?s on logging flight time

[Fontus]

I was a prior helo guy, so I meet all the other times, it's just the 250 in airplane requirement I'm trying to scrape together. Yes, I had my Comm-Inst multi-single airplane prior to FWQ. Since there is no midphase checkride, would the Contact checkride be when I start logging PIC?

Thanks,

JT

In UPT the only PIC time that you can log is your Solo T-6 time and your Team T-1 time (if they still do that) - that is the only time that you signed for the airplane. The rest of the time you are with an instructor and it woud be logged probably as dual time. Basically it counts towards your total time, but not your Pilot In Command time.

To log SIC time you must be in an aircraft that requires two pilots to be at the controls (i.e. T-1, C-130). Again to log PIC time you need to sign for the airplane (i.e be the "A" code)

Hope this helps

Fontus

Edited August 3, 2008 by Fontus

[Hacker]

In UPT the only PIC time that you can log is your Solo T-6 time and your Team T-1 time (if they still do that) - that is the only time that you signed for the airplane.

No, not true.

Remember, there are two different definitions of "pilot in command" time.

- The FAA Part 61 definition says that when you are the "sole manipulator of the flight controls" in an aircraft for which you are rated, you can log PIC -- regardless of if you are with an instructor or not.

- The "airline" definition says that you're the PIC only when you signed for the aircraft.

So, JT was asking specifically about what the FAA considers, not what the airlines consider. By the FAA definition, once you pass your first checkride and can "area solo", that's when you are officially checked out in that aircraft (that's according to the Memphis FSDO back in 1999 when I asked them specifically about this situation). If you have a license for the same category/class of airplane (e.g. FAA ASEL), then you can log every minute that you are the sole manipulator of the controls as PIC.

Here's a good article, but a little dated, that gives more information on how the military, the FAA, and the airlines differ in what they consider PIC time:

http://www.jet-jobs.com/articles/loggingpic.html

Also note that one of the mods has appended this article to a previous thread that has good discussion, too.

[BADFNZ]

Bringing this thread back from the dead...

I'm about to start filling out my logbook from IFS, UPT, and PIT. I have a civilian logbook with a bunch of C-172 time mixed in with some helo time, but I bought a new logbook to start logging all my AF time. I know this is a matter of opinion, but should I log my IFS time in my civilian logbook or put it in the new one? I figured since it's single-engine piston like the rest of my civilian hours, I'd just put it in my old logbook. Those of you with IFS/IFT hours logged, how did you do it?

[Right Seat Driver]

Bringing this thread back from the dead...

I'm about to start filling out my logbook from IFS, UPT, and PIT. I have a civilian logbook with a bunch of C-172 time mixed in with some helo time, but I bought a new logbook to start logging all my AF time. I know this is a matter of opinion, but should I log my IFS time in my civilian logbook or put it in the new one? I figured since it's single-engine piston like the rest of my civilian hours, I'd just put it in my old logbook. Those of you with IFS/IFT hours logged, how did you do it?

I put my IFS time in my civilian logbook but UPT and onward was all in a military-time only logbook. I also have an electronic logbook that I log all of my time.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Right Seat Driver

[Hacker]

I keep a digital logbook (an Excel spreadsheet) that tracks both military and civilian flight time. The military time is logged exactly the same (more or less) as it appears in AFORMS, and the civil time is logged as FAA regs proscribe.

The digital book allows me to split off the time into mil-only, civil-only, or both, depending on what I want to use it for.

[BADFNZ]

I keep a digital logbook (an Excel spreadsheet) that tracks both military and civilian flight time. The military time is logged exactly the same (more or less) as it appears in AFORMS, and the civil time is logged as FAA regs proscribe.

The digital book allows me to split off the time into mil-only, civil-only, or both, depending on what I want to use it for.

I saw your spreadsheet over on AFOTS and I'm going to do basically the same format. You wouldn't happen to have a blank spreadsheet file you could attach here do you?

[brabus]

I'm about to start logging all my mil time starting from UPT (fuck, this is going to take a lot of time). Question is, during UPT when I flew with an instructor, do I log only "Dual Received" or do I also log PIC time? Not sure if the IP was technically the PIC or not. I'm guessing the IP was, but I thought I remember logging both PIC and Dual Received back in my GA days...but don't have that logbook with me to reference.

