NoyGonnaDoIt

...and for educational purposes and to see how far back some of this goes,

No endorsements needed to act as a safety pilot:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...991/Rizner.rtf

For the logging rules for safety pilots as SIC or as PIC:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...1993/Hicks.rtf

If you don't like old stuff, there's stuff from 2009 and 2010 dealing mostly with cross country scenarios (safety pilots may not log cross country time toward requirements) that restate some of the basic rules.

mswmsw

You don't need those endorsements to log the Safety Pilot PIC time; you only need those endorsements to act as a PIC in those types of aircraft. It might benefit you (both financially and operationally) if you did some research so you understand the difference between acting as a PIC and logging PIC time.

NoyGonnaDoIt

Yes you do. Read the reg and the FAA's interpretations. You need to be acting as PIC to log PIC as a safety pilot.

==============================
61.5(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time.

(1) A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-
***
(iii) When the pilot, except for a holder of a sport or recreational pilot certificate, acts as pilot in command of an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted;
==============================

If you think there's another part of 61.51 that applies to safety pilot logging PIC, please point it out.

flyandive

It's been a while since I have done any instruction but it seems to me that based on the FARs and backed up by the first letter you do not need to have the endorsements if you were acting as a safety pilot and therefore logging SIC time.
However according to the second letter, if both pilots agreed ahead of time that the safety pilot would act as PIC (and therefore log PIC time) then he/she would need the endorsements.

If you really don't want to attract attention by having SIC time in a single engine piston, get the endorsements.

Thanks for the links, NoyGonnaDoIt, answers a lot of questions.

Bellanca

IMO, if you're talking about logging 10ish SIC safety pilot hours towards your commercial, do it. At current aircraft rental prices that can save you $1000, I find it difficult to believe that 500, 1000, 1500, etc, hours down the road some airline is going to fault you for for logging 10 hours or so of perfectly legal SIC time in a 182 to help you obtain the commercial cert. Now if you show up to an interview with a significant percentage of time as SIC in a single pilot plane that is a different story.

As for the endorsements, you will need the complex endorsement for commercial anyways. The high performance may not hurt to have down the road. If you can spare the money I would get them. You never know if you will be able to find one of these people who is willing to just let you fly them around on a couple $100 hamburger runs and log the PIC time outright.

I've logged some SIC time in single pilot planes under 135 that required an SIC, and I found it to be valuable experience. It does not comprise a significant percentage of my total time, and if airlines want to subtract it from my total time then I'm fine with that. It gave me different types of experience (actual, bad wx, icing, turbine, high alt ops) that I can't get beating the pattern with a student. If anything it made me a more well-rounded pilot and instructor. I realize the airlines frown upon it, but logging it is the only proof I have that I have this kind of experience, and its some hours that may come in handy for getting my ATP or insurance minimums for some job down the road. I would suggest to anyone that has the opportunity to get some hours as SIC for a 135 to do so. Just remember its not going to get you an airline job, and if you show up to an interview with 1000 hours and 100+ of it is SIC in a King Air 90 then that may not look so good.

NoyGonnaDoIt

You got it. Here's what's going on:

The first letter only answers the question, "do you have to have the endorsements to act as a safety pilot." (no) It doesn't attempt to answer the question of (a) whether the SP is PIC or SIC or something else, nor (b) how you log the time.

The second question answers the logging question and tells us the same thing 61.51 does. If a pilot in a required 2-pilot crew (in this case, the safety pilot) is acting as PIC, he may log the time as PIC. If not acting as PIC, he may log the time as SIC.

Neither one goes on to say the (hopefully) obvious: To act as PIC, you need to be qualified to act as PIC in the aircraft and the operation - ratings, endorsements, currency, etc.

Misunderstanding occurs when you don't break down the question into its parts. A lot of people get "a safety pilot may log PIC time" somewhere along the way and think it's a universal. It's not; like any other multi-pilot situation, it depends on their roles and what they are doing. Start doing that (assuming it's important to you) and even those weird 2-pilots-log-PIC scenarios begin t make some kind of sense.

JimHalpert

Screw it, I'm just gonna go ahead and do it. There's no way I'm getting more than 20 hours out of it anyway, and if I do happen to find some guy who will let me fly his 182 around then I'll just get the damn endorsement. I'm looking to fly ANG initially, not airline. I appreciate the help you guys gave me.

Jim

Golden Bear

If its only a few hours, why take a chance of having it being a subject scrutinized on a later interview (military or civilian)?

It's all about the risk vs. reward calculation. Demonstrate good judgement in they eyes of a future evaluator.

NoyGonnaDoIt

How does one demonstrate good judgment by not following the rules and avoiding the logging of legitimate flight time?

Or (and I always ask this one :) ) is it that future employers also avoid following the rules and avoiding the use of FAA requirements?

rickair7777

Logging SIC at a 135 operation should be completely acceptable to airline employers assuming that the legs were 135 (not 91), the 135 OPSPEC authorizes it, and you had the required training, checkrides, and currency.

Where people get in trouble is when all of those conditions are not met.