Envoy 2019
04-19-2019, 08:56 AM
#921
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 53
That one's closed.
Short answer - technically legal but certainly not advisable, except maybe for insurance purposes.
I didn't contact the FAA, but I found a legal interpretation (Butler 92-40) in which the FAA legal counsel responds that it is legal for a type rated Pt 121 SIC to log PIC time when acting as "sole manipulator" (and it confirms the concept of the PF being "sole manipulator" even in an aircraft certificated for a min crew of 2).
It's here http://www.offhand.org/amb/pic-time.txt
and then search for "92-40" - it's about 1/5 of the way into the document . The FAA legal interpretation list on their web site does not go back that far. Here's the relevant quote.
Your second question asks if the SIC is flying the airplane, can
he log PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) because he
is appropriately rated and current, and is the sole manipulator
of the controls. Additionally, he has passed the competency
checks required for Part 121 operations, at least as SIC. The
answer is yes.
So legal, apparently, but clearly not advisable based on all the responses to this subject. Clearly meaningless in a 121 environment, but not widely acceptable for Pt 91 either, apparently. So clearly unwise to show up at a 91/135 interview claiming such time as PIC.
But for insurance purposes...…..it IS legal to log it as PIC.
Short answer - technically legal but certainly not advisable, except maybe for insurance purposes.
I didn't contact the FAA, but I found a legal interpretation (Butler 92-40) in which the FAA legal counsel responds that it is legal for a type rated Pt 121 SIC to log PIC time when acting as "sole manipulator" (and it confirms the concept of the PF being "sole manipulator" even in an aircraft certificated for a min crew of 2).
It's here http://www.offhand.org/amb/pic-time.txt
and then search for "92-40" - it's about 1/5 of the way into the document . The FAA legal interpretation list on their web site does not go back that far. Here's the relevant quote.
Your second question asks if the SIC is flying the airplane, can
he log PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) because he
is appropriately rated and current, and is the sole manipulator
of the controls. Additionally, he has passed the competency
checks required for Part 121 operations, at least as SIC. The
answer is yes.
So legal, apparently, but clearly not advisable based on all the responses to this subject. Clearly meaningless in a 121 environment, but not widely acceptable for Pt 91 either, apparently. So clearly unwise to show up at a 91/135 interview claiming such time as PIC.
But for insurance purposes...…..it IS legal to log it as PIC.
04-19-2019, 12:16 PM
#924
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,633
Anyway, that was not the point. No agenda, just a factual datapoint. Sorry you have a problem with it.
04-19-2019, 01:14 PM
#925
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2019
Posts: 48
04-19-2019, 01:17 PM
#926
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Position: FO
Posts: 167
04-19-2019, 01:28 PM
#927
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,633
04-19-2019, 02:58 PM
#928
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,510
Where does the company post those?
I have gone through the “Class Drop” thread and the Seniority List. There are a few discrepancies between the thread and seniority list, some due to resignations, so can’t tell what aircraft, but the numbers are still almost exactly 50/50, not counting a handful of CRJ FOs and DECs, both 145 and CRJ.
89 145 FOs, 91 175 FOs, 4 CRJ FOs, 11 145 CAs and 5 CRJ CAs.
The 8 April class was 40/60 145/175, but before that was always heavier 145 except the 14 Jan class that was all 145 and 7 Jan that was all 175.
Going forward we shall see, but bottom line is if you were a FO hired since the first of the year you had LESS than a 50% chance of getting a 175.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
