Systemized

yes shock cooling, this sliped my mind. I don't think any of the guys with recip. pressurized planes I know would let me do a steep decent in. Until I get the proper logbook endorse. I don't know if it is worth my time sitting right seat in the TBM if I can't log it. I have been sitting right seat here and there, and it has really improved my pilot skills though. Fun airplane

I think my best bet is doing the high altitude stuff in a full motion class D simulator, there is one in Greeley that I could get myself in(same one that lakes uses), all the guys with turbo props on my home field don't have cfi's anyways.

AbortAbortAbort

That's the FAR text. Now what defines "emergency descent procedures?" In a sim, do the full shabang all the way to 10K or whatever your aircraft specifies. In the plane, doing the procedures and simulating the descent portion would be good enough in my view. No different than old school MPTFGIVFC (mixture, props, throttles, flaps up, gear up, identify, verify, feather, cutoff) in the multi-engine pistons we learned during training...when we got to "feather...cutoff" we didn't feather and kill a perfectly good, simulated dead engine, did we? No difference here. Don the mask, run procedures as specified in your plane, touch the throttle and say "power to idle", then say "nose down to maintain X kts". I think we all understand that training and a true emergency are not exactly the same thing...if the pressurization blows in a turbo piston, the last thing I'm worried about is shock cooling the engine(s) during descent.

I'd say stay in the TBM even if it's not loggable...it's experience and potential connections which are invaluable in the industry. Plus it'll look better to the owner than you showing up after you're qualified to log and suddenly being willing to fly.

wizepilot

You cannot log PIC time in an aircraft that you are not properly endorsed in. Does not matter if you are CFI or not.

AbortAbortAbort

Yes...you can. Provided there is another pilot onboard who is perfectly qualified to act as PIC, you can log any time in which you are the "sole manipulator" of the controls. You do have to have the appropriate category and class ratings, but you do not need the endorsements.

I.E., you buy a Cessna 210 (complex, and high performance). I have a private pilot, SEL, no endorsements at all. We go fly, I fly the entire flight start to finish with you coaching me, I physically control the airplane.

I log PIC because I was flying (sole manipulator of the controls). You were acting as PIC, because you had the ratings and therefore were the only one qualified to actually fly the plane without further training and endorsements and ultimately you were the "final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight", but you weren't the one physically flying the plane, so I get the PIC time.

Clear as mud eh?

wizepilot

Yeah, I would like to see you take that in front of a FAA review board. I know what you are getting at, but come on, let's get realistic here. Would you want to argue that one out when it really counts for, possibly, a career move. That's one of the problems in aviation, which I have been in for 38 years, everyone is always looking for a way to circumvent the regs via their own interpretation.

AbortAbortAbort

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you one hundred percent. I won't log PIC if I'm not qualified to act, but I'm not desperate for time either. The people who tend to do it are those that are hurting for hours and want any way to build them that they can (insert safety pilot timebuilding here).
I'm just pointing out that, per the FAA, it is "legal" in the sense that one FSDO may be cool with it, and another may tell you "no way".
I think that for most of us who have gotten somewhere in the career, we equate logging with acting and don't try and bend the rules (I know, I know, it's not "bending" if it's in the rules), but the lower timers who are desperate to get enough hours before the ATP rules kick in won't have any problems doing it.

Twin Wasp

It's not FSDO to FSDO, it's what the Chief Counsel of the FAA says. They are the ones who will be sitting at the other table in the court room. And they say it's OK.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...009/Herman.pdf

HOWEVER, the other half of the issue that no one pays any attention to is the pilot who is acting as PIC. If they only have a PVT or COMM, they CAN NOT log the time the other pilot is the "sole manipulator" of the controls unless the aircraft or the rules it is being operated under require two pilots.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...9/Speranza.pdf

About the only way two PVT or COMM pilots can both log time is the safety pilot route and then one logs SIC or PIC while the other logs PIC, again only while the handling pilot is under the hood.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...1993/Hicks.rtf

wizepilot

Okay, I stand corrected, according to TwinWasp. I guess my point is, would you really feel "qualified" to log that time? Even if it may be "legal". That is the difference between me, who follows the rules, and another person, as stated, who needs the time. I guess I am a dying breed of those people who believe in honesty and integrity no matter what profession they may be in. I had a CP once, who told me when I needed time, just go ahead and pencil in some "P-51 time". I lost all respect for him then, and that has not changed. Rant over. Thanks for your input.

hypoxia

If you are an instrument instructor- airplane, give him instrument instruction!

Systemized

would it be allowable to log PIC time if I am giving dual instruction, even though I do not have the high alt endorsement?