Originally Posted by
INTERNET PILOT
The FAA's rules regarding how PIC time should be logged gets thrown out the window once you get 250 hours required for the ATP checkride. The FAA's definition for PIC time is only for their purposes (anything requiring an 8710 form). Airlines and employers often have their own definition that they use (like limiting how much safety pilot PIC time is valid).
Every time these topics like this come up it always perplexes me. There is absolutly nothing legally wrong with improperly logging PIC time once you're past 250, so why bring the regs up into discussions like this?
Another thing. The whole point of logging time is to record experiences. Lets say Person A sat right seat in a King Air for 500 hours only because an insurance company required him to. None of this time is "legally" loggable. Person B spent 500 hours right seat in the same model King Air because his opspecs says he has to be there. He can "legally" log it. If you're interviewing both candidates, why should the one who "legally" logged the flight get the upperhand? Do they both not have the same experiences?
The OPSPEC SIC had to do training, a checkride, and recurrent. The other guy might just be going for an airplane ride...who knows?
If you show up at an interview with logged PIC time, employers generally expect that to be FAR legal time (even if you already have your ATP). If you represent a certain amount of PIC, SIC, or turbine time and they discover while reviewing your book that it was ride-along time, you will be shown the door for misrepresenting yourself.
I would not clutter up my book with questionable time. If you do, advise interviewers about it up front...if they find it one their own, your interview is over.