NoyGonnaDoIt

Thank you. I found it. I guess I never had a reason to look for that before.

tflyer70

Okay, here's the latest from my buddy, and his responses to queries within this thread that I linked to him are as follows:

Definitions are definitions, while regulatory requirements are
more usually "specific", as in specific regulatory requirements

(tell him to) read all the applicable documents

Now, regarding definitions, read the following:

From Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part § 1.1 General
definitions, a SIC is:

Second in command means a pilot who is designated to be second in command
of an aircraft during flight time.

That is it, now we read what a PIC entails, from the same part, it means:

Pilot in command means the person who:


(1) Has (not dreams about) final authority and responsibility for the
operation and safety of the flight;


(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight;
and


(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate;
, for the conduct of the flight.

And: Rating "means a statement" that, as a part of a certificate,
sets forth special conditions, privileges, or limitations




And in case he needs to know, aType means:



(1) As used with respect to the certification, ratings, privileges,
and limitations of airmen, means a specific make and basic model of
aircraft, including modifications thereto that do not change its
handling or flight characteristics. Examples include: DC–7, 1049, and
F–27; and



Definitions are designed follows under Part 1:

1.3 Rules of construction.


(a) In Subchapters A through K of this chapter, unless the context
requires otherwise......


(b) In Subchapters A through K of this chapter, the word:


(1) Shall is used in an imperative sense;


(2) May is used in a permissive sense to state authority or
permission to do the act prescribed, and the words “no person may
* * *” or “a person may not * * *” mean that no person is
required, authorized, or permitted to do the act prescribed; and


The previous alone is enought to answer all the jib jab I saw on
those posts.


Regarding logbooks, read:




14 CFR 61.51 Pilot logbooks.


(a) Training time and aeronautical experience. Each person must
document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the
Administrator:


(1) Training and aeronautical experience used to meet the
requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this
part. (ﾅKeep in mind that ALL U.S certificates are issued
under this part or under part 135 or 121, which requires approved
training that meets or exceeds this part)


(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent
flight experience requirements of this part.


(b) Logbook entries. For the purposes of meeting the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, each person must enter the following
information for each flight or lesson logged:


(1) General—




(c) Logging of pilot time. The pilot time described in this section
may be used to:


(1) Apply for a certificate or rating issued under this part or a
privilege authorized under this part; or


(2) Satisfy the recent flight experience requirements of this part.




Now, read this to (the one asking the question):

(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time. (1) A sport, recreational,
private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for
that flight time during which that person—


(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which
the pilot is rated or has privileges; (Commercial Pilot, Sole
manipulator, log PIC if rated or priveleged) And read the following
to (the one originally asking the question):


(ii) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft; or


(iii) Except for a recreational pilot, is acting as pilot in command
of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the
type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the
flight is conducted.


(2) An airline transport pilot may log as pilot-in-command time all
of the flight time while acting as pilot-in-command of an operation
requiring an airline transport pilot certificate.


(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.




(h) Logging training time. (1) A person may log training time when
that person receives training from an authorized instructor in an
aircraft, flight simulator, or flight training device.


(2) The training time must be logged in a logbook and must:




And, usually this happens when something undesirable happens:

(i) Presentation of required documents. (1) Persons must present
their pilot certificate, medical certificate, logbook, or any other
record required by this part for inspection upon a reasonable request
by—(they are almost always reasonable)


(i) The Administrator; (yep, that means me)





14 CFR 61.55 Second-in-command qualifications.


(a) A person may serve as a second-in-command of an aircraft type
certificated for more than one required pilot flight crewmember or in
operations requiring a second-in-command pilot flight crewmember only
if that person holds:




(3) The appropriate pilot type rating for the aircraft unless the
flight will be conducted as domestic flight operations within United
States airspace.




(b) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, no person
may serve as a second-in-command of an aircraft type certificated for
more than one required pilot flight crewmember or in operations
requiring a second-in-command unless that person has within the
previous 12 calendar months:


(1) Become familiar with the following information for the specific
type aircraft for which second-in-command privileges are requested—




(d) A person may receive a second-in-command pilot type rating for an
aircraft after satisfactorily completing the second-in-command
familiarization training requirements under paragraph (b) of this
section in that type of aircraft provided the training was completed
within the 12 calendar months before the month of application for the
SIC pilot type rating. The person must comply with the following
application and pilot certification procedures:




(7) There is no practical test required for the issuance of the “SIC
Privileges Only” pilot type rating.

That reads SIC PRIVELEGES..........

tflyer70

continued:

14 CFR 61.58 Pilot-in-command proficiency check: Operation of
aircraft requiring more than one pilot flight crewmember.


(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, to serve as pilot
in command of an aircraft that is type certificated for more than one
required pilot flight crewmember, a person must—


(1) Within the preceding 12 calendar months, complete a
pilot-in-command proficiency check in an aircraft that is type
certificated for more than one required pilot flight crewmember; and


(2) Within the preceding 24 calendar months, complete a
pilot-in-command proficiency check in the particular type of aircraft
in which that person will serve as pilot in command.