Second question is, is it really worth logging pre-wings time? Is it useful for jobs down the road after military (if I decided to do that) or is really just for my own personal memories?

[discus]

I'm about to start logging all my mil time starting from UPT (fuck, this is going to take a lot of time). Question is, during UPT when I flew with an instructor, do I log only "Dual Received" or do I also log PIC time? Not sure if the IP was technically the PIC or not. I'm guessing the IP was, but I thought I remember logging both PIC and Dual Received back in my GA days...but don't have that logbook with me to reference.

Second question is, is it really worth logging pre-wings time? Is it useful for jobs down the road after military (if I decided to do that) or is really just for my own personal memories?

You log "Dual Received" up until your solo, after that you log PIC time, unless of course you entered IMC during the flight, then you log "Dual Received" and "Actual IMC" time for the portion of the flight that was IMC. Also, all your I-rides under the hood are logged as "Dual received" After your I-check, you log PIC time for everything until you went to T-38's, then it starts over again until after solo... Except, of course, you were then technically "Instrument rated", so all time post solo was "PIC".

In other words, unless you kept all your line up cards, a PITA and not really worth it. Go to the FSDO and get your Instrument, multi engine (Center line thrust restricted) ticket and call it good. Start keeping track of your shit.

Edit: More rules

Edited June 3, 2010 by discus

[SUX]

You log "Dual Received" up until your solo, after that you log PIC time, unless of course you entered IMC during the flight, then you log "Dual Received" and "Actual IMC" time for the portion of the flight that was IMC. Also, all your I-rides under the hood are logged as "Dual received" After your I-check, you log PIC time for everything until you went to T-38's, then it starts over again until after solo... Except, of course, you were then technically "Instrument rated", so all time post solo was "PIC".

In other words, unless you kept all your line up cards, a PITA and not really worth it. Go to the FSDO and get your Instrument, multi engine (Center line thrust restricted) ticket and call it good. Start keeping track of your shit.

Edit: More rules

This method works per the FAA rules just realize if you ever apply to an airline all of your pilot training time is considered dual/student regardless of whether or not you were with an instructor. You are not a pilot until graduation, so you shouldn't be logging pilot in command time.

[Guest]

I'm about to start logging all my mil time starting from UPT

Why?

[brabus]

Talked to someone today at work and they said no PIC time unless you were solo. The only caveat is if you had the proper rating prior to UPT (i.e. high performance retractable gear for T-6s). So if you have those ratings prior to starting UPT, you can log PIC in T-6s. I didn't have a retractable rating, so that means PIC only applies to my solo rides in UPT. Everything else is dual given. I was also told the time (PIC or not, student or not) will still count towards total time down the road. So, I guess it's worth it to log if after the military I decided to fly civilian and need X total time.

Discus - For UPT, you do not get your additional ratings (instrument, commerical, multi) until post graduation, so you're not instrument rated after T-6s just b/c you flew instrument rides (unless of course you had a civ instrument rating prior to UPT).

[Guest]

Why do you care?

[brabus]

The first reason is I've had a few friends have a good chunk of time go missing from the SARMs. If it happens at the wrong time, an upgrade might get delayed. Having a logbook already filled out (vs. having a large stack of random print outs of flight time) will speed up rectifying the problem. Secondly, I don't want to be 20 yrs down the road, decide I want to fly civilian for a job and at that point wish I'd have started a logbook. Really the PITA is catching up, but once caught up, logging 10 flts or so a month is not time consuming, nor difficult.

[CJ-6A]

Talked to someone today at work and they said no PIC time unless you were solo. The only caveat is if you had the proper rating prior to UPT (i.e. high performance retractable gear for T-6s). So if you have those ratings prior to starting UPT, you can log PIC in T-6s. I didn't have a retractable rating, so that means PIC only applies to my solo rides in UPT. Everything else is dual given. I was also told the time (PIC or not, student or not) will still count towards total time down the road. So, I guess it's worth it to log if after the military I decided to fly civilian and need X total time.

Discus - For UPT, you do not get your additional ratings (instrument, commerical, multi) until post graduation, so you're not instrument rated after T-6s just b/c you flew instrument rides (unless of course you had a civ instrument rating prior to UPT).

Just as a minor issue... the high performance, complex, high altitude, "ratings" are not "ratings", but rather just simple endorsements. As long as you are rated (in the FAA sense) in category/class as in Airplane - Single Engine Land, then you can log PIC, but may not act as PIC. It's a weird distinction, but it's how they do things.

