Nicholas Air
01-16-2017, 11:25 AM
#91
Chief A'Hole
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Barely Flying!
Posts: 402
Originally Posted by piloto2
My opinion and interpretation of the regulations is not what matters. What does matter is the FAA legal division's interpretation. And they are crystal clear on the matter. If you aren't a required are member per the type certificate on the plane, you don't get to log the time. I don't know why that is so hard for you to understand.
As far as NetJets goes, they have an exception on their certificate. They are the ONLY 135 operator that does. It's not "my logic". The FAA has granted the exception. Because of that exception, their SICs get to log the time.
You're darned straight that I know the qualifications of the pilots I fly with. PIC is determined before the flight, every flight. If I am sitting right seat in a single pilot jet, and the other guy is the PIC, I don't log SIC time because it isn't legal (per the FAA).
I'm pretty sure none of this will change your mind. You've determined that you want to log the time and that's it. As I stated earlier, I am personally familiar with the details of the FAA Nichols letter as well as several of the individuals involved. The 135 certificate holder in that case was telling young, inexperienced pilots exactly what you want to believe. They did so because many of their customers wanted two pilots, even though only one was required by the FAA. And they hired these novices on with low pay, but with the promise of logging "jet time".
I have come across many of these erroneous logging entries while reviewing job applicants in both the 121 and 135 worlds. Only one applicant was able to satisfactorily explain the entries. A lot of operators won't care. Many will. And as stated by another here, if you find yourself in front of the FAA for an unrelated situation, they WILL care.
As far as NetJets goes, they have an exception on their certificate. They are the ONLY 135 operator that does. It's not "my logic". The FAA has granted the exception. Because of that exception, their SICs get to log the time.
You're darned straight that I know the qualifications of the pilots I fly with. PIC is determined before the flight, every flight. If I am sitting right seat in a single pilot jet, and the other guy is the PIC, I don't log SIC time because it isn't legal (per the FAA).
I'm pretty sure none of this will change your mind. You've determined that you want to log the time and that's it. As I stated earlier, I am personally familiar with the details of the FAA Nichols letter as well as several of the individuals involved. The 135 certificate holder in that case was telling young, inexperienced pilots exactly what you want to believe. They did so because many of their customers wanted two pilots, even though only one was required by the FAA. And they hired these novices on with low pay, but with the promise of logging "jet time".
I have come across many of these erroneous logging entries while reviewing job applicants in both the 121 and 135 worlds. Only one applicant was able to satisfactorily explain the entries. A lot of operators won't care. Many will. And as stated by another here, if you find yourself in front of the FAA for an unrelated situation, they WILL care.
DH
01-22-2017, 05:19 AM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: First Officer
Posts: 432
NetJets does not have an exception. They simply don't have the OpSpec allowing for an autopilot in lieu of an SIC. All pax 135 requires an SIC unless that OpSpec has been issued. Wheels Up is in the same situation with the King Airs. I can't speak to Options or Flex because I haven't seen their OpSpecs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-25-2017, 02:26 PM
#93
On Reserve
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: CEO pax Area ( Boeing BBJ)
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by piloto2
Winner, winner, chicken dinner! Of course, you could always just lie about not using the autopilot as was suggested earlier. Who would know, right?
02-03-2017, 01:48 AM
#94
Chief A'Hole
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Barely Flying!
Posts: 402
Originally Posted by B1RD
I wouldn't be so fast to lie. The Phenom is a smart aircraft and will show per CMC and CVDR data I believe if the A/P is on /off or inop.
DH
03-23-2017, 10:01 AM
#95
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Position: Da Bus
Posts: 35
Originally Posted by piloto2
My opinion and interpretation of the regulations is not what matters. What does matter is the FAA legal division's interpretation. And they are crystal clear on the matter. If you aren't a required are member per the type certificate on the plane, you don't get to log the time. I don't know why that is so hard for you to understand.
