Logging IMC time

[dana172]

Can I log actual if flying in IMC conditions while working on my instrument rating?

Who's name should be on the flight plan if we are doing instrument training on an IFR flight plan?

Totaly different senario. In a 2 pilot aircraft does the SIC log actual (when flying in IMC conditions) when the PIC is flying?

I have had a few discussions with my instructor about thes questions. I have been unable to find any refrence in the AIM or FAR's to document these questions.

Thank you for your help.

Dana

 

[maverick_fp00]

You can log actual if you are with a CFII.

When I go on an IFR flight plane with my instructor I put his name down.

As far as the SIC goes, I haven't got a clue.

 

[avbug]

Dana,

You may log conditions of flight, regardless of what they may be. If you are in given conditions, then log them that way. While working toward your instrument rating, if you are in instrument conditions, then log instrument conditions. 14 CFR 61.51(b)(3) specifies that the conditions of flight should be logged for every entry, and these include day or night, actual instrument, or simulated instrument.

It makes no difference if you are receiving instruction, acting as SIC, acting as PIC, etc. Conditions of flight have nothing to do with the type of pilot time. A PIC in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions. A SIC in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions. A Student pilot in instrument conditions is still in instrument conditions, as is a private pilot without an instrument rating.

If you are not able to legally act as pilot-in-command in instrument conditions or under IFR, then you should provide the name of the pilot in command, or the person who acted as pilot in command, in the remarks section of your logged entry. If this person is a flight instructor, then you should have the instructor endorse the logbook. If the pilot in command is not a flight instructor, then you should still identify that person.

The name entered on the flight plan should be that of the pilot in command, or the person responsible for the outcome of the flight. If you will be flying under IFR, this should be the name of your instructor, or the PIC, as you are not yet instrument rated, and cannot act as PIC under IFR. (You can log PIC under IFR, but cannot act as PIC, under IFR).

 

[dana172]

avbug,

I knew you would have the references that I wanted. You da' the man.

Thank you very much.


Dana

 

[bayoubandit]

.

Totaly different senario. In a 2 pilot aircraft does the SIC log actual (when flying in IMC conditions) when the PIC is flying?

I have to disagree with Avbug about SIC for aircraft requiring 2 pilots. The only time a SIC can log actual instrument time is when he/she is at the controls. The PIC can log all actual IMC flight time. So, to sum it up, if the PIC is at the controls and in IMC, the SIC cannot log that as IMC time. If the SIC is at the controls in IMC, they both may log the actual IMC flight time.
61.51(g) is the source.

 

[avbug]

Bayoubandit,

That is a common misunderstanding of the regulation, and is easily forgiven. The regulation to which you refer, 14 CFR 61(g)(1), states that "A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft soley by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument conditions."

Some mistakenly believe that this indicates only the pilot-in-command may log instrument time, but this is clearly not the case due to the wording of that paragraph. Others mistakenly believe that this indicates only the pilot manipulating the controls may log the time as instrument time; this is also clearly not the case. Note that 61.51(g) does not make mention of pilot authority (PIC vs. SIC), nor is it worded to reflect anything regarding sole manipulator.

In an aircraft requiring two crew members, the aircraft may not be operated without both crew members. The conditions under which one crewmember might be in actual instrument conditions and not the other, are rare, indeed. The only time when one crewmember in a two-or-more crew cockpit would log instrument time when the other would not, would be simulated instrument flight in visual conditions.

The SIC may log instrument time, regardless of weather he or she manipulates the controls.

Another common question arises about logging landings and approaches. Some mistakenly believe that the PIC should log all the approaches and landings, regardless of who makes the approach, or the landing. Logging of landings is assigned according to sole manipulator, and the individual logging the approaches must have performed them, in accordance with 61.57(c)(1).

A pilot should only log the landings which he or she has done, regardless of position in the aircraft or assignment by the certificate holder. The same is true for instructors, who often mistakenly believe they should log a student's landings or approaches.

A pilot should always log the conditions of flight. One might just as well state that the non-flying SIC cannot log night time when the flight is conducted at night; this is obviously wrong. The SIC may log night time when acting as a required crewmember. He or she may show it as total night time in the logbook, or divide it into PIC/SIC night if so inclined. The FAR does not differentiate.

The same applies to instrument conditions, as specified in 61.51(b)(3)(ii)&(iii). Weather acting as PIC or SIC, and regardless of who is flying, if the flight is conducted in instrument conditions, all parties entitled to log time should log the conditions under which the flight is conducted.

