TyFoo

CapnDan is correct, 61.51 dictates the logging of Instrument time, with little room for interpretation. The ATP test specifically has a question regarding Hecklers question.

What Instrument time may be logged by a SIC of an aircraft requiring two pilots?
Answer: "All of the time the SIC is controlling the airplane soley by reference to flight instruments." Section (A20) 14CFR 61.51

UCLAbruins

Well, then I guess I'm wrong, I'll shut up now.

The Juice

I understand what your are saying. However, it is foolish anyway to hold actual time as a premium when 99% of us fly with autopilot while in actual. I could see a Beech 1900 guy with tons of actual as a positive but for those of us with AP, seems senseless.

Spooled

You are incorrect.

There is Legal FAA Interpretation stating that an SIC can log instrument time, while not acting as the flying pilot:

"You first ask whether it would be proper under FAR 61.51(g) for a properly qualified SIC to log instrument flight time flown during instrument conditions while serving as the SIC in Part 121 operations on an aircraft that requires two crewmembers. The answer is yes. As a qualified SIC, and as a required crewmember, you are "operating" the aircraft within the meaning of FAR 61.51(g). Therefore, as the SIC operating the aircraft "solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions," you would log that time as SIC flown in instrument conditions. Naturally, the PIC logs the time as PIC flown in instrument conditions."

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/.../Carpenter.rtf

Wolfbayne

As a qualified SIC, and as a required crewmember, you are "operating" the aircraft within the meaning of FAR 61.51(g). Therefore, as the SIC operating the aircraft "solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions," you would log that time as SIC flown in instrument conditions.

You're misreading that....It says as the SIC "operating", meaning the pilot flying, that you can log instrument time. He cannot log the instrument time when it is the PIC's leg, only instrument time when it is his leg. It even says in your quote, "as the SIC "operating" the acft>>>>>>>"

NJA Capt

You'd better read your LOI again. It references the SIC doing the flying and thus logging the time. It does NOT address the SIC logging while the PIC is flying. It further goes on to state the the SIC cannot log approaches for currency while the PIC (PF) is at the controls.

"You then ask if, for the purposes of maintaining instrument currency, an instrument approach on the above flight flown by the PIC can be logged as an instrument approach by the SIC. The answer is no. As the SIC you have not "performed" the approach as contemplated by FAR 61.57(c) because you were not the sole manipulator of the controls during the approach."

Spooled

I think you're reading it wrong. "operating" does not mean "soul manipulator of the controls".

If what you were saying is true, then only the PIC can log instrument time anytime in IMC, even if he is not at the controls? That doesn't make sense.

heckler

Boy, I didn't mean to stir up a storm on this and there seems time a similar split on opinions everywhere else I look. One of the uncertainties deals with my question and that is why I would like to know NJA's take on this. I would rather under report than over report, but under reporting in this case can end up in me not even getting considered. Can someone who works there, like NJA Capt, please confirm the company's take on this?

In researching this I have seen all sorts of answers and there are some that I definitely understand to be certain. A SIC cannot log a landing or approach unless he is the one manipulating the controls.

On the SIC instrument time question there has been a split. Some have said that logging instrument time is when that person is the one actually doing the flying, which up to now has been my take. Others have said that an SIC on an aircraft requiring two pilots, acting as pilot not flying, is required for the operation of the aircraft and therefore is "operating" that aircraft or contributing to the operation of it. While he is in the aircraft acting as Pilot not Flying in instrument conditions the aircraft is being operated by sole reference to instruments and the Pilot not Flying should be paying attention to what's going on by looking at his instruments and logging actual instrument would be no different than logging night time. People have produced documentation and interpretations for both and probably as far as the FAA is concerned you could "get away" with either as long as you were consistent. Getting away with it isn't as much my concern here as playing by NJA's "rules."

Spooled

You are getting the term 'operating' confused with pilot flying/at the controls.

I never stated you could log an approach or landing if you did not perform the approach or landing. In fact, I stated you could not.

The dispute here is logging instrument time when you are not the pilot flying.

"Therefore, as the SIC operating the aircraft "solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions," you would log that time as SIC flown in instrument conditions. Naturally, the PIC logs the time as PIC flown in instrument conditions."

So if the SIC is pilot flying, how can the PIC log instrument time? Since in your terms the PIC is not 'operating' the aircraft.

UCLAbruins

Thank you, that's what I've been trying to say, right from the start.