rickair7777

This actually all makes sense to me... among other things, it eliminates the old gotcha with logging 135 SIC in a single-pilot plane.




The FAA has published a final rule that will increase the allowed use of aviation training devices for flight training and proficiency maintenance. The changes are estimated to save pilots and operators up to $113.5 million over a five-year period. The rulemaking “relieves burdens on pilots seeking to obtain aeronautical experience, training, and certification.” The rule makes changes to other training areas as well including opportunities for military instructor pilots or pilot examiners to obtain civilian ratings based on military experience and expanded opportunities for logging pilot time.

A rule change affecting aviation training devices removes the requirement to have an instructor present “when accomplishing flight experience requirements for instrument recency in an FAA-approved full-flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device (ATD).” The provision also reduces the frequency of instrument recency accomplished exclusively in ATDs from every two months to every six months, reduces the number of tasks, and removes the three-hour flight time requirement.

An additional rule change allows a pilot to log second-in-command (SIC) flight time in a multiengine airplane in a Part 135 operation that does not require an SIC. The option to utilize a single-engine turbine-powered airplane in an approved SIC PDP is now added and the PIC is no longer required to be a Part 135 flight instructor. Crew pairing requirements to ensure the PIC is qualified and has undergone mentoring training have been added to the rule. Pilots can log SIC time obtained in Part 91 operations conducted in accordance with the certificate holder’s OpSpec. Pilots can also credit SIC time logged under a SIC PDP toward flight time requirements for ATP certification. Any combination of aircraft and FSTD is now allowed to satisfy the SIC instrument recency requirements and an option is included for Part 135 SICs to reestablish instrument recency.

For the single-engine commercial pilot certificate, a technicallly advanced airplane can now be used to meet some or all of the required 10 hours of training that must be completed in a complex or turbine-powered airplane. The requirement for instrument-only instructors to have category and class ratings on their flight instructor certificates to provide instrument training has been removed. New provisions for sport pilots have been added including allowing a portion of sport pilot training to be credited for certain aeronautical experience requirements for a higher certificate or rating.

A further rule change allows the addition of a flight instructor rating based on military competency to “simultaneously qualify” for the reinstatement of an expired FAA flight instructor certificate. An additional change allows pilots to “operate certain large and turbojet-powered airplanes (specifically former military and some airplanes not type certificated in the standard category) without a pilot who is designated as SIC.

Additional information about the changes and expected financial savings can be found in the FAA NPRM published on June 27. The rule significantly impacts Part 61 and the majority of changes will be effective July 27 with all changes implemented by December 24 of this year.


https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...g-rule-changes

dera

It also implies the 135 SIC time prior to this rule was not loggable...

joepilot

Previously, SIC was loggable if the airplane type required a two pilot operation, or the operation required two pilots (IFR carrying passengers with no autopilot).

Joe

JohnBurke

Or with an autopilot. The presence of an autopilot doesn't eliminate the need for an SIC under 135 IFR operations. The certificate holder may gain a single-pilot-with-auto-pilot exemption under their opspecs, but is still entitled to use a SIC so long as they have and use the approved training program. In that case, despite the exemption, when electing to use a SIC, the SIC may still log the time. This has always been the case.

The proposed changes allow the SIC to credit that time toward ATP requirements, which was not previously the case.

Overall, it's simply lowering the qualifications of the applicant, bit by bit.

dera

Got a reference for this? That's not what the Tarsa and Nichols letters say. The only place where they had this kind of training program was Ameriflight with their ACP, and the time they log is only usable as company time, but not towards a certificate or a rating. So in general, SICs haven't been able to log time based on that.

rickair7777

I'm no fan of degraded standards by any means, but in this case a pilot trained to operate as a member of a crew in a turbine aircraft is still gaining legit experience, particularly as applicable to airlines. In some cases the distinction between a single pilot vs. two pilot aircraft comes down to whether the PIC has good visibility out the right window.

EDIT: For clarity, I don't care much for the PDP aspect of the new rule, I just like that they clarify the allowance for logging 135 and 91 time flown under an appropriate OPSPEC. I think noobs should get as much GA PIC as they can, they often learn more that way than sitting in the right seat of anything.

dera

I'd say a pilot trained as an SIC in a legit 135 operation has much better and more relevant experience than a 1500 hour CFI.

SonicBoom

Woah, I have 100 hours + of SIC King Air aircraft part 91 that I did no log due to this rule. Could I go back and log those hours I did not log but kept on a spreadsheet for keepsake? If so they'd be out of order, would that be an issue?

rickair7777

If you're sure the time meets the requirements in the new rule (and the rule does not prohibit grandfathering of old flight time), just log it out of sequence, using the date it was actually flown... a rule change is a perfectly good reason to amend your logbook after the fact. Just be sure it's all correct, since that will get scrutinized.

bamike

There seems to have been a change to 61.159(c)(4) where you can no longer log the flight time as PIC when you are sole manipulator. Is this only for operations for a 135 carrier? Can a king air 200 that doesn’t require a type rating have a "first officer" log PIC time when he is the sole manipulator under part 91? Basically there are two pilots, one flies the first leg and logs PIC, the other logs nothing. Then they switch on the second leg. Is this still legal PIC time?