PIC & SIC questions
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: 737/FO
Posts: 423
...So if the aircraft requires two pilots by it's FAA type certificate or if the flight requires two pilots under the FAA regulations it is flying under, and you are rated (category, class, and type), and you find yourself in the right seat, and its a part 91 flight, you can log SIC, flight time, day/night, cross-country, but not instrument...
See the following FAA interpretation (it's a bit dated, but still applies):
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/.../Carpenter.rtf
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 826
To log Pilot-in-Command time you must be in one of two situations. You must be the pilot designated as pilot-in-command as defined in 14 CFR part 1.1.
***
f you are designated by the company as the PIC for the return part 91 flight, and you're appropriately rated (which you would be), then you can log the flight as pilot-in-command, flight time, night, instrument, etc
***
f you are designated by the company as the PIC for the return part 91 flight, and you're appropriately rated (which you would be), then you can log the flight as pilot-in-command, flight time, night, instrument, etc
I think the universe of logging PIC is contained in 61.51 and that, unless you fit into a 61.51 "box", there is no basis for logging FAA PIC time (for certificates, ratings or currency) just by being the "Part 1 PIC. "
There are only 61.51 boxes for a non-flying Part 1 PIC to log PIC time:
- "acting as pilot in command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted." 61.51(e)(1)(iii)
- an ATP "while acting as pilot-in-command of an operation requiring an airline transport pilot certificate." 61.51(e)(2)
The FAA issue is complete different from the employment issue where many pilots log all of their Part 1 PIC in a separate column to have numbers that show their experience being responsible for the aircraft and the flight (rather than the time when, as a brand new private pilot who had only flown a CE-152, his uncle let him be the "sole manipulator of the flight controls" of his Meridian for .2).
BTW, I think the rest of your explanation is not only technically spot on but written in a style that is very clear and easy to follow.
#13
Ok, since I don't have access to the 135 thread, I will pose my questions here.
Do I have to meet Part 135 minimums & insurance requirements (they may be one in the same), to sit SIC during a charter flight?
Once the passengers disembark the a/c and say the a/c returns empty of passengers, is that leg considered 135 or 91? If 91, what qualifications must I have in order to sit as PIC?
atp
Do I have to meet Part 135 minimums & insurance requirements (they may be one in the same), to sit SIC during a charter flight?
Once the passengers disembark the a/c and say the a/c returns empty of passengers, is that leg considered 135 or 91? If 91, what qualifications must I have in order to sit as PIC?
atp
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: 737/FO
Posts: 423
I think you're incorrect here also: It sounds like you are saying that acting as PIC as defined by FAR 1.1 (Part 1 PIC) is sufficient for logging PIC time. That's the part I think is incorrect.
I think the universe of logging PIC is contained in 61.51 and that, unless you fit into a 61.51 "box", there is no basis for logging FAA PIC time (for certificates, ratings or currency) just by being the "Part 1 PIC. "...
I think the universe of logging PIC is contained in 61.51 and that, unless you fit into a 61.51 "box", there is no basis for logging FAA PIC time (for certificates, ratings or currency) just by being the "Part 1 PIC. "...
When I teach this stuff I always try to remind my students to read the regs literally, too not read into them anything that is not there. And then to go find the FAA interpretations to see how they been applied. I should follow my own counsel!
#15
In regards to your question in bold:
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
#16
In regards to your question in bold:
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
Is that the norm or does it occur as an isolated event?
I mean, in most cases will a 135 outfit charge the customer for a return trip that's empty? I understand the economics of it, but is that the practice of the 135 industry?
atp
Last edited by atpwannabe; 12-04-2008 at 03:58 AM.
#17
"Transportation, not local in nature, furnished by the certificate holder, shall not be considered as part of any required rest period."
Also, FAR 135.263(b) states "No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember to ANY duty with the certificate holder during any required rest period."
Under Part 135, it's not really a 14 hour "duty" period that is important, it is the required 10 hour lookback rest period that is controlling.
Also, the part 91 ferry flight time (positioning leg, not going home leg) counts against the max flight time in the duty period.
Joe
#18
I see a problem here.
"Transportation, not local in nature, furnished by the certificate holder, shall not be considered as part of any required rest period."
Also, FAR 135.263(b) states "No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember to ANY duty with the certificate holder during any required rest period."
Under Part 135, it's not really a 14 hour "duty" period that is important, it is the required 10 hour lookback rest period that is controlling.
Also, the part 91 ferry flight time (positioning leg, not going home leg) counts against the max flight time in the duty period.
Joe
"Transportation, not local in nature, furnished by the certificate holder, shall not be considered as part of any required rest period."
Also, FAR 135.263(b) states "No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember to ANY duty with the certificate holder during any required rest period."
Under Part 135, it's not really a 14 hour "duty" period that is important, it is the required 10 hour lookback rest period that is controlling.
Also, the part 91 ferry flight time (positioning leg, not going home leg) counts against the max flight time in the duty period.
Joe
Same with 121.
#19
In regards to your question in bold:
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
I don't think that an empty aircraft in your example necessarily is a Part 91 flight. Lets assume that someone, for some odd reason pays a 135 operator to fly an aircraft without passengers or cargo. The flight is paid for, regardless of what or who is onboard. It must then be flown under Part 135. Another example: A charter company in LAX is paid to fly a passenger LAX-PHX, drop him/her off and then return empty. The passenger was quoted, and charged for the airplane to return to LAX. Although the aircraft is "empty" someone paid for it to return to LAX and it is then a revenue flight and must be operated IAW Part 135.
I remember this interpertation coming up in the 1990s, making news in the trade publications, and then being abandoned.
135 positioning legs are considered to be operated under Part 91. At least in the two FSDOs in the Eastern Region that I have been under.
#20
HOWEVER, according to FAR Part 135 regs, the positioning legs cannot be part of your required rest period, and Part 91 commercial flight time counts against your maximum Part 135 flight time. The Feds don't buy the idea that professional pilots jump in an airplane and fly empty to Omaha for free, and only then start getting paid.
Joe
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post