Will having my ATP help or hurt me?
#51
Reserve Without End
Joined APC: Feb 2022
Posts: 147
Yes I am a SIC, but have a full type rating, and the plane does require 2 crew.
Also I hired a professional app review company, one that was highly recommended on here, and they said absolutely nothing about PIC time not counting towords anything.
The regs --
FAR 61.51:
"A ..commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-...
(1)(i)when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated"
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1.../section-61.51
Also I hired a professional app review company, one that was highly recommended on here, and they said absolutely nothing about PIC time not counting towords anything.
The regs --
FAR 61.51:
"A ..commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-...
(1)(i)when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated"
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1.../section-61.51
I think we have found the problem with your application and why you aren’t hearing back. The airlines are viewing your time as inappropriately logged.
An app review company isn’t going to question your time. They will simply help you format it. You desperately need a reality check on what the merits of PIC time are. It’s an immediate red flag to almost any carrier when they see a sub 1500 hour pilot logging Jet PIC.
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Posts: 249
Yes I am a SIC, but have a full type rating, and the plane does require 2 crew.
Also I hired a professional app review company, one that was highly recommended on here, and they said absolutely nothing about PIC time not counting towords anything.
The regs --
FAR 61.51:
"A ..commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-...
(1)(i)when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated"
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1.../section-61.51
Also I hired a professional app review company, one that was highly recommended on here, and they said absolutely nothing about PIC time not counting towords anything.
The regs --
FAR 61.51:
"A ..commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-...
(1)(i)when the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated"
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-1.../section-61.51
#53
Reserve Without End
Joined APC: Feb 2022
Posts: 147
It's a good news bad news situation for part 121 noob.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2021
Posts: 366
It's a good news bad news situation for part 121 noob.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
#55
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,260
It's a good news bad news situation for part 121 noob.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
The good:
We now know why he is not getting any traction in his job hunt. The saga has spanned many forums but ends here. His resume is strong enough to generate at least an interview. Unfortunately the airlines are seeing too many red flags with his logbook.
The bad:
He's been fraudulently (even if only mistaken) logging 135 PIC time under a part 61 rule. It could be difficult to explain.
There is a difference between logging pilot in command time, and acting as pilot in command. One may log PIC time while not the acting PIC. There are cases in which two pilots may simultaneously log PIC in an airplane. There are cases in which neither pilot can log PIC. Logging is a separate issue from acting as PIC, and while multiple pilots can log PIC at the same time under certain conditions, only one may be the acting PIC.
In this case, 121Noob was not the pilot in command. He's stated clearly that he's a second in command under Part 135, that he's type rated, and that there is no possibility of an upgrade with his employer. It's clear that at no point here has 121Noob been the pilot in command with is employer. This does not prevent him from logging the time as PIC.
When we speak of how it's viewed in the industry, we must recognize that the industry at large does not concern itself necessarily with whether that sole-manipulator time is legal (it is), but instead focuses on an industry-wide assumption that one SHOULD not log PIC on a 121 or 135 flight, if one was NOT the assigned pilot in command of record. This is not regulatory, but cultural. Never the less, if one hopes to get ahead, one must understand the industry norms, and act accordingly. One who logs PIC under Part 135, when one is not the acting PIC, has not violated the regulation, but has demonstrated a poor understanding of industry expectations. If one tries to break through that based on one's own standards and interpretations, it's an uphill battle with little to gain.
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2019
Position: 757/767 CA
Posts: 275
It's not fraudulent. If 121Noob has logged pilot-in-command time as sole manipulator of the controls in an aircraft for which he is rated, he has logged in accordance with the regulation. This does NOT violate the regulation.
There is a difference between logging pilot in command time, and acting as pilot in command. One may log PIC time while not the acting PIC. There are cases in which two pilots may simultaneously log PIC in an airplane. There are cases in which neither pilot can log PIC. Logging is a separate issue from acting as PIC, and while multiple pilots can log PIC at the same time under certain conditions, only one may be the acting PIC.
In this case, 121Noob was not the pilot in command. He's stated clearly that he's a second in command under Part 135, that he's type rated, and that there is no possibility of an upgrade with his employer. It's clear that at no point here has 121Noob been the pilot in command with is employer. This does not prevent him from logging the time as PIC.
When we speak of how it's viewed in the industry, we must recognize that the industry at large does not concern itself necessarily with whether that sole-manipulator time is legal (it is), but instead focuses on an industry-wide assumption that one SHOULD not log PIC on a 121 or 135 flight, if one was NOT the assigned pilot in command of record. This is not regulatory, but cultural. Never the less, if one hopes to get ahead, one must understand the industry norms, and act accordingly. One who logs PIC under Part 135, when one is not the acting PIC, has not violated the regulation, but has demonstrated a poor understanding of industry expectations. If one tries to break through that based on one's own standards and interpretations, it's an uphill battle with little to gain.
There is a difference between logging pilot in command time, and acting as pilot in command. One may log PIC time while not the acting PIC. There are cases in which two pilots may simultaneously log PIC in an airplane. There are cases in which neither pilot can log PIC. Logging is a separate issue from acting as PIC, and while multiple pilots can log PIC at the same time under certain conditions, only one may be the acting PIC.
In this case, 121Noob was not the pilot in command. He's stated clearly that he's a second in command under Part 135, that he's type rated, and that there is no possibility of an upgrade with his employer. It's clear that at no point here has 121Noob been the pilot in command with is employer. This does not prevent him from logging the time as PIC.
When we speak of how it's viewed in the industry, we must recognize that the industry at large does not concern itself necessarily with whether that sole-manipulator time is legal (it is), but instead focuses on an industry-wide assumption that one SHOULD not log PIC on a 121 or 135 flight, if one was NOT the assigned pilot in command of record. This is not regulatory, but cultural. Never the less, if one hopes to get ahead, one must understand the industry norms, and act accordingly. One who logs PIC under Part 135, when one is not the acting PIC, has not violated the regulation, but has demonstrated a poor understanding of industry expectations. If one tries to break through that based on one's own standards and interpretations, it's an uphill battle with little to gain.
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2018
Posts: 226
Are you serious? You know when you go into training at a Regional they get you your ATP, right? So either way when you are done with training you will have your ATP. If the company has some sort of training contract, having your ATP going in does not get you out of that training contract.
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2023
Position: 135 SIC
Posts: 200
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2023
Position: 135 SIC
Posts: 200
Are you serious? You know when you go into training at a Regional they get you your ATP, right? So either way when you are done with training you will have your ATP. If the company has some sort of training contract, having your ATP going in does not get you out of that training contract.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post