This is incorrect. Reference FAR 61.51(f)(2) which states
(f) Logging second-in-command flight time. A person may log second-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person:
(1) Is qualified in accordance with the second-in-command requirements of §61.55 of this part, and occupies a crewmember station in an aircraft that requires more than one pilot by the aircraft's type certificate; or
(2) Holds the appropriate category, class, and instrument rating (if an instrument rating is required for the flight) for the aircraft being flown, and more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted.
As far as NetJets goes, they have an exception on their certificate. They are the ONLY 135 operator that does. It's not "my logic". The FAA has granted the exception. Because of that exception, their SICs get to log the time.
You're darned straight that I know the qualifications of the pilots I fly with. PIC is determined before the flight, every flight. If I am sitting right seat in a single pilot jet, and the other guy is the PIC, I don't log SIC time because it isn't legal (per the FAA).
I'm pretty sure none of this will change your mind. You've determined that you want to log the time and that's it. As I stated earlier, I am personally familiar with the details of the FAA Nichols letter as well as several of the individuals involved. The 135 certificate holder in that case was telling young, inexperienced pilots exactly what you want to believe. They did so because many of their customers wanted two pilots, even though only one was required by the FAA. And they hired these novices on with low pay, but with the promise of logging "jet time".
I have come across many of these erroneous logging entries while reviewing job applicants in both the 121 and 135 worlds. Only one applicant was able to satisfactorily explain the entries. A lot of operators won't care. Many will. And as stated by another here, if you find yourself in front of the FAA for an unrelated situation, they WILL care.
This is incorrect. Reference FAR 61.51(f)(2) which states
(f) Logging second-in-command flight time. A person may log second-in-command time only for that flight time during which that person:
(1) Is qualified in accordance with the second-in-command requirements of §61.55 of this part, and occupies a crewmember station in an aircraft that requires more than one pilot by the aircraft's type certificate; or
(2) Holds the appropriate category, class, and instrument rating (if an instrument rating is required for the flight) for the aircraft being flown, and more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is being conducted.
As far as NetJets goes, they have an exception on their certificate. They are the ONLY 135 operator that does. It's not "my logic". The FAA has granted the exception. Because of that exception, their SICs get to log the time.
You're darned straight that I know the qualifications of the pilots I fly with. PIC is determined before the flight, every flight. If I am sitting right seat in a single pilot jet, and the other guy is the PIC, I don't log SIC time because it isn't legal (per the FAA).
I'm pretty sure none of this will change your mind. You've determined that you want to log the time and that's it. As I stated earlier, I am personally familiar with the details of the FAA Nichols letter as well as several of the individuals involved. The 135 certificate holder in that case was telling young, inexperienced pilots exactly what you want to believe. They did so because many of their customers wanted two pilots, even though only one was required by the FAA. And they hired these novices on with low pay, but with the promise of logging "jet time".
I have come across many of these erroneous logging entries while reviewing job applicants in both the 121 and 135 worlds. Only one applicant was able to satisfactorily explain the entries. A lot of operators won't care. Many will. And as stated by another here, if you find yourself in front of the FAA for an unrelated situation, they WILL care.
08-31-2017, 12:28 PM
#99
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 133
It seems that logging SIC time is the least of anyone’s worries at Nicholas Air. I have a friend who used to work there who told me that they have lost 7 or 8 pilots over the last two weeks or so. Most were captains. Some were SICs who had only been there a couple months. The place sounds like others where management refuses to realize that the aviation industry has changed significantly over the last year. More details are available if anyone is interested.
08-31-2017, 12:56 PM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Retired for now
Posts: 233
Originally Posted by piloto2
It seems that logging SIC time is the least of anyone’s worries at Nicholas Air. I have a friend who used to work there who told me that they have lost 7 or 8 pilots over the last two weeks or so. Most were captains. Some were SICs who had only been there a couple months. The place sounds like others where management refuses to realize that the aviation industry has changed significantly over the last year. More details are available if anyone is interested.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
