So when the Captain is taking a dump, do you have to go and knock on the Lav and ask him first before reacting to an RA?

You're exactly right - MY opinion doesn't mean squat outside my department.

But *I* am not the only person in business aviation who has that opinion re: 121 FOs logging sole manipulator TPIC.

Then you should know first hand that there is no NEED to have ME turbine PIC in order to get insured by any number of aviation underwriters...and anybody who says there is a NEED doesn't know what they are talking about.

Don't be so defensive. Again, its MY opinion, you don't have to like or agree with it but I do think its important for those who are considering logging sole manipulator TPIC in a 121 operation to have an idea what those in segments of industry they might want to work in think of that practice.

If someone is a hiring manager for a department and doesn't like that method of logging time (legal methods - let me be clear) then that is their preogative; though to pass judgment on those who log IAW the FARs and then call them dishonest is placing yourself in a holier-than-thou position. There is nothing wrong with a person's moral compass if they log according to the rules. There is something wrong if the job announcement denotes that such logged time is unacceptable for the position and it is still on the resume/application in my opinion or is passed off in the interview process as being applicable. Someone earlier in the tread mentioned numbers looking good on a resume. Isn't that the PURPOSE of a resume - to grab an eye? You have supposedly 1 page and about 10 seconds to make an impression. The PERSON doesn't get to come into play until the interview. There are certain things that you can gleam from a resume about a person: neatness / organization, some education, experience *on paper*, a little about drive possibily; but if you can tell for sure that a person is going to fit your culture and be a good fit on the road after a quick glance at a 1 page resume then you'd better bottle that mojo up cause there are HR departments just waiting to buy that snake oil! :D
In my opinion of course.

USMCFLYR

Just because you can do something, doesn't necessarily mean you should.

There are plenty of things that are legal that many do not consider ethical. For me, this is one of those topics - and I'll be the first to admit that others may not care.

If that makes me holier-than-thou...well, I guess I'm guilty.:confused:

Yes...but you don't want to do is grab an eye for the wrong reason.

When I review a resume, I look at a handful of things in a matter of seconds:

1. Address
2. Total & ME time
3. Education
4. Current employment situation
5. Employment history
(note TPIC and type ratings aren't on my list of important things)

Seeing Turbine PIC listed on a resume, with the current employment situation showing the candidate to be a regional FO and nothing in the employment history to otherwise explain where they would have gotten TPIC, that's a red flag.

Almost as big a red flag as multiple misspellings or having "Obtain a position as First Officer with Delta Air Lines" as objective on a resume sent to me :D

You can't tell somebody will fit in based on a quick glance on a resume...but you often CAN tell if they *won't* fit in on based on a quick glace on a resume.

In my past experience as a regional airline intern, major airline intern, regional airline FO and corporate CP, I have seen a fundamental difference in hiring practices between bizav and airlines. Generally speaking, airlines hire based on qualifications with weight placed on the person, while corporate operators hire based on the person with weight placed on their qualifications. It is entirely possible that difference is responsible for this entire conversation.

Guess its like this: I don't want somebody to feel the need to impress me with flight time on their resume - I want them to impress me with their cover letter, explaining why they want this job and why I should hire them. Flight time is a ****-poor way to judge one's flying ability or suitability to business aviation. If you're a regional airline FO I know your base level of qualifications, that you've made it through jeopardy training events and have flown in all weather conditions. I know you can successfully complete training at FSI or CAE that costs $20-50k. I know you can fly.

At this point in one's career, there shouldn't be a need to "fluff" a resume with sole manipulator time. Don't be ashamed of being an SIC...

Then we will have to disagree on this point.
IMO - it is a large play to call someone UNETHICAL for logging time IAW with the FARs.
Make up whatever rules you would like - but unethical? Come on. I'd call that a tadddddd harsh myself.

Ah! the famous cut and paste. yep - proof read, proof read, and then have someone else proof read.

Maybe the entire thread, but not our personal parts in it. I claim no idea of hiring practices and I sit on no hiring boards. My views represented in the discussion are solely on my personal viewpoint of calling a person unethical (or chose some other judgmental term) when logging time IAW with the ACTUL RULES - not with airline/corporate business practices.
Your resume / application / cover letter etc.... ought to reflect the practices of your targeted audience - period.

I am one of those PROUD SICs :D
I won't even sign the paperwork unless I'm the PIC on the release.
Makes it easy to keep track for when I'm ready to move on to that airline job ;)

USMCFLYR

If you were the F.O. and pilot flying with the Captain in the cockpit would you ask him before reacting to an R.A? NO! So why would you need to ask if he wasn't there? If he needs to leave the flight deck to do the walk of shame are you going to switch epullettes and hope over to the left seat for 6 minutes, so you can log 0.1 PIC?
Probably legal if you are typed on that airframe, but still defies the laws of common sense.

As I've said before, I'm with BoilerUp on this.

If you wish to log 121 turbine PIC as "sole man" it is legal to do so. Maybe it will even help you get a job somewhere other than the airlines (FAA?).

But if you're airline bound please trust me that you will probably screw yourself if you in any way represent, or allow this time to be misconstrued, as real signed-for-the-airplane turbine PIC.

If you're airline bound and must do this, please keep a separate column...that's the only way to ensure that somebody doesn't think you're pulling a fast one.

I keep coming back to this because I keep flying with kids who have two months on line and are already are talking about putting their stuff in with FDX :eek: They are likely to apply to every major airline in the US...and get themselves permanently blacklisted from every major airline in the US before they even figure out how to plug their headset in on an airliner.

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's a good idea. It would be legal for me, based on my 121 currency, to jump in a small king air (which I have zero time in), kick the tires, light the fires, and go fly.

I wish I could find the reference to this but was unable - about ten years ago two MEI's were flying together in a Seneca and both were logging ME PIC under the provision of acting as instructor (not hood time/safety pilot stuff).

Conveniently they omitted the entry in the "dual received" and "instruction given" columns of one another's logbooks. Neither logbook was signed by the other pilot that gave "the instruction". The FAA quickly determined the novel time building technique to be a sham and violated both.

I think us "older" pilots (born pre-1975) tend to take the traditional view of PIC time - the designated trip captain. The sole manipulator is a creative approach to meet minimums that otherwise would not be met by the traditional way of looking at it.

Exactly. Common sense prevails and trying to manipulate the numbers could be classed as "poor judgement" in a recruiters eyes. Don't screw yourselves.

I can't believe this is even being debated.

Everyone knows what they mean by "part 121 PIC". It "ain't" sole manipulator! It's The Captain. The pilot who's seniority and experience enabled them to sit in the left seat, sign for the airplane, make the final decision, and lead the operation. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to find a loophole. You know what they mean. I don't know about corporate, but as said above, if you're trying for a major airline, DON'T PUT THAT IN YOUR LOGBOOK!