Anyone else wondering how SIC under supervision of a PIC as explained by some here can be obtained by a "baby Captain" on IOE who has to have passed a Upgrade which includes an ATP? So he would be using time towards his ATP that he has not flown yet? The timeline of your explanation doesn't match up.

 

Just curious, as an SIC at a 121 carrier, how would you perform the duties of the PIC? PIC in this case is not manipulator of controls, it is exerting final authority for flight. How do you act as PIC in this case? Can you overide the CA? Also, don't most FOM's say that the Captain cannot delegate his PIC responsibilities to anyone else. I know ours does. For example, It is the duty of the PIC to sign the release, can you do this as an SIC? Can you sign the aircraft acceptance check? Can you demand more fuel from dx on your own authority? What PIC duties exactly are you performing with supervision?

 

Nope, it's replacing the 300 or so CAL 737 pilots who are getting displaced out of Newark on the last system bid.

 

So if someone read the regulation, and had at least a marginal ability with reading comprehension when it comes to interpreting what the regulations state, and what has been shown to be current practice at most companies such as ASA, and Expressjet, where does this 250 hour PIC signing for the airplane argument stand? In the winners circle with Timmy & Jimmy from South Park?


Skybob, I would like you, in your own words, if you have the time, you probably do since you probably think you made such a clever post, to explain this excerpt. Specifically the italicized, bolded and underlined portion, and how the FAA allows the SIC to perform the duties of pilot in command while the PIC supervises as it relates to your witty post. No minimum, or maximum word requirement. No time limit.

After you complete that, same instructions, but for this excerpt taken from 61.55(2)(ii):



Ready, set, go!

 

What does the 61.55 have to do with an ATP? 61.55 refers to SIC qualifications.

Actually they do. Most decent airlines will keep part 91 repo flights under the limitations of 121 duty times. If I get a 91 repo leg that puts me over 16 hours it goes against my FOM which is a regulatory document that is approved by my POI. However at Colgan they just got a memo that said no part 91 repo will be allowed to put you over 18 hours of duty. Even though it is legal, it is two different ways a POI has interpreted the duty times.

There are other regs like 61.129 that I know have been interpreted differently by different feds. I know a couple of people who went to FL to instruct. The FSDO down there didn't accept their commercial tickets because they did not do a non-stop flight on the 250 nm leg of their commercial long x-c. It says no where in the regs that that leg needs to be non stop but that is how the MCO fsdo interpreted it.

I also don't see where we spread misinformation. There are many pilots at Expressjet and Eagle that could not upgrade until they had 250 hours of PIC even though they had thousands of hours of SIC.

 

You didn't explain how you can use time you acquire on your Capt IOE to meet the requirements of the ATP Practical you would have had to take before you can take your Capt IOE? Your answer is wrapped up in pretzels.

 

the real truth here is just like POI and FSDO's have different interpritations of this reg, so do differant airlines and pilots......sigh. typical of the FAA, as they write this stuff purposely with some gray in it, that way they can get you if they need to....

 

How do you exercute the duties of a PIC in a simulator?

You misquoted 61.55 (b)(2) which actually says except as provided in paragraph (e).

(e) A person may receive a second-in-command pilot type rating after satisfactorily completing an approved SIC training program or PC under parts 121, 125, or 135 in that type of aircraft.

So the engine out provedures and maneuvering with an engine out while executing the duties of pilot in command does not apply.

 

While the new captain getting IOE is an example of how a second in command can perform the duties of pilot in command while under the supervision of a pilot in command, it was not the basis of the intent of the reg. The intent applies more to part 91 ops. Think of a Citation or B350 King Air pilot who is typed on that aircraft. They are perfectly legal to fly the aircraft with a commercial type rating. Now some insurance companies require an ATP so the commercial pilot gets supervision from an ATP while performing the duties of the PIC and building time for the ATP.

 

Ok, I'm lost.

What is the Cliff Notes version of the last 1.5-page disagreement?