 

[bayoubandit]

Is there a defintion of what a person is? A person could mean the person flying (sole manipulator) or a person on the flight deck.
Is there a reason it doesn't say "person(s)". I'm asking in all seriousness. Everyone you ask has a different interpretation of the rule. How did you come to yours? It's like talking to a FSDO, call 3 different FSDO's, get 3 different answers. Most guys in the airlines only log the time they fly.

As far as 61.57. That just states what is needed for currency to act as PIC. You must make the landings as sole manipulator to remain current. It doesn't say who may/may not log landings otherwise. Now I agree with you though, whoever lands the plane logs the landing. I haven't instructed in years and most of this goes out the window. Thanks for the challenge!

 

[avbug]

If you are referring to 61.51(g)(1), which states in part, "A person may log instrument ime only for that flight time when the person operatoes the aircraft...", then the answer to your question is clear. Unless two people share a logbook, the wording must be in the singular.

The regulation is referring to the logging of flight time, not to the operation of aircraft. Clearly an aircraft requiring two crewmembers to operate, is operated by two crewmembers. However, each crewmember logs that time separately. Therefore, as the regulation speaks to the individual airman, it is written in the singular.

The regulation referring to the requirement for more than one crewmember is legion, and begins with the type certification for the aircraft, includes the operations specifications and airworthiness limitations, and may include other parts of 14 CFR. Unless otherwise approved by the administrator, an aircraft requiring more than one crewmember is operated by each required crewmember.

A SIC in instrument conditions is in them every bit as much as the PIC. The regulation does NOT differentiate between SIC and PIC instrument time. An employer may ask for a breakdown, but legal logging of time in accordance with 14 CFR 61.51 only requires the logging of instrument time. This time may be further broken down, by definition, into actual or simulated instrument time.

A SIC may log the conditions of flight. To do so would be to ignore the fact that the SIC performed the duties of SIC and operated the aircraft as SIC, in instrument conditions, or at night.

One might postulate that because the SIC didn't perform a landing, he or she is not entitled to show arriving at LAX. Instead, only the PIC would be allowed to log the destination. This is obviously ridiculous. Both parties are there, both parties made the flight; both parties identify the location to which they flew, in their logbooks. Likewise, if both parties entered instrument conditions or flew at night, then both parties log the conditions of flight, as dictated in 61.51(b)(3).

Only the pilot performing a landing or an approach logs that landing or approach. Otherwise, both pilots log the conditions of flight.

 

[avbug]

I should add in all fairness that John Lynch, who writes much of FAR 61 and maintains the FAA AFS-640 FAQ web site, takes the opposite stance of the information I have given. In his FAQ on the subject, he states that the PNF should not log instrument time.

The FAQ site is not endorsed by the FAA and is not regulatory, and for the most part, it provides an element of clarity for the regulations. There are areas of general disagreement, and I have disagreed on several points in the past with what is printed there.

Mr. Lynch states that instrument time logged as SIC/PNF is not useable for the purposes of currency (the response was written when 6 hours were still required for currency), and is not valid for the purposes of meeting the instrument time requirements for the ATP certificate. I agree in substance to both these claims, as the purpose of each is to provide actual instrument experience, and speaks to a different purpose in logging.

However, for logging instrument time, the fact remains that one is not logging experience with respect to manipulation of the controls in reference to instruments, but conditions of flight.

Mr. Lynch also states that he personally believes that instrument conditions in legal VFR (dark moonless night over the ocean, with legal separation from clouds, for example) should be listed as simulated instrument flight. I disagree, though by most counts, my view on that subject would be a losing cause. (As far as I am concerned, flight requiring reference to instruments represents instrument conditions, and absent a view limiting device, represents actual instrument conditions, while not necessarily instrument meteorological conditions).

Interestingly, Mr. Lynch also takes a potentially controversial stance that one does not require a safety pilot in conditions mentioned above, as a view limiting device is not used, although he states that such conditions represent simulated, and not actual instrument conditions. To each his own. I don't see his version being particularly defensible, except that it most likely represents the viewpoint at-large for the majority of inspectors.

 

[AWACoff]

I see both sides of the debate. I only log IMC time for when I am flying the aircraft. I do it simply because I believe it shows a certain skill level and experience. Watching somebody fly in IMC is a lot different than actually doing it. Let's agree to disagree so that at least we agree about something, eh?