Airline Pilot Forums

As I read the FAR, it seems that a flight has only one purpose, eg. training, or private flight, or commercial flight.

Can a flight have multiple purposes at the same time?
For example, can an instructor teach a student, while also carrying cargo for pay?

As I read the FAR, it seems that a flight has only one purpose, eg. training, or private flight, or commercial flight.

Can a flight have multiple purposes at the same time?
For example, can an instructor teach a student, while also carrying cargo for pay?

Sounds like IOE. Doubtful in the way that you are thinking; though I wonder if a CFI couldn't take a student for some type of lesson (let's say PPL lesson) and then at the end of the lesson decide to fly to a near-by airport to visit family. I imagine that the whole flight would be logged as a PPL lesson; but technically could in actuality be a lesson followed by a private flight to another field.

Good question. I look forward to some of the responses from people on the APC who can quote FARs!

USMCFLYR

There is no reason that an instructional flight cannot also be a recreational flight.

The key is that the flight must have actual training value (ex a required XC) and both CFI and student need to have a shared purpose at the recreational destination: Lunch, skiing, partying, visiting family, etc. The CFI would need to pay his own way on the ground (exception would be the tradition that the student buys lunch/dinner...but not hotel, beer, lift ticket, hookers, etc)

If the student is going to a business meeting or family get together, and is paying for the CFI to hang out in a hotel, that would sound more like a charter flight. Even so you could probably get away with it once...say on his long XC.

It also helps if there are better transportation modes available...ie LA to Vegas airlines would be cheaper and faster than GA.

Where people get in trouble is they keep doing the same thing again and again, and log it is "XC dual-given". The "student" usually doesn't even have a third class medical or logbook...

There is no reason that an instructional flight cannot also be a recreational flight.

Provided that you don't enjoy it.

so how about if a twin otter is used for flying jumpers, anyone with a Comm muilti could legal fly the otter, since its under 12.5 gross.....the insurance requires more, but I could fly the otter all day with someone sitting right seat just to cover the insurance, since I am the only one to fly the plane I log the PIC.........now what if I go in the otter flying jumpers part 91 and the guy right seat is a mei, is that dual given??

You log a flight based on the type of experience you attained, not based on the "purpose" of the flight. If you experienced PIC flight time, then you put that in your logbook. If you experienced actual instrument conditions, then you put that in your logbook. Whether or not you can legally act as PIC or whether you are getting paid has nothing to do with how you can log the time. It may matter in other ways, but not in terms of logging. For instance, the FAA defines what can and can't be logged as PIC somwhere in part 61 (too lazy to look up the exact paragraph). You must be sole manipulator and rated in category/class. Thats it. If you meet those standards you can log it as PIC, thats all there is to it. No more no less.

As I read the FAR, it seems that a flight has only one purpose, eg. training, or private flight, or commercial flight.

Can a flight have multiple purposes at the same time?
For example, can an instructor teach a student, while also carrying cargo for pay?Maybe.

I like Rick's examples.

The problem with the "dual purpose" flight is, if the FAA looks at it closely, what does it look like to them? You're not going to find a specific reg on this. What you will find if you look at FAA Chief Counsel opinions and reports of certificate actions (usually revocations) will lead most to the conclusion that the "legal" test is nothing more solid than, "if it quacks like a duck..."

Keep in mind that the goal here is twofold - to protect the public from folks who have not met commercial pilot/Part 135 qualifications, and to protect those that have spent the time and money to meet commercial pilot/Part 135 qualifications from those who didn't. Given how creative people can be, the result is an area that is intentionally gray. And if you're thinking, "well, if we do it this way..." (in your best Jon Lovitz-as-lawyer-accent) you're probably on the wrong side of the line.

Ok BUT, say tomorrow my owner lets me fly the twin otter all day, I have a comm/multi, its under 12.5, if I can fly it, I am PIC, lets say the owner sits in the right seat all day, because the insurance company requires someone with over 100hrs in an otter hrs in the cockpit, but he does not fly once, I am the PIC and I can log it, NOW when I get over 100 hours of PIC in the otter with the owner in the right seat, then I can fly the otter alone....now I dont see what reg I broke...........

Now to take that further, what if the owner goes home and logs the time PIC as well, and never tells me, how am I suppose to know that, all I know is I only flew the plane all day he just ate food and read a book

Now lets take it further, since its 91 and with jumpers, say the owner has a CFI Multi, why cant it be duel instruction given, logged in both our booked as such?

For example when I started flying for this place, we farryed the plane alot. the 182, which required 25 in type for the insurance, which i did not have.........SO I would fly the farrys, and the other guy who was on the insurance would sit right seat to cover the insurance, but I would do all the flying and I got my 25 hours, no I was def PIC since I flew these legs, but I have no idea if he went home and logged it..

