Question about PIC time
#11
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2024
Posts: 625
Likes: 144
Originally Posted by Airplne;[url=tel:3977749
3977749[/url]]Even if I’m not the person the signed off on the 135 legs? Because it’s 135 ops and I only fly the 91 legs
When the plane turns into a 91 it’s just another 91 airplane
it’s fully legal per the FAA and a ton of legal interpretation letters, full stop
As for what some random job wants to see in your logbook, who knows, they could say they only count cross country time flying east if they wanted, that’s just some random HR qualification and has zilch to do with the FAR
#12
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2024
Posts: 902
Likes: 158
that said, a common distinction is FAR 1 PIC. The employer wants to know when you were the ultimate authority for the flight.
and yes, there ARE different types of pic. The faa has been quite unhelpful in labelling two very different things with the same name. 1) the ultimate authority for the conduct of a flight 2) any sort of aeronautical experience which they deem relevant towards a rating or certificate
#14
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2024
Posts: 625
Likes: 144
Originally Posted by VacancyBid;[url=tel:3977802
3977802[/url]]there’s no way to predict what an employer might want because they can do anything.
that said, a common distinction is FAR 1 PIC. The employer wants to know when you were the ultimate authority for the flight.
and yes, there ARE different types of pic. The faa has been quite unhelpful in labelling two very different things with the same name. 1) the ultimate authority for the conduct of a flight 2) any sort of aeronautical experience which they deem relevant towards a rating or certificate
that said, a common distinction is FAR 1 PIC. The employer wants to know when you were the ultimate authority for the flight.
and yes, there ARE different types of pic. The faa has been quite unhelpful in labelling two very different things with the same name. 1) the ultimate authority for the conduct of a flight 2) any sort of aeronautical experience which they deem relevant towards a rating or certificate
FAR 1.1
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has 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.
#15
Disinterested Third Party
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,758
Likes: 74
and yes, there ARE different types of pic. The faa has been quite unhelpful in labelling two very different things with the same name. 1) the ultimate authority for the conduct of a flight 2) any sort of aeronautical experience which they deem relevant towards a rating or certificate
There are various legal rationale for logging PIC time, but there's only one PIC time. It's a subset of pilot time, typically referred to as "total time." There is no subset of pilot in command time.
There are many means by which to log PIC time. Future employers, particularly 121 operators, only care if you were the pilot in command, not if you used a particular rationale to log it. If you weren't actually the acting pilot in command for the flight, then logging it as PIC with a disclaimer (I wasn't actually the PIC, but I was logging it as PIC as sole manipulator) looks like you don't don't understand the program, and that you're padding your logbook. It smacks of desperation. Logging simply as PIC, which is the correct way to log, draws no attention. It's ho-hum PIC time. Unless you weren't really the PIC...which comes back to what employers wanna see. They just wanna see experience logged when you were the acting pilot in command: the pilot in command of record.
135 legs are relevant: if you were SIC, then you log SIC. Because you were never the acting pilot in command, and your'e concerned about logging in accordance with what future employers will want, then it's all SIC. If you were performing duty for a 135 operator, it's 135, regardless of what you or they want to call the legs, it's 135, and you're SIC.
#16
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,164
Likes: 803
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
If you lump sole man PIC into your actual PIC you're going to be scrambling to back it out for airline applications and logbook reviews.
As I've said it's good to log sole man, for FAA purposes, just use a different column. Blank logbook columns are very inexpensive, no need to agonize over whether you should use one or not.
#17
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2024
Posts: 625
Likes: 144
None of that is even remotely applicable to airline hiring practices.
If you lump sole man PIC into your actual PIC you're going to be scrambling to back it out for airline applications and logbook reviews.
As I've said it's good to log sole man, for FAA purposes, just use a different column. Blank logbook columns are very inexpensive, no need to agonize over whether you should use one or not.
If you lump sole man PIC into your actual PIC you're going to be scrambling to back it out for airline applications and logbook reviews.
As I've said it's good to log sole man, for FAA purposes, just use a different column. Blank logbook columns are very inexpensive, no need to agonize over whether you should use one or not.
What “airline” doesn’t accept Pt 91 PIC time??
#18
Thread Starter
On Reserve
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
None of that is even remotely applicable to airline hiring practices.
If you lump sole man PIC into your actual PIC you're going to be scrambling to back it out for airline applications and logbook reviews.
As I've said it's good to log sole man, for FAA purposes, just use a different column. Blank logbook columns are very inexpensive, no need to agonize over whether you should use one or not.
If you lump sole man PIC into your actual PIC you're going to be scrambling to back it out for airline applications and logbook reviews.
As I've said it's good to log sole man, for FAA purposes, just use a different column. Blank logbook columns are very inexpensive, no need to agonize over whether you should use one or not.
#19
Thread Starter
On Reserve
Joined: Sep 2025
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
It's fine to log, but I would strongly recommend doing it the way you're doing it... separate columns for Sole Man PIC and actual PIC.
The Sole Man PIC is usable for FAA ratings, and some employers might also credit it towards their PIC requirements (I think the FAA does for jobs that require pilot experience).
But many or most civilian employers will not count it towards their min requirements, as long as you can easily keep the totals separate it's fine. They won't mind that you logged it.
The Sole Man PIC is usable for FAA ratings, and some employers might also credit it towards their PIC requirements (I think the FAA does for jobs that require pilot experience).
But many or most civilian employers will not count it towards their min requirements, as long as you can easily keep the totals separate it's fine. They won't mind that you logged it.
#20
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2024
Posts: 902
Likes: 158
The issue is if you say you have 200 hrs of TPIC and it's all co-pilot sole manipulator and you don't even have a high-altitude endorsement. The real distinction is jobs that require an ATP (not just 1500 hrs and ATP written). Aside from regionals, big airplane employers mean FAR 1 when they ask about PIC.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



