The approved flight training program under 14 CFR 61.51(e)(1)(iv) is a program which is specifically approved for the purpose, such as a program for training someone in airline operations.
If you break 61.51(e)(1)(iv) down, it contains several requirements:
61.51(e)(1)(iv)(A): the person performing the duties of PIC must hold a commercial or ATP pilot certificate, appropriate to
category and class: airplane, multi-engine land, or airplane, multi-engine sea)
AND
61.51(e)(1)(iv)(B): the person performing the duties of PIC must be undergoing an approved pilot in command training program (eg, airline type program).
It's the first requirement above, 61.51(e)(1)(iv)(A), which specifies that the person logging the time under 61.51(e)(1)(iv) must have a pilot certificate that is appropriate to both category (here, airplane) and class (here, multi-engine land or sea, as appropriate). Specific to your question, a person logging time under this regulation must already hold a multi-engine rating. Training toward the multi-engine rating is not pilot in command experience, even if it's part of an approved program. The requirement is category, and class. Category is airplane, and the class is multi engine (land, or sea).
It sounds like you're cherrypicking the regulation, meaning that you're looking to choose either 61.51(e)(1)(iv)(A) OR 61.51(e)(1)(iv)(B). If you read the regulation, both (A) AND (B) are requirements for logging time under 61.51(e)(1)(iv).
This rule was adopted in 2009, as published in the Federal Register at the time. The link is below as well as the specific language from the Federal Register concerning the specific subparagraphs in your question. When looking for an understanding of the regulation; three sources are used: the first source is the Federal Register preamble, which explains the regulation and the purpose for it, or the change to it; the second are FAA Chief Legal Counsel letters of interpretation, and the third source, in order, is the regulation itself.
https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-certification
26. This revision of § 61.51(e)(1)(iv) will permit a pilot performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a qualified pilot in command to log pilot in command flight time
Revised § 61.51(e)(1)(iv) will allow a pilot performing the duties of a pilot in command (PIC) while under the supervision of a qualified PIC to log PIC flight time. The FAA is making this revision to provide another way for commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate holders to log PIC flight time.
The pilot performing the duties of a PIC will be required to hold a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate with the aircraft rating appropriate to the category and class of aircraft being flown, if a class rating is appropriate. The pilot must be under the supervision of an appropriately qualified PIC. Additionally, the pilot who is performing PIC duties is required to undergo an approved PIC training program consisting of ground and flight training on the following areas of operation: pre-flight preparation, preflight procedures, takeoff and departure phase, in-flight maneuvers, instrument procedures, landings and approaches to landings, normal and abnormal procedures, emergency procedures, and post-flight procedures.
The supervising PIC will be required to hold either a commercial pilot certificate or ATP certificate, and flight instructor certificate. In addition, the supervising PIC must hold the appropriate aircraft rating (i.e., category, class, and type of aircraft being flown, if a class or type rating is required). The supervising PIC must log the PIC training given in the pilot's logbook, certify having given the PIC training in the pilot's logbook, and attest to that certification with his/her signature, flight instructor certificate number, and expiration date, or ATP certificate number, as appropriate. This revision parallels and further clarifies the provisions in revised § 61.129 and existing §§ 61.31(d), 61.159(a)(4), 61.161(a)(3), and 61.163(a)(3) for PIC aeronautical experience.
AOPA supported the concept, but believed the proposed rule was unclear and would lead to confusion. AOPA recommended rewriting the proposed regulatory text to include a matrix text showing conditions under which a pilot may log time as PIC. Four commenters supported the proposed provisions clarifying logging of PIC flight time by pilots acting as PIC under supervision. One commenter questioned whether the proposed provisions are targeted toward pilots working toward advanced certificates, ratings, or authorizations after receiving their commercial pilot certificates.
Four commenters asserted the proposed provisions are unnecessary, as pilots acting as PIC under supervision are already permitted to log PIC flight time under other sections of the regulations. The Greater St. Louis Flight Instructor Association objected to the proposed provisions arguing there is a trend toward pilots having inadequate true solo experience; it believes the proposed rule would result in pilots building time without accruing real experience. One commenter opposed application of the proposed provision other than in operations or aircraft requiring a second in command (SIC) (e.g., operation of light single engine airplanes under part 91). The commenter did not consider a required safety pilot to be an SIC. One commenter objected to requiring endorsement of the acting PIC's logbook by the supervising PIC. The commenter asserted that the training contemplated by the proposed rule is recorded in training records, not logbooks. One commenter recommended pilots logging PIC flight time under supervision also be required to log dual instruction time.
This rule is designed to allow operators to train new hires to eventually become PICs. The rule was initially petitioned for by Saudi Aramco. Saudi Aramco wanted permission to allow new hires' training in their Bell 214 helicopter to eventually become PICs in the company and allow logging PIC flight time while under the supervision of more experienced and senior PICs. This rule does require pilots to hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and requires those performing supervising PIC duties must hold either a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate, and flight instructor certificate with the appropriate category and class of aircraft being flown, if a class rating is appropriate.
A pilot may log PIC flight time when performing the duties of the PIC while under the supervision of the § 1.1 PIC. The FAA believes the rule is abundantly clear that a person may log PIC flight time when performing the duties of the PIC while under the supervision of the PIC, provided both the person who is performing the duties of the PIC and the supervising PIC meet the requirements of the rule.
After consideration of all the comments received, the FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.
Despite the FAA's assurance in the preamble that the regulation is "abundantly clear" it's evident from reading the regulation, and from your question, that it's not that clear. The FAA explains that the rule was developed in response to a request by Saudi Aramco, which is a US/Saudi venture, operating under US regulations and also under Saudi regulations, which were built on, and modeled after the US regulation. Aramco wasn't looking to train pilots from scratch or train them toward pilot certificates or ratings. They were hiring pilots and wanted to be able to have them start logging PIC time during their new-hire training. Aramco was hiring qualified pilots and putting them through their company training program. Rather the intent was to allow someone who showed up with the certifications necessary to do the job, but who was not yet assigned as a pilot in command in that operation, to be logging PIC while performing the duties of PIC...even though that person was not the pilot in command.
Relevant to your question to log that time, in the case of an airplane category, multi-engine land airplane, the pilot would need to hold either a commercial or ATP level pilot certificate, with an airplane category and multi-engine land rating.
Rebecca MacPherson, FAA Assistant Chief Legal Counsel for Regulations, clarified 61.51(e)(1)(iv) in response to a question about logging flight time for someone who held a rating. In this case, she clarifies the difference between logging under 61.51(e)(1)(i) as sole manipulator of the controls (
in an aircraft for which one is rated), vs. logging PIC under 61.51(e)(1)(iv), which is performing the duties of PIC (so long as one meets the requirements of that regulation. The FAA uses the term "rated" to mean category and class, and where appropriate, type rating. 61.51(e)(1)(iv) uses language other than saying "
rated in the airplane", and clarifies that category and class are required, but doesn't use the full definition of "rated" as applied elsewhere, such as 61.51(e)(1)(i).
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...rpretation.pdf