Maybe.

I like Rick's examples.

The problem with the "dual purpose" flight is, if the FAA looks at it closely, what does it look like to them? You're not going to find a specific reg on this. What you will find if you look at FAA Chief Counsel opinions and reports of certificate actions (usually revocations) will lead most to the conclusion that the "legal" test is nothing more solid than, "if it quacks like a duck..."

Keep in mind that the goal here is twofold - to protect the public from folks who have not met commercial pilot/Part 135 qualifications, and to protect those that have spent the time and money to meet commercial pilot/Part 135 qualifications from those who didn't. Given how creative people can be, the result is an area that is intentionally gray. And if you're thinking, "well, if we do it this way..." (in your best Jon Lovitz-as-lawyer-accent) you're probably on the wrong side of the line.

Ok BUT, say tomorrow my owner lets me fly the twin otter all day, I have a comm/multi, its under 12.5, if I can fly it, I am PIC, lets say the owner sits in the right seat all day, because the insurance company requires someone with over 100hrs in an otter hrs in the cockpit, but he does not fly once, I am the PIC and I can log it, NOW when I get over 100 hours of PIC in the otter with the owner in the right seat, then I can fly the otter alone....now I dont see what reg I broke...........

Now to take that further, what if the owner goes home and logs the time PIC as well, and never tells me, how am I suppose to know that, all I know is I only flew the plane all day he just ate food and read a book

Now lets take it further, since its 91 and with jumpers, say the owner has a CFI Multi, why cant it be duel instruction given, logged in both our booked as such?

For example when I started flying for this place, we farryed the plane alot. the 182, which required 25 in type for the insurance, which i did not have.........SO I would fly the farrys, and the other guy who was on the insurance would sit right seat to cover the insurance, but I would do all the flying and I got my 25 hours, no I was def PIC since I flew these legs, but I have no idea if he went home and logged it..

Read my post above. You log time based on your experience, nothing else. It don't matter one bit what the other person does. If you were sole manipulator of the controls and you are rated in category/class, and you meet all other requirements laid out in part 61.51(e), then you log it. What the other guy does is his business. There is no requirement that you both have to agree to log the time in tandem to each other.

Can a flight have multiple purposes at the same time?
For example, can an instructor teach a student, while also carrying cargo for pay?

Yes. IOE would be a good example, as the student has completed the sim check but not the line check.

Ok BUT, say tomorrow my owner lets me fly the twin otter all day, I have a comm/multi, its under 12.5, if I can fly it, I am PIC, lets say the owner sits in the right seat all day, because the insurance company requires someone with over 100hrs in an otter hrs in the cockpit, but he does not fly once, I am the PIC and I can log it, NOW when I get over 100 hours of PIC in the otter with the owner in the right seat, then I can fly the otter alone....now I dont see what reg I broke...........

Now to take that further, what if the owner goes home and logs the time PIC as well, and never tells me, how am I suppose to know that, all I know is I only flew the plane all day he just ate food and read a book

Now lets take it further, since its 91 and with jumpers, say the owner has a CFI Multi, why cant it be duel instruction given, logged in both our booked as such?


For example when I started flying for this place, we farryed the plane alot. the 182, which required 25 in type for the insurance, which i did not have.........SO I would fly the farrys, and the other guy who was on the insurance would sit right seat to cover the insurance, but I would do all the flying and I got my 25 hours, no I was def PIC since I flew these legs,No, you were entitled to =log= PIC because you flew those legs. Whether you were in fact the pilot in command of the flight is a totally different question. If you "were" the pilot in charge of that flight, you probably violated the insurance contract and, if there was an accident, the insurance company would have been entitled to deny coverage. Don't confuse logging PIC time under 61.51(e) with being PIC as defined by FAR 1.1. That way lies madness (arguable the FAA's madness, but madness nonetheless :D ).

As Internet Pilot said, the legality of a flight doesn't have that much to do with the logging question. Neither does the insurance question.

In terms of =your= logging of PIC time in this scenario, we''re talking straight 61.51(e)(1)(iii) sole manipulator time (this is the rewritten version that goes into effect next Tuesday:

==============================
61.51(e) (1) A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-

(i) When the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or has sport pilot privileges for that category and class of aircraft, if the aircraft class rating is appropriate;
==============================

You meet that and you log PIC time. Nothing else matters.

As for your friend, Now to take that further, what if the owner goes home and logs the time PIC as well, and never tells me, how am I suppose to know that, all I know is I only flew the plane all day he just ate food and read a book that's his problem. You won't find anything in 61.51 that allows him to log PIC time in your scenario (unless it is instruction) and if he wants to falsify his logbook, that's his perrogative and has nothing to do with you.

But to get back to the point. Separate legality of flight issues from logging issues. Mix the two together and you're bound to be confused.