Anyways from a non-FAA perspective - if you're qualified to solo, then you would obviously have the proper "endorsements" necessary to do what the FAA would call as acting as PIC, just as (now days) a Private student during solo would be acting as PIC prior to actually getting the certificate.

All of which is fine in the FAA's eyes...however different employers may have a different definition of PIC (signing for the aircraft, etc)... so if it's for an additional rating/certificate then it would be useful... if not... well... whatever your future employer says is PIC.

Also some endorsements are implied - that is once you get a Commercial Certificate - Airplane (single or multi land/sea,etc), it is implied that you have a complex endorsement because it is a requirement for the certificate. Same with certain type ratings, example a BE400 type rating has an implication of a high altitude endorsement, because the aircraft is pressurized and a type rating ride/training would deal with the pressurization system and respective emergencies, etc.

[ellsworb]

.Also some endorsements are implied - that is once you get a Commercial Certificate - Airplane (single or multi land/sea,etc), it is implied that you have a complex endorsement because it is a requirement for the certificate. Same with certain type ratings, example a BE400 type rating has an implication of a high altitude endorsement, because the aircraft is pressurized and a type rating ride/training would deal with the pressurization system and respective emergencies, etc.

Are you sure? I didn't think an examiner had a requirement to check you have a complex, high alt, etc for a type rating. Those are just requirements before one can ACT as PIC, as you previously mentioned. I could have missed something, but haven't read an AC or published document relating the implication. Just says that the applicant must receive training 10 hrs of training in Complex, not hold the endorsement. If you can't get the endorsement in 10 hours, you're a moron, but stranger things have happened I suppose. Do you have a reference for the implications?

[Guest]

The first reason is I've had a few friends have a good chunk of time go missing from the SARMs. If it happens at the wrong time, an upgrade might get delayed. Having a logbook already filled out (vs. having a large stack of random print outs of flight time) will speed up rectifying the problem. Secondly, I don't want to be 20 yrs down the road, decide I want to fly civilian for a job and at that point wish I'd have started a logbook. Really the PITA is catching up, but once caught up, logging 10 flts or so a month is not time consuming, nor difficult.

Log books are fine I guess but it always seemed like a waste of time to me. The only guys I ever knew that did that were guys with a shitpot of civilian time that couldn't break the habit or guys who were using their logbook to pad their time. I know lots of guys who added 0.2 to each sortie for taxi time which I always thought was an absolute fucking joke and worse, a lie. I caught a couple guys doing that on their 781s and ripped the shit out of them for it because it was EXTREMELY wasteful of our nation's treasure since mx was replacing parts and doing inspections basis the amount of time a jet actually flew. Plus, a unit is only allocted so many hours a year and that meant they could lose at least two sorties a day in a fighter squadron just so guys could pad their flight time for the airlines. Total bullshit and not what the taxpayers are expecting from their pilots.

Timing for upgrades can be waived if you're good enough/ready and should never be based solely on flight time so that seems like a moot point. Won't the airlines accept your official USAF documents vs some logbook with your chicken scratch in it? I thought the A-words put some sort of factor on fighter time anyway, which makes sense. Did they stop doing that? I would definitely ask to see a guy's official USAF records if I was on an A-word hiring panel.

Don't you do a records review? That's where you should catch mistakes in the system. Are you saying you can bring your logbook into SARMs and they just throw the hours into the system for you?

[Guest Crew Report]

Don't you do a records review? That's where you should catch mistakes in the system. Are you saying you can bring your logbook into SARMs and they just throw the hours into the system for you?

2

Every SARMS/HARM I've seen will not use some guy's logbook as a source document to update hours. Hell the one here won't even let you turn in a 1522 for a ground training event if you forgot to print the back side of it.

I've always made a front back copy of my 781 and my MAR (781 on the front, MAR on the back). If one of my currencies/flight time didn't update, I just turned in a copy to the SARM and it was updated without any hassle.

[Hacker]

I know lots of guys who added 0.2 to each sortie for taxi time which I always thought was an absolute fucking joke and worse, a lie.

You know that the FAA considers the "flight time" to start when the aircraft first moves under it's own power for the purposes of flight, ergo, at taxi time.

