Its a company policy that requires you to be there. Zero correlation.

 

IMO, morality has little to do with it and while you see no harm in it, some Fed Inspector may think otherwise. Plus, this is a little more severe matter than the "loggable flight time" debate......

 

Point taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so how about in another direction. What if that CFI logged the time, but not as PIC and didn't log "instruction given?" Would that be acceptable Spike?

 

People get together all the time to cut costs and build hours like that, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would you log it if not as pic? You cant log sic. You can't log it as instructed. What do you log it as?

 

Only one pilot can log pic at a time. Pilots that split cost and both log pic are cheating. Either you are being instructed, you are pic, sic, or you are not logging. If the aircraft doesn't require a second pilot, you can't log sic. The only way around this is I'd one pilot is a CFI and is providing instruction to the other licensed pilot. Then they can both log pic.

Edited by nightsta1ker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I'm trying to figure out nightsta1ker. I guess I just assumed you could log it. I didn't realize that you HAD to log PIC, SIC or dual received/inst given (as appropriate).

 

So if two private pilots rent a bird, the only one that can log it is the one on the controls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be correct.

I don't know if I can agree with you. One pilot will always be more experienced, even if by an hour or a day. The FAA would find that person to be the PIC. The other will be able to log PIC as sole manipulator. As for split, it's anything different from 100/0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2012 at 8:07 PM, aeroscout said:

I don't know if I can agree with you. One pilot will always be more experienced, even if by an hour or a day. The FAA would find that person to be the PIC. The other will be able to log PIC as sole manipulator. As for split, it's anything different from 100/0.

 

For enforcement actions, incidents or accidents, sure, the most qualified can be held accountable. Furthermore, we can hypothesize this to the nth-degree and every situation is different, but with regards to the question presented, the answer is simple. And, the first and last sentence of the last paragraph of the attached makes it crystal…..

 

 

As far as shearing expenses, it’s shared equally with everyone on board.

 

Edited by Spike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good lessons to be learned in those posts Spike. The FAA is usually an almost invisible entity, which gives pilot's a false sense of security that they can basically get away with whatever they want. But you simply never know when/where they might show up, and when they start digging, they don't stop until they find something. I can almost guarantee that my logbook has some errors in it somewhere, made by one of my instructors no doubt B)

Edited by nightsta1ker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spike, where are you finding this stuff? I'd love to read more articles like this without needing you to post them. haha

 

I'm a hoarder and my house if filled with old aviation magazines and cat poop..... Kidding...

 

Many years ago, as an instructor, I wanted to be knowledgeable and accurate about the material I was teaching. Therefore, anytime a relevant article was published in a magazine which I found interesting, I cut it out and saved it. I only did this for a few years and my current file is roughly 2 inches thick. Even though I eventually stopped doing this, I still cut out an article from time to time if I believe it may have some value to me later on. Plus, most of the stuff published nowadays can be found electronically. Either way, don't just look at the cool pictures in these magazines. Read them, cover to cover and you'll be surprised what you can learn......

 

In any case, one of the things to be understood is, most of these topics/debates/discussions here at VR are not new. Simply put, it's new to some but only by the fact they are new to aviation......

 

If you want to read more from Mr. Yodice, just Google him....

Edited by Spike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did find all the AOPA pubs. They went back as far as 1996. Some of those Pilot Counsel and Never Again articles are quite informative...

 

I currently have a subscription to Vertical and Vertical 911. If you were to recommend 2 more magazines, what would they be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did find all the AOPA pubs. They went back as far as 1996. Some of those Pilot Counsel and Never Again articles are quite informative...

 

I currently have a subscription to Vertical and Vertical 911. If you were to recommend 2 more magazines, what would they be?

 

Mad and Playboy....

 

No really, AOPA (I believe it comes with a membership) and Flying have good all-around information for the GA flyer albeit not necessarily 100% geared for helicopters.

 

Of course, HeliOps as well and Rotorcraft Professional and Rotor&Wing. Most can be had for free.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...