The question has been answered, but its important to note what kind of airplane you are talking about to help broaden the understanding.

If its a single-pilot jet (such as a Mustang, CJ or Premier), one can long SIC time provided you have been trained in accordance with 61.55, your logbook reflects as much, and the PIC is 61.58 current. This is because the TCDS for these aircraft shows Required Crew as "minimum one".

If its a King Air, then the TCDS shows Required Crew as "one" and you're pretty much out of luck.

 

I see, "one" vs. "minimum one".

The aircraft was an SA-227 if that helps.

 

Huh?

Exactly how does "minimum one" translate into "requires more than one"?

 

Those airplanes are essentially two-pilot airplanes which the FAA allows to be operated as single pilot by a specially trained pilot.

The generic type rating requires two pilots. You can get a one-pilot type by demonstrating that you can do it all by yourself.

If the PIC has a single-pilot type, he can still chose to operate with two pilots...legal and loggable SIC. The SIC would need the minimum training in part 61.

 

"One" means just that - one/eine/uno required pilot.

"Minimum one" means at least one, but possibly more.

As an example, a holder of a CE525S type rating cannot fly a CJ single pilot if the autopilot is MEL'd. The only way that airplane could legally be flown is with an SIC trained IAW 61.55 and the PIC being 61.58 current.

 

Thanks. I think I understand.

It's similar to the Part 135 passenger IFR/autopilot SIC issue, although dealing with the aircraft's certification rather than the type of operation?

 

Correct. Basically the FAA is spring-loaded to require two pilots on turbojets, but if all the conditions are met, you can operate single-pilot on some of them. But that provision does not prevent normal two-pilot operations if conditions warrant, or if desired by the pilots.

 

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?

 

Edit: sorry didn't see the SIC in your question, you can log SIC if is certified for 2 pilots.

 

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.