So, guys who are logging "taxi time" (ergo, that extra .2) in their own logbooks aren't doing anything anywhere near what you're accusing them of.

Naturally, if they're doing it on the 781, then the issues you brought up are valid.

[CJ-6A]

Are you sure? I didn't think an examiner had a requirement to check you have a complex, high alt, etc for a type rating. Those are just requirements before one can ACT as PIC, as you previously mentioned. I could have missed something, but haven't read an AC or published document relating the implication. Just says that the applicant must receive training 10 hrs of training in Complex, not hold the endorsement. If you can't get the endorsement in 10 hours, you're a moron, but stranger things have happened I suppose. Do you have a reference for the implications?

For the civilian side, going through six different checkrides for certificates/ratings, each time the examiner checked that the endorsement was there prior to the checkride and the 8710 paperwork. For example, for a multi-engine sea add on to a commercial, he checked for a tailwheel endorsement as well as an endorsement for the checkride because I would be acting as PIC for the CMES checkride (which is called a PIC endorsement) despite having a CMEL prior (since is was a different class, same category).

The reference he used was AC 61-65D

The implication - from what I understand from the FSDO (for prior - mil pilots mostly) is that since it would be required for the certificate (8710 ride), it is implied on the certificate.

It's about as clear as mud

[Learjetter]

You know that the FAA considers the "flight time" to start when the aircraft first moves under it's own power for the purposes of flight, ergo, at taxi time.

So, guys who are logging "taxi time" (ergo, that extra .2) in their own logbooks aren't doing anything anywhere near what you're accusing them of.

Naturally, if they're doing it on the 781, then the issues you brought up are valid.

In the C-21, we log the extra 5 min on the 781, and log the actual time (TO to LAND) in the 781H. Keeps mx happy (for time change parts/inspection issues) and happy mx =

better jets. Complies also with 11-401 logging rules, I believe. Flight hour program runs off 781 time, so no lost sorties. Thought everyone was doing it that way (sts).

[brabus]

Timing for upgrades can be waived if you're good enough/ready and should never be based solely on flight time so that seems like a moot point.

Valid, but if enough hours are missing, it's at least possible it could delay something...i.e. an assignment requiring X IP hours or something like that. But yes, that's probably a far-fetched possibility.

Won't the airlines accept your official USAF documents vs some logbook with your chicken scratch in it? I thought the A-words put some sort of factor on fighter time anyway, which makes sense. Did they stop doing that? I would definitely ask to see a guy's official USAF records if I was on an A-word hiring panel.

As far as I know they do and have heard they do the fighter time factor thing. I still have a copy of my flight records, so no worries there.

Don't you do a records review? That's where you should catch mistakes in the system. Are you saying you can bring your logbook into SARMs and they just throw the hours into the system for you?

This is where my opinion differs. I've done a handful of records reviews so far and to be honest, I will have no idea if my records are missing some flights here and there, mis-transcribed type of flight time off my 781, etc. It's humanly impossible for you to go, "hey wait a minute, 169 days ago on Feb 3rd I flew a 1.2 and logged .8 NVG...please fix this" as you're flipping through multiple pages of flight time. With a logbook, I can quickly just look at the totals and if something doesn't match up, now I can run through dates and see where a flight's missing. I have already caught a couple mistakes and pointed them out to the SARMs. Maybe it's amazingly different here, but they trust my word as an officer. What a concept. I would hope nobody would make shit up to pad a logbook...complete BS and I would not expect someone to do that.

Bottom line, now that I backlogged all my flight time, it literally takes me 15 sec to fill it out after a flight. So, I spend approx 2.5 min per month writing in my logbook. Just my opinion, but I'm not worried about "wasting" 2.5 min out of my month. That's like the dudes arguing in favor of green boots because they don't have to shine them. Copy, I'll "waste" 2 min to shine my black boots once every 6 months...again, not worried about it. If someone else is, then don't do it.

[Right Seat Driver]

This is where my opinion differs. I've done a handful of records reviews so far and to be honest, I will have no idea if my records are missing some flights here and there, mis-transcribed type of flight time off my 781, etc. It's humanly impossible for you to go, "hey wait a minute, 169 days ago on Feb 3rd I flew a 1.2 and logged .8 NVG...please fix this" as you're flipping through multiple pages of flight time. With a logbook, I can quickly just look at the totals and if something doesn't match up, now I can run through dates and see where a flight's missing. I have already caught a couple mistakes and pointed them out to the SARMs. Maybe it's amazingly different here, but they trust my word as an officer. What a concept. I would hope nobody would make shit up to pad a logbook...complete BS and I would not expect someone to do that.

