Since Stig wouldn't enlighten us with his vast knowledge. I looked it up.

QUESTION: I am hopeful you can provide assistance concerning a question that arose regarding first officers at Mesaba Airlines who are about to upgrade to Captain but who do not have the PIC requirements for the ATP Airplane Certificate [as per § 61.159(a)(4)]. As you know, this rule provides credit for time as SIC performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command. However, this credit provision is not clearly described in the rule nor have I been able to find supporting documentation that can help clarify the application of the rule in Mesaba's case.

What is the definition of “SIC performing the duties of pilot in command” in an aircraft requiring a type rating and seat specific functions that can only be performed on the PIC's (captain's) side of the aircraft?

How would this definition apply to first officers in the SF-340 flying under FAR 121 who fly in the right seat of an aircraft with seat dependent tasks? The SF-340 requires seat dependent training and normally the airline would not provide left seat dependent training to a FO who sits in the right seat. The FO cannot perform all the duties of the captain (PIC) from the right seat of the SF-340 (one example, operating the tiller during taxi).

How does the SIC document this experience so that an examiner reviewing the log books of an applicant can determine the time which may be credited toward the PIC requirements of § 61.159(a)(4)?

Mesaba does not conduct any type of formal training of first officers to prepare them as captains during revenue operations. Also, they do not conduct any flight training in the SF-340 in preparation for upgrade to captain.
All formal training is accomplished in approved simulators under Appendix H.

In essence, the questions pertain to the phrase “. . . or as second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command, or any combination thereof . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4).

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); In answering these questions below, I am going to preference my answers by saying that in all the FARs, there has to be an acceptance that most pilots are going to be honest.
QUESTION: What is the FAA’s policy on the intent of the phrase “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); The intent of the phrase “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” means controlling the airplane (e.g., has his hands on the controls, controlling the autopilot system, being the flying pilot for that leg of the flight). Otherwise, he/she is the one who is actually controlling the airplane and the flight. When a pilot is the “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .”, I would expect that pilot to ACT like he/she is the final authority and is responsible for the operation and safety of the flight.

QUESTION: What would the FAA expect to see as proof to verify that the time was honest “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); The SIC should have the real PIC endorse each entry in his/her logbook or training record when “. . . performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” as follows:

Recommended Endorsement: “Performed duties as a supervised PIC in accordance with § 61.159(a)(4)”
John T. Realpic, ATP #123456789

QUESTION: How is a pilot supposed to act when performing as “ . . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); When an SIC is performing “. . . the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command. . .” that SIC should be:

a. Controlling the aircraft by the use of controls or the autopilot system for a given leg of the flight (i.e., directs/monitors the flight route) from takeoff through landing, otherwise ACTS like the Captain!

b. Acting like he/she is the final authority responsible for the operations and safety of the flight, otherwise ACTS like the Captain!

c. Supervising the work of the flight crewmembers, otherwise ACTS like the Captain!

d. Conduct and initiating the appropriate crewmember briefing throughout the flight, otherwise ACTS like the Captain!

e. Reviewing all conditions and data necessary for the flight release (i.e., dispatch, weather, weight and balance, fuel requirements, destination requirements, alternate requirements, and routing, etc.), otherwise ACTS like the Captain!

In essence, we would expect the pilot who is the “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in
command . . .” to supervise and work within the crew concept in being responsible for obtaining, reviewing, and determining the flight’s dispatch, weather, weight and balance calculations, fuel requirements, destination and alternates, and routing. We would expect the pilot to brief his/her crew. We would expect the pilot to work within the crew concept in checking and monitoring the takeoff procedures and numbers. We would expect the pilot to be able to determine that the airplane is operating normally before takeoff and requires his/her crew to follow proper, standardized procedures. We would expect the pilot to work within the crew concept in getting the takeoff clearance and comply with air traffic control clearances. We would expect the pilot to be at the controls on takeoff, departure, arrival, approach, and landing. We would expect the pilot to insure the aircraft follows the precise routing as provided in an assigned air traffic control clearance. We would expect the pilot to be the responsible pilot for monitoring/supervising the input of data into the flight management systems and/or autopilot systems throughout the flight. We would expect to see the pilot to be the responsible pilot for establishing the tempo of the flight by insuring that his or her flight deck remains standardized and professional throughout. We would expect the pilot to be the pilot at the controls for landings. We would expect to see the pilot to ACT like the senior pilot who supervises his/her crew, passengers, and cargo. Otherwise, We would expect the pilot who is the “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command. . .” to ACT like the Captain.

QUESTION: What crewmember seat is a pilot required to be seated in (i.e., left or right or does it make any difference) when performing as “ . . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); The seat the SIC sits in is irrelevant. The SIC may be seated in the right seat performing right seat dependant tasks, or the left seat performing left seat dependant tasks, and still this time “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” would be creditable. That is, provided the SIC ACTS like the Captain! No place in the FARs does it require the PIC to be located in the left seat. However, in a Part 121 or Part 135 operation, it would be the norm that the SIC who is only “. . . performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” would most likely be seated in the right seat. I doubt there are any air carrier operators who would allow their SIC to be in the left seat! And I doubt there are any PICs who would allow their SIC to be seated in the left seat!

QUESTION: Does the pilot need be type rated in that type of airplane in order for the time to be creditable as “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); The pilot need not be type rated in that type of airplane in order for the time to be creditable as “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” No place in the FARs does it require the pilot be type rated for the time to be creditable under § 61.159(a)(4). It merely states “ . . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .”

QUESTION: How would the pilot log the time when the pilot is the “ . . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” in § 61.159(a)(4)?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); As for how the time would or could be logged, that time would still only be able to be logged as SIC time.

As shown in the answer above, the SIC should have the real PIC would endorse each entry in his/her logbook or training record as follows:

Recommended Endorsement: “Performed duties as a supervised PIC in accordance with § 61.159(a)(4)”
John T. Realpic, ATP #123456789

However as a point of clarification, if this SIC happens to hold a type rating appropriate to the aircraft flown or the appropriate category and class rating for the aircraft flown (otherwise when no type rating is required), that SIC may log the time as PIC flight time when that pilot “. . . Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated . . .” [i.e., § 61.51(e)(1)(i)].

However, if the SIC doesn’t hold the appropriate ratings, then the pilot would have the real PIC make the above endorsement and then when the SIC computes his/her time for meeting the requirements of § 61.159(a)(4), that
“ . . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command . . .” time would count toward the 250 hours.

QUESTION: Does the pilot need to be in any kind of a structured, formalized Part 121 or Part 135 training program in order for the time to be creditable as “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .”?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.159(a)(4); No. The pilot need not be in any kind of a structured, formalized training program in order for the time to be creditable as “. . . second in command performing the duties of pilot in command . . .” No place in § 61.159(a)(4) does it require it nor was it ever intended.

Answered by: John D Lynch, Certification Branch, AFS‑840 and Jan Demuth, Air Carrier Training Branch, AFS‑210
{Q&A-391}



Thanks for the help Stig