Blueskies21

I think the union is just echoing the Company info, I don't think either of them have an FAA interpretation to support that.

For what it's worth we DO have a direct answer from the company/union of which times they're using for tracking various items.

I still wouldn't log more than 8 or 9 flight hours in my logbook but I guess that's up to each of us.

theUpsideDown

You sure are quick to admit you're new and know very little, but slow to call and find out why what the company says (and the union clarified) is correct. It's like you're half a professional pilot.

mojo6911

FAR 1.1 is clear.

Casualinterest

Literally every pilot I've ever flown with logs block.

Also, I hope no one logged Hobbs time when they went through flight training, instructing, or cargo... Since it's almost universally based on battery on with engine running and has nothing to do with movement.

In my decade as a flight instructor I've never met someone that logged movement time in GA. Furthermore, the FAA reps I worked with logged and approved Hobbs logging.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

vessbot

Logging Hobbs time in GA, and out-in at the airlines, has been a close-enough approximation to 1.1 that has been generally accepted without the FAA bringing up the discrepancy.

But now that the plane tracks (and supplies) exact 1.1, that's much shakier ground to stand on. Especially with the fact that out-in will give times greater than 117 allows. Do you really want to deal with the possibility of having to answer for why you logged more than 9 hours in one day?

Casualinterest

Good point was made earlier, be careful not to log more than 9. That was excellent advice.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

2dubs

Man you guys are beating a dead horse. No one cares if you log Block or the new 0001. Better question to ask is has anyone ever been asked at an interview if they logged Block/Hobbs time or "forward movement" time? I'm pretty sure the answer is NO!!!!

Shadre Reevis

So if we can't log more than 9, the company can't log more than 9. So then, what was the point of this change in the first place?

Bartok

Ah.......

What good times when you have to bicker over logbook times so you can upgrade.......

Blueskies21

So absolutely everything I said wasn't completely worthless, you at least took this away.

Something worthwhile came out of this discussion. My work here is done.

Now just ignore that if you agree it's a risk to log more than 9 hours in a day, the only really compelling argument there was for continuing to log block is consistency. If you can't log block all the time (because sometimes it would raise questions of legality), then the consistency argument is out the window.

But at least if you don't log more than 9 hrs you won't have to deal with that potential question of your logbook in an interview. You still will have falsified your logbook for those extra 5 minutes each flight that you are completely aware of (and have accurate accounting for) that don't meet the definition of FAR 1.1 but you'll never get caught, so at least there's that. Clearly some people take the "I certify these entries are true" at the bottom of each page a little liberally. True-ish. I mean, I know they don't meet FAR 1.1 definition, and I know by how much each leg, because I had to adjust it, but "true".

Now how do we tell the guys that only read the company memos; log block time unless it's over 9 hours, then don't. Because it's one of those poor unsuspecting guys that could potentially get screwed over in an interview. They will be sitting there with 11 hours on a day in their logbook and won't even know they did anything wrong because... "the company said block time" which another company won't care about.

I guess I shouldn't worry about those guys, because if they lose their opportunity for the next job, more opportunity for me. As long as I get mine, right?