Bottom line, now that I backlogged all my flight time, it literally takes me 15 sec to fill it out after a flight. So, I spend approx 2.5 min per month writing in my logbook. Just my opinion, but I'm not worried about "wasting" 2.5 min out of my month. That's like the dudes arguing in favor of green boots because they don't have to shine them. Copy, I'll "waste" 2 min to shine my black boots once every 6 months...again, not worried about it. If someone else is, then don't do it.

"2" on all of the above. When you have the same last name as three other dudes on base, it is nice to be able to look back at your logbook and catch the missing flights when you do your records review. I had 30ish hours missing during my last records review, showed the SARM guys my logbook, and they put the flight time in. The dates and tails also help because they can sometimes pull the mission number and back up your word. But like brabus said, they took my word as an officer.

[Kuma]

"2" on all of the above. When you have the same last name as three other dudes on base, it is nice to be able to look back at your logbook and catch the missing flights when you do your records review. I had 30ish hours missing during my last records review, showed the SARM guys my logbook, and they put the flight time in. The dates and tails also help because they can sometimes pull the mission number and back up your word. But like brabus said, they took my word as an officer.

There is an ARM application on the Portal. I click on it once a week or so to make sure that they've put in all the 781s. I have found a bunch of errors that I never would have found if I had waited until the annual records review. All of them were Human errors on the part of the SARM plugging in the data.

I've had to go to the HARM office twice to fix problems, both errors stemmed from my interservice transfer and both errors were immediately corrected because of my log books (I think that maybe CrewReport's HARM office is full of assholes). The only thing I can't get them to do is give me NVG credit for my flights in the USMC. I've spoken with two different CHARMs and they both had the same answer..."no". If someone can figure out a way to get that time logged, I would be thankful.

Now, when I go to the records review, I know that all the info is good because I've been keeping track.

Edited October 4, 2010 by Kuma

[ellsworb]

For the civilian side, going through six different checkrides for certificates/ratings, each time the examiner checked that the endorsement was there prior to the checkride and the 8710 paperwork. For example, for a multi-engine sea add on to a commercial, he checked for a tailwheel endorsement as well as an endorsement for the checkride because I would be acting as PIC for the CMES checkride (which is called a PIC endorsement) despite having a CMEL prior (since is was a different class, same category).

The reference he used was AC 61-65D

The implication - from what I understand from the FSDO (for prior - mil pilots mostly) is that since it would be required for the certificate (8710 ride), it is implied on the certificate.

It's about as clear as mud

Interesting. I'll call LA FSDO tomorrow and get their take. As far as I can recall, and I haven't recommended a commercial pilot candidate in 7 years, but I thought the only specific endorsements required were those from the flight instructor saying they received the appropriate ground instruction, flight instruction, blah blah blah within the last 60 days, etc. What did you do your MES in? BTW, badass , my last recommendation for a student was one going to do his Seaplane rating, THE most fun you can have in an airplane. But if it was configured on straight floats, I cannot see why you would be required to hold the tailwheel endorsement. But if it were a Widgeon or something equally cool, then I understand.

You're right on with the clear as mud. Especially when we start getting differing opinions between FSDO's. That always made it easy to teach students. . .

Edited October 4, 2010 by ellsworb

[CJ-6A]

What did you do your MES in? But if it was configured on straight floats, I cannot see why you would be required to hold the tailwheel endorsement. But if it were a Widgeon or something equally cool, then I understand.

You're right on with the clear as mud. Especially when we start getting differing opinions between FSDO's. That always made it easy to teach students. . .

Thanks! The MES was in a Republic/ UC-1 TwinBee. Somewhat like a Widgeon (only uglier) in the flying boat type. Since it was an amphib, the checkride originated from land, so since it had a tailwheel..... which was a handful sometimes, the tailwheel never locked when you wanted it to.. and if it did lock, it never unlocked.. and the right engine would just feather itself if you brought it under 12". But, like you said, it's some great flying! 'Legally' flying under bridges....er...uh... high speed step taxi.

You're right about the different FSDOs - some of them have some weird opinions!