Splitting PIC Time (FAR 61 discussion)

A place to relax and discuss flying topics.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

BenWlson
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:31 pm

Re: Answer

Post by BenWlson »

jrenwick wrote:
BenWlson wrote:... An SEL-only pilot may land in water solo with an endorsement from a CFI.
I'm curious to know the recommended text of that endorsement, and what FAR authorizes it.
What if a bran-new student pilot decides his first private certificate is going to be SES instead of SEL? He would have to build 20 hours of solo time, right? The endorsement should be just like any solo endorsement given to a student pilot.
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 21145
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Post by GAHorn »

Off the top of my small head.... A CFI may not authorize/endorse for solo a certificated pilot, except such as a rotary wing/helicopter rated pilot to solo a fixed wing aircraft, etc.. Otherwise he may only endorse for solo a student pilot,...AND...he may only endorse for solo a student pilot whom he has given instruction in that make/model aircraft (and the CFI must also be so rated, of course.)

*Note: the following statement is incorrect (gahorn)*:
A certificated SEL pilot may solo a MEL airplane without instruction, as he may a SES and/or MES. He does not require CFI endorsement. He also may not log the time PIC, because he is not rated in that class aircraft. He must log the time "solo".
Last edited by GAHorn on Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10348
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

What?

:? :? :?

I'm so confused. I will comment further when I get to work and have time to sort this out.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
User avatar
jrenwick
Posts: 2045
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 8:34 pm

Post by jrenwick »

I think it would be really helpful, for the education of all of us, that when anyone makes an assertion concerning legality, they should mention the section of the FARs that makes it so. Don't quote the whole section, because we all have copies of the regs and can read them if we know the paragraph number. But quoting the essential wording to support your statement would be really good, because these regs are not easy to understand, and I, for one, am always learning.

George, I'm referring especially to your last statement about a SEL pilot being eligible to solo aircraft of a different class, without instruction. I never knew that!

Best Regards,

John
John Renwick
Minneapolis, MN
Former owner, '55 C-170B, N4401B
'42 J-3 Cub, N62088
'50 Swift GC-1B, N2431B, Oshkosh 2009 Outstanding Swift Award, 2016 Best Continuously Maintained Swift
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10348
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Re: Answer

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

BenWlson wrote: My bad... I meant to say "Recreational Pilot Certificate". That is all that is needed to fly any Experimental aircraft solo. You must be category and class rated to take passengers.
Ben this statement can be true and it can be false. To say an aircraft is experimental does not give enough information to determine whether your statement is true or false.

For example an experimental airplane can be an overground ultra light that doesn't meet the requirements of FAR part 103 or it can be a Lancair 4P capable of speeds of 300 knots and an altitude of 28000ft.

A recreational pilot can not pilot a Lancair 4P because it exceeds the limitations found in FAR 61.101 Recreational pilots privileges and limitations.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10348
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

George I'm still trying to make sense of what you were trying to say.

A rated piloting in a category of aircraft seeking a rating in another category would have to have an endorsement in his log book before solo flight. An example of this is a helicopter pilot seeking an airplane rating or vice-versa.

But this is not clear in fact as you point out in your second paragraph about SEL pilots flying MEL airplanes. At the heart of the subject is when is a person a student pilot.

It is clear that if one has no ratings they are a student. But once one has a rating can they ever be a student pilot again?

I had a commercial rotorcraft-helicopter; instrument helicopter before I ever flew an airplane. Did I need to have a solo entry required of 61.87? I was a commercial pilot not a student.

So the question is when is a person a student? I've not found that definition in the FARs. That is the key as to what endorsements are required by the FARs.

As for a SEL rated pilot logging PIC time will flying a MEL airplane that again would depend on if the pilot was considered a student. A solo student can and should log the time both as solo and PIC 61.51 (e)(4)

Because I can not determine when a student is a student except for when they have no ratings and only students can receive solo endorsements at this time a I can't find fault with your statement regarding a SEL pilot in a MEL airplane.

But I can't imagine the FAA, not calling the SEL rated sole occupant and manipulator of the controls, that has just crashed an MEL airplane, the PIC. And since they where not rated for the class of airplane they must be a student.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 21145
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Post by GAHorn »

Note: the statements following inred[/color] are known to be incorrect (gahorn):

There are only four levels of pilot certificate in the U.S.
Student, Private, Commercial, and ATP.
For a person not certificated as a Private/Commercial/ATP, who receives instruction for purposes of obtaining a higher certificate and in order to solo an aircraft, that person must obtain a student pilot (medical) certificate. In order to solo an aircraft of any class/category, that certificate must be endorsed by a CFI. No other pilots certificate is ever endorsed by a CFI.
A person holding a private pilot certificate, studying for another rating, while they may be a "student" in the traditional/secular sense, they are an "applicant" who already has a pilot's certificate in the sense of FARs. No endorsement is made for a person who is already a certificated pilot to "solo" a different class/category aircraft, although instruction may be provided towards that additional rating which, after application and successful examination, may result in a new, higher pilot's certificate being issued.
No instruction is required to obtain a Multi engine rating added to a certificate, and experience may be gained by an applicant who already has a pilot's certificate by simply flying the ME airplane solo (without passengers of any kind, and that solo time is counted towards total PIC time.) He/she may also receive instruction, of course, and it does not have to be from a CFI. (Although that's certainly the recommended and traditional method, and any instruction provided by any other pilot (other than an ATP instructing in ATP services) makes that other pilot the PIC, therefore the "student" may not log that time at all.)
All flight instruction provided by a CFI required for a higher rating must be entered into the logbooks of the person receiving instruction, and signed by the CFI. But the CFI does not have the authority to "endorse" solo flight in aircraft for which the applicant has not passed any/all required tests (and no endorsement is necessary for any applicant who has passed such tests.)
If a pilot is sole manupulator of the controls in operating an aircraft for which he is not rated, but is accompanied by an appropriately rated pilot in the aircraft, then he may not log the time as PIC. Nor may he apply the time toward another rating* unless the accompanying pilot is a CFI and that CFI endorses the time (or is an ATP instructing in ATP services.)

