Ameriflight
07-07-2012, 01:07 PM
#1282
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2011
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 949
Originally Posted by Beaver Hunter
SWABlue
Are you the log book police? Who cares how someone logs time. If a company doesn't like it. Then it's the applicants problem.
Are you the log book police? Who cares how someone logs time. If a company doesn't like it. Then it's the applicants problem.
Most of the logging posts tend to come from low time guys who don't know any better, or the guys who are finding any way they can to skim the edge of truth and check boxes on the application. You can log what you want, true, but to think that what's in your logbook could never cost you a job is naiive at best.
07-07-2012, 01:58 PM
#1283
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by DirectTo
Have you thought maybe he's trying to help people who might log things without realizing the implications. Most posters here are professional pilots who at one point or another have had their logbooks dug through. Some companies skim over them, some tear them apart. There's no reason for you to waste a perfectly good interview because of something idiotic.
Most of the logging posts tend to come from low time guys who don't know any better, or the guys who are finding any way they can to skim the edge of truth and check boxes on the application. You can log what you want, true, but to think that what's in your logbook could never cost you a job is naiive at best.
Most of the logging posts tend to come from low time guys who don't know any better, or the guys who are finding any way they can to skim the edge of truth and check boxes on the application. You can log what you want, true, but to think that what's in your logbook could never cost you a job is naiive at best.
Many have had their heart broken by this profession. I am an advocate of trying to minimize that for some. Kind of my way of giving back I guess.
We have OpSpecs, as do almost everyone else, that allow for lower than standard departures if the have an SIC onboard. Since an SIC is required for lower than standard takeoffs then they can be required to be on onboard for other ops. This has been my best understanding of the regs to this point.
Any chance you can share that part of your ops specs?
Thanks.
And as always, good luck to us all.
07-07-2012, 02:12 PM
#1284
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: PIC
Posts: 103
There's no point in arguing the pay to play FO topic again for a single pilot cargo operation.
It is allowed per a company Ops Spec, and yes it's looked down upon in the US. However, that doesn't matter because most of these guys are from a country without a GA industry and this is how they get the time to go to their national airline. It is not only accepted, they are funneled through the program by the airline. I told the two Americans that came through our base (for 100 hours each instead of the usual 500+) flat out that the time is looked down upon. They knew it, but decided to waste their money anyway because it was 1/4 the price of renting a twin.
It is allowed per a company Ops Spec, and yes it's looked down upon in the US. However, that doesn't matter because most of these guys are from a country without a GA industry and this is how they get the time to go to their national airline. It is not only accepted, they are funneled through the program by the airline. I told the two Americans that came through our base (for 100 hours each instead of the usual 500+) flat out that the time is looked down upon. They knew it, but decided to waste their money anyway because it was 1/4 the price of renting a twin.
07-07-2012, 06:00 PM
#1285
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by polymox
There's no point in arguing the pay to play FO topic again for a single pilot cargo operation.
It is allowed per a company Ops Spec, and yes it's looked down upon in the US. However, that doesn't matter because most of these guys are from a country without a GA industry and this is how they get the time to go to their national airline. It is not only accepted, they are funneled through the program by the airline. I told the two Americans that came through our base (for 100 hours each instead of the usual 500+) flat out that the time is looked down upon. They knew it, but decided to waste their money anyway because it was 1/4 the price of renting a twin.
It is allowed per a company Ops Spec, and yes it's looked down upon in the US. However, that doesn't matter because most of these guys are from a country without a GA industry and this is how they get the time to go to their national airline. It is not only accepted, they are funneled through the program by the airline. I told the two Americans that came through our base (for 100 hours each instead of the usual 500+) flat out that the time is looked down upon. They knew it, but decided to waste their money anyway because it was 1/4 the price of renting a twin.
In this "pay for play" opportunity is the time logged as SIC or PIC?
07-07-2012, 07:53 PM
#1286
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Left
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by SWAblue
I have no involvement with the "pay to play" topic but for the foreign carriers I can see where this would be accepted. In the highly competitive US market I can understand where it may not.
In this "pay for play" opportunity is the time logged as SIC or PIC?
In this "pay for play" opportunity is the time logged as SIC or PIC?
07-08-2012, 12:41 PM
#1287
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: PIC
Posts: 103
Originally Posted by SWAblue
I have no involvement with the "pay to play" topic but for the foreign carriers I can see where this would be accepted. In the highly competitive US market I can understand where it may not.
In this "pay for play" opportunity is the time logged as SIC or PIC?
In this "pay for play" opportunity is the time logged as SIC or PIC?
07-09-2012, 02:23 AM
#1288
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: Any
Posts: 656
Originally Posted by SWAblue
With that being said, is there a section in your ops specs that a SIC is required for Part 135 cargo operations in your PA31 or BE99?
You can log anything you want. How it is viewed by future employers is another subject matter. Anything interpreted as dishonest will automatically disqualify one from further consideration. Unless I am missing something you have failed to explain in the past few posts, whether or not this has been argued before, you can not legally log second in command time in any operation that does not require the position. Only those who need the time I can imagine would debate this point of well known FAR common sense among professional pilots.
You can log anything you want. How it is viewed by future employers is another subject matter. Anything interpreted as dishonest will automatically disqualify one from further consideration. Unless I am missing something you have failed to explain in the past few posts, whether or not this has been argued before, you can not legally log second in command time in any operation that does not require the position. Only those who need the time I can imagine would debate this point of well known FAR common sense among professional pilots.
Originally Posted by freightdog
We have OpSpecs, as do almost everyone else, that allow for lower than standard departures if the have an SIC onboard. Since an SIC is required for lower than standard takeoffs then they can be required to be on onboard for other ops. This has been my best understanding of the regs to this point.
There is not stipulation in the exemption about it being for purposes of lower than standard takeoff minimums, though that is one advantage to us in some aircraft.
One thing I would definitely agree with you about, SWABlue, is that if they were to log it as PIC, it only counts as part 91 PIC, not part 61. And 61 is what employers are looking for. So it doesn't do any good for PIC time requirements and my recommendation to guys is that they log it AS SIC time so there is no confusion. But it should be valid as total time as much as if they were flying right seat in any other aircraft.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
