gopinjr

I think the original question was logging ALL of the flight time when there are more than two pilots. In other words, logging the time when you’re in the bunk.

For me, I only log the time that I’m in the cockpit performing duties. This could be as a third or fourth pilot, but if I’m up there “working” I’m logging it. If no, I’m not. I’ve got enough flight time, so like I said before, I’ll error on the side of caution and not log the time.

And like you, I never log PIC as an FO or RFO. No point in it.

blinkpilot182

Ah, my apologies. Sadly the FAA offers no clear cut guidance on that. The language in part 61 is not explicitly referencing augmented 121 crews. On the one hand if you are on the flight release on an augmented crew you are required to be a rested and capable pilot at all times. On the other hand I’ve never met someone who starts a stopwatch whenever they get up to use the lav .

I’ve heard of other airlines (i.e. - US Airways) having language in their FOM stating things about logging 2/3, or 1/4 time on augmented crews. No such language at Atlas. I’d be curious to hear a POI’s standpoint on this. For a personal gripe a 121 pilot shouldn’t be looking back to part 61 for detailed information on how to log flight time. It should be broken down further for airline pilots in part 121. Much like NOTAMS, this is an issue that should be overhauled.

Cheers,
blink


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

gopinjr

I would say that you’re still occupying the seat when you get up to go to the lav. But when you get up and someone else takes over, you’re not.

As far as going back to 61 as a 121 pilot, that president has been in the regs for ever. Same as 91 rules applying while operating under 121/135. I see as, if there is something about the operation that supersedes 91 or 61, they’ll put it in there. If not, those regs apply.

I do agree that it would be interesting to hear the FAAs point of view. I have a common friend with Atlas’ 747 fleet inspector (or whatever his title is). I’ll reach out informally and see what he says. PM me if you want me to follow up with you if he answers.

sigler

I think it would be covered under 61.51 (f) (2). Now my question is, does one need to meet the requirements of 61.51 (f) (1) AND (2) or (f) (1) OR (2)? I think it’s the latter.

Elevation

FWIW I didn't think you were doing that. I thought we were talking more about the points of logging time since a lot of folks are applying who haven't been flying with augmented crews before.

gopinjr

You make a valid observation. Looking at other parts in that chapter, it’s clear that the use of the “;” between 61.51(f)(1) and (2) make them independent of each other. Also, the use of “or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted” in 61.51(f)(2) probably applies to augmented crews, and there is no mention of being at a pilot station. Based on this, I guess one could conclude that when an augmented crew is required under 121, the entire time can be logged.

I’m gonna do a little more digging, but for now I’ll say that I stand corrected.

Elevation

These discussions come up a lot and, from my perspective, it all comes down to how you read 61.51(f)1. One interpretation says you can log SIC any time you're not able to log PIC and at a crew station. People (like me) also read that you have to be at a crewmember station. Sleeping in the bunk doesn't really count as being at a crewmember station. I think most of the perspectives I hear about this err on the right side of ethics. So this part of the discussion is largely academic and not worth losing any more hair over.

Logging PIC as a relief pilot is sort of the reverse, right? By the letter of the law you can log PIC time when you are the relief PIC. It's legal. Is it ethical? What actual decisions beyond when to step or what direction to deviate around weather do you really make? If you have a situation where some real decisions do need to be made (say you're over-burning fuel enroute from HNL to SYD for example) are you going make these decisions without waking up the PIC? In this case what is clearly permitted by the letter of the law doesn't seem right to me. How much command authority are you really exercising here? How much good judgement?

But these are my perspectives. I'm nobody special, and if I was anyone good I'd have made it someplace further up the industry's food chain. I'll even say that anyone who's trying to determine whether they can or can't log time is making a good-faith effort to represent themselves accurately in their logs. I have clear memories of a guy in a DFAC saying he logged what he needed to log to get his Southwest interview and he'd catch his time to his logbooks up at the new job. He's been at SWA for seven years now. More fool us, right?

UnprotectdPilot

Regarding seat lock(s) ...

As I understand it, completing training on a new type induces a 3-year seat lock (e.g. 747 FO to 767 FO). If one went, say, 74 FO to 76 FO, would they then still have to wait an additional 3 years to upgrade on the 767 or is the lock waived because its an upgrade on the same type?

RyeMex

Seat locks do not affect upgrade. In your example, after three years as a 747 FO you could switch to the 767 as an FO. Then, after a year or two when you could hold it, you could upgrade to captain. Upgrading, however, comes with another seat lock. If you took the 767 CA slot, you’d have to wait 3 years to switch to 747 CA (if you could hold it).

boeingdvr

Did you say Upgrade 🤣🤣🤣