*(Unless the aircraft is one requiring more than one crewmember and no other persons are carried, in which case he may apply half the time so acquired towards the aircraft rating.)

See FAR 61 for supporting data.
Last edited by GAHorn on Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
BenWlson
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:31 pm

Post by BenWlson »

Wow.. this really got off on a tangent, but that's why I love this site for talking regulations. You guys are really good!

This all started because I wanted to know if I could earn PIC time when flying with my friend in his amphib on flights over to the lake.

I think I can, so in that case, check out my first tail-wheel takeoff as PIC!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h7eVRYm ... 47&index=2
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 21145
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Post by GAHorn »

BenWlson wrote:Wow.. this really got off on a tangent, but that's why I love this site for talking regulations. You guys are really good!

This all started because I wanted to know if I could earn PIC time when flying with my friend in his amphib on flights over to the lake.

I think I can, so in that case, check out my first tail-wheel takeoff as PIC!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h7eVRYm ... 47&index=2
Tangent? You asked for regulation opinions, right? It was your first msg post. Posting a youtube about a completely different airplane is a "tangent". :lol: (just teasing)
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10348
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

gahorn wrote:There are only four levels of pilot certificate in the U.S.
Student, Private, Commercial, and ATP. ....
George

What do you call the Recreational and Sport pilot ratings?

I think it goes Student, Recreational, Sport Pilot, Private, Commercial and ATP.

And since I brought these two ratings up I will say contrary to what seems to be the case with a Private, Commercial and ATP there are a lot of logbook endorsements required with Recreational and Sport Pilot ratings.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
BenWlson
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:31 pm

Post by BenWlson »

gahorn wrote:Tangent? You asked for regulation opinions, right? It was your first msg post. Posting a youtube about a completely different airplane is a "tangent". :lol: (just teasing)
If we're going to go off on regulation tangents, here's a good regulation question that I was unsure of for a long time and got several different answers about before I finally got the right one.

Take for example the following airports:
KFWS, KGKY, KGPM, KLCQ

These airports have control towers, they are shown as blue on the charts, yet there is no dashed blue circle around them to depict the boundaries of class D airplace.

Why are they shown this way on the chart? What airspace are they in? What are the ATC communication requirements?

Whoever gets it right wins a cookie.
doug8082a
Posts: 1373
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:06 am

Post by doug8082a »

They are blue because they have a tower. They are in Class E airspace. Communication requirements for towered airports in Class E are establishing two way radio communication (FAR 91.127). Since they are within the DFW Mode C veil then a transponder w/mode C is also required.

Did I get it right? Did I? Where's my cookie? :lol:
Last edited by doug8082a on Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doug
User avatar
Bruce Fenstermacher
Posts: 10348
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 11:24 am

Post by Bruce Fenstermacher »

BenWlson wrote:Wow.. this really got off on a tangent.....
No a tangent would follow a mention of an uninsured, Private rated, fringe democrat turned republican with an MEL solo endorsement, seen carrying a can of mogas and MMO from Pep Boys to his highly modified green over red 170 with the over serviced tail wheel bought from ebay, in order to give rides to strangers kids while the rear seat was removed.

Now THAT is bound to bring on a tangent from someone. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I do appreciate the thought provoking mental excercise and research required to keep up with the forum. I only wish I could remember all that I've learned along the way.

(and before my paragraph above starts a tangent of it's own it was not written with any one in mind. Just reminiscing and poking fun about some of the hotter topics over the years.)
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!

Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
BenWlson
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:31 pm

Post by BenWlson »

doug8082a wrote:They are blue because they have a tower. They are in Class E airspace. Communication requirements for towered airports in Class E are establishing two way radio communication (FAR 91.127). Since they are within the DFW Mode C veil then a transponder w/mode C is also required.

Did I get it right? Did I? Where's my cookie? :lol:
Actually, they are in class G up to 700' AGL. The reason for no class D has something to do with the weather reporting equipment available on site (I think).

You can have the left-over cookie:
Image
BenWlson
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:31 pm

Post by BenWlson »

Here's one I don't have an answer for yet. You are flying VFR and are talking to approach control for a large class B airport recieving flight following with vectors through the class B (class B clearance given). ATC gives a vector heading/altitude that will send you slightly through a satelite airport's class D airspace.

You have established ATC communications, but not with the ATC responsible for the class D. Is this enough, or are you required to either remain clear of the class D or ask the controller if the satelite airport has been notified of your flight path?

I've seen several times when flying to a satelite airport near a class B and talking to approach control, they do not hand you off to the local tower until you are already inside the class D for your destination. Do you assume they have communicated to the local tower of your intent to enter their airspace?

(Maybe the title of this thread should be changed to "FAR Discussion")
Post Reply