Rc12driver

Thank you for the answer. I retired a couple months ago.

Atlas Shrugged

I hear what you are saying now. I wish I knew the answer.

I was a C-12/C-23 guy. I always thought it was a bit ridiculous that we did not get a single engine qual of some sort at the fixed wing course.

I had to pay my own way for my ATP due to a time crunch situation when I finally got my big break. $6k to fly a Seminole doing things that meant absolutely nothing in order to satisfy the bureaucrats. But hey, that's life, and it was certainly worth it in the long run.

Logs books are such a joke anyway.

Rc12driver

Right on. Yeah logbook are a pita. I guess I was lucky. I had an assignment flying a caravan. So that was a qualified single engine aircraft in my military flight records. So I was able to get my asel. I kick myself because every time I went to recurrent I would pass on my ATP. Then August 2014 happened. I am still debating if I want to get my ATP for poops and giggles.

BeatNavy

Well if you have records of flying complex/high performance airplanes as PIC, and military training records, you may be able to visit the FSDO and see what they say. As rickair said, you don't need the high altitude based on your mil records. The only two you really need are complex/HP, which isn't addressed by 61.31, as high altitude is. You could also find an IP friend with whom you flew to recreate them (complex/hp), though if they didn't give/log the instruction (ground and air) I don't know if that's technically/legally valid. But as someone previously mentioned, logbooks are, well, a joke (in that they can be pencil whipped fairly easily, which seems too prevalent these days). And in this case, you are just recreating a valid endorsement you previously had to the best of your ability, so you aren't really pencil whipping anything. That said, a moral justification may not be a legal justification, hence getting the FSDO input.

This article below says "If unable to locate the instructors who gave the initial endorsements, it may be necessary to obtain the appropriate endorsements again." https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/.../lost-logbooks

If you want to be on the safe side, talk to the FSDO or get an IP buddy to redo your endorsements in your new logbook using a previous flight you had together. But, again, you aren't carrying your logbook with you when you go fly, so it would just be for insurance/employers/(maybe FBOs you'd rent from?) to see, and even then, I doubt they'd even care about those endorsements. The physical endorsement is not a required item to be carried in the plane or on you and will never be asked to be seen by the FAA. If you crash and burn in the hypothetical C182RG and the FAA/NTSB gathers logbooks/pilot records and sees you had PIC time in complex/hp turbine military aircraft, and a burned up logbook, I doubt they'd question your original endorsement. That said, I tend to play on the safe side and I'd get FSDO's guidance/stamp of approval or redo it, as I can't find any regs that would have you covered for complex/HP.

JohnBurke

The high altitude endorsement is not required in your case, thanks to 14 CFR 61.31(g)(3)(iii). You've completed an official pilot in command check conducted by the military services in a pressurized aircraft.

Endorsements for complex and high performance, however, will need to be received again, as there is no language in the regulation making a military allowance, even though you hold type ratings.

Your logbook can be accounted by making a statement regarding the lost one. If you've started a second logbook and moved the end times from the previous one forward, then you need only make a statement regarding the loss (notarized doesn't hurt) and include it with the new logbook. If you've had previous FAA 8410's when applying for certificates or ratings, and have copies of those, you can use those as snapshots of your reported hours at the time. They represent official documentation, too. Likewise, any military records you have will be useful.

If you've already started a new logbook, use your current documentation. Get new endorsements for the complex and high performance (and tailwheel, if you had that), and move on.

No one is going to ask to see your endorsements at this point, and you won't be carrying your logbook. It may be asked for if you're renting, but that's about it. It's for that purpose that you might want current endorsements. Get them in the course of doing a checkout, prior to rental, and explain why you don't have them.

rickair7777

You shouldn't carry them around, because they might get lost or stolen. Keep them in a fire proof safe.

But you may not want them around after a crash either. I know people who instruct their next of kin to destroy their logbooks if they're in a fatal accident.

There's no requirement that your estate produce logbooks to prove anything, or that you arrange for that. In their absence the assumption in any court would be that you met all the requirements for currency, ie innocent until proven guilty.

But any good ambulance chaser will go through your books with a fine tooth comb. If you crash an airliner, he'll find some instructor endorsement from student pilot days that's not quite technically correct, and spin that into gross ineptitude and a huge plaintiff's award.

Bottom line, your logbooks will probably only hurt you in that scenario.

Rc12driver

All great answers guys. I'll get up with the FSDO and see if they have anything to add. I'll report back so if anyone else ends up in my position they will have an answer.

I wouldn't be opposed to getting an IP buddy to do the sign offs but as stated this is a CYA age we are living in and I wouldn't want to put a friend in a potential bad spot.

I was really hoping someone smarter than me might know of some obscure AC or something that said a type rating supersedes an endorsement. Looks like I will have to grit my teeth and go pay a 20 something year old, hour building cfi to go sign me off on something I have thousands of hours doing lol. Oh well I guess there are worse things in life.

Again thanks for the input guys.

rickair7777

The expensive one would have been high alt, but you're good on that.

It would take 30 minutes in something like a 182 to get the other two, ie a couple laps around the pattern. Don't need a twin. A couple, three hundred bucks maybe.

rickair7777

Not so much. While that would make perfect sense it's not how the regs are technically written, so best to comply with regs verbatim, or as interpreted by an FAA AC or legal opinion.

Also a type on a jet aircraft would not qualify for a complex endorsement...jets don't have constant speed props.

If you looked hard enough you might even find some obscure airplane which requires a type, but has multiple engines of 200 HP or less.

All that said the odds are very, very low that any fed would waste his time with this, since the spirit of the law was clearly complied with. Even if the FAA tried, if you appealed to a real court they would probably conclude preponderance of evidence is in your favor. But you wouldn't want to stumble over this at a job interview. Sometimes they do thorough logbook reviews.

Rc12driver

So I called the FSDO (Scottsdale). They had to transfer me a few times since they have never been asked this question. The FSDOs first response was with my type rating I am good to go. So I asked if there needed to be anything annotated in my logbook. He didn't know. Then I asked if I could fly a c182rg. He said he didn't know, but I can fly a king air as a pic (just not a high performance complex plane that isn't a king air (sense I have that type rating, and don't need a logbook endorsement).

Bottom line: I confused the FSDO and they are doing more research on if my type rating supersedes the need for endorsements, and also how to legally annotate in my logbook if that is the case.

I'll update when they call me back., with their final ruling/ interpretation.

Truthfully I think regardless of the answer I will go redo the endorsements just to cover my a$$.