(b) This section does not apply to persons conducting operations
under subpart K of part 91, part 121, 125, 133, 135, or 137 of this
chapter, or persons maintaining continuing qualification under an
Advanced Qualification program approved under subpart Y of part 121
of this chapter.





14 CFR 61.59 Falsification, reproduction, or alteration of
applications, certificates, logbooks, reports, or records.


(a) No person may make or cause to be made:


(1) Any fraudulent or intentionally false statement on any
application for a certificate, rating, authorization, or duplicate
thereof, issued under this part;




(b) The commission of an act prohibited under paragraph (a) of this
section is a basis for suspending or revoking any airman certificate,
rating, or authorization held by that person.






14 CFR 61.63 Additional aircraft ratings (other than on an airline
transport pilot certificate).


(a) General. To be eligible for an additional aircraft rating to a
pilot certificate, for other than an airline transport pilot
certificate, an applicant must meet the appropriate requirements of
this section for the additional aircraft rating sought.


(b) Additional category rating. An applicant who holds a pilot
certificate and applies to add a category rating to that pilot
certificate:


(1) Must have received the required training and possess the
aeronautical experience prescribed by this part that applies to the
pilot certificate for the aircraft category and, if applicable, class
rating sought;


(2) Must have an endorsement in his or her logbook or training record
from an authorized instructor, and that endorsement must attest that
the applicant has been found competent in the aeronautical knowledge
areas appropriate to the pilot certificate for the aircraft category
and, if applicable, class rating sought;




Okay RT, need I really say anymore?

NoyGonnaDoIt

No, except that, other than 61.51 90% was irrelevant to whether on not a person can log something.

tflyer70

Certain "definitions" which were brought up that he wanted addressed. And there are no short definitions in the FAR's

So the short and long of it is NO. You cannot log PIC time with an SIC type rating that has the limitation of SIC priveleges only

flyboyjake

holy ####, I think I nodded off a few times with that one. To start, I am still flying the lear, so no Rich its not what im trying to do. Its just a really good loophole I think, and what better place to bring it up. Maybe ill shoot a letter off the the chief counsils office, but dont expect an update for a year. As for your buddys info...Some pretty typical language from the FAR, but none of it really addresses the issue. much of it had to do with acting pic, which is irrelevant. And where does the falsification of records, proficiency check, etc... come in to play? I know some of you long time captains are offended at even the notion that an FO could log PIC with an sic type...and frankly, it doesnt sound too rational to me, but ego aside, with respect to LOGGING pic only, where in that jumble of regs do you see that it prohibits it?

NoyGonnaDoIt

There are plenty of short ones. And how many do you need for "Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has privileges"?

I don't think we have a definitional problem with aircraft. Or with pilot. Or with "sole manipulator"

"Rated" is a short one (although I don't think you mentioned it): "Rating means a statement that, as a part of a certificate, sets forth special conditions, privileges, or limitations." FAR 1.1. Or, as the FAA Chief Counsel said 29 years ago, ""Rating" as used in that section [61.51] refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates."

The rest of the reg quote sort of sounds like "No, you can't do it. Here, read the FAR. It's gotta be somewhere in there." Bottom line, it's not somewhere in there.

The only real question is whether the FAA (a) intended and (b) will interpret "rated" in 61.51(e) to include the SIC type rating (despite the formal definition). My WAG is no, but that's only my WAG.

tflyer70

Whats that saying--something about being the messenger.......As I stated, this is coming from a Fed.

About falsification: It was a blanket statement meant to anyone--seeing a this is a public forum-- (not pointing a finger at you Jake) who is logging time that is incorrect......

And Jake, I could care less what or how you are logging time. Dont ever think Im "offended" at what you log. What I am "offended" is what you accused me of when you sent that text. It was wrong, and your accusation was wrong, and it crossed the line. Your logbook does not affect me in any way, shape or form, so I simply dont care how or what you do with it. You asked the question, I asked a friend who is a Fed, and posted his answers. IF you dont like it or disagree, send me an email and I will forward it to him. Then you can hash this subject out with him.

And Noy, my statement about no short FAR's, c'mon now. Its called SARCASIM!

NoyGonnaDoIt

Why would he? A Fed's personal opinion is really no better than the opinion of anyone else (except, of course that if he is wrong, he has the power to make your life difficult until he is corrected). A written opinion from the FAA Flight Standards Division means something. A written letter of interpretation from the FAA Chief Counsel, definitely. But an oral opinion from a "cop on the beat" at a FSDO? Nope. There have been too many incorrect "opinions" from that source.

flyboyjake

Rich...leave your personal quarrels just that, personal...Unless you are fishing for some emotional justification from the unknown and unseen masses here. Feels like its slowly morphing to a vendetta post. Sorry that I ever offended you, however it wasn't without rationale.

Im inclined to agree that a feds word, though probably more educated than most, is no more than another pilots opinion, unless that fed is my POI, in which case, unless I get a written opinion that differs his word is gold.