201er

Quote: HartParr I know the numbers for my Mooney and understand many things about inst. flying but I have never 'needed' to fly in weather that I don't like and am not convinced that I need one. Sometimes I think I should get the rating and then other times I feel like I don't have the time or want it bad enough.

Quote: gregwatts I am from the camp that thinks the IR should be mandatory. Aside fro allowing you to fly in weather, I believe it absolutely makes you a better VFR pilot as well. I routinely file IFR, even on severe clear days.

Got Mooney so I could get/use instrument rating. Mooney since last June, Instrument since December.

Quote: JimR I remember now that there are two flush exterior screws on the side of the fuselage a few inches above the co-pilot's side air vent that hold it on. Does that sound the same as yours, Mike? Jim

I had mine recently changed on a '78 J. Not where the previous posters mentioned. Mine is in the copilot side foot bay on the right side wall on the inside. The screws come in from the outside wall and someone had to hold from outside so the person inside could undo the nuts. Not sure if this is a non-standard setup but just sharing from recent experience.

http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=threads&forumid=7

Quote: Becca And then there is the section that says "responsibility and authority of pilot in command" are: The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft. So do you say you are "acting as pilot in command" when you have that authority? As a safety pilot, if you see a hazard, you are the one, and only one, directly responsible to avoid it - you are the "final authority". (Or on the negative side you are at every moment making the decision to continue to flight since you don't see as collission hazard). If you are the safety pilot and your plane, say, collides with another plane that you should have seen, and you are lucky enough to walk away, the FAA is going to hold you responsible as PIC, because you are the only, final, and directly responsible authority. And since the entire time you are acting as safety pilot while the other guy is under the hood, you are exercising that authority in my opinion.

For anyone not on our email list, this event is CANCELLED due to inclement weather.

Quote: danb35 Mike, a safety pilot isn't a passenger--he's a crewmember.

Can someone confirm my understanding of the FARs that the safety pilot (assuming both pilots are private) cannot log PIC time on the flying pilot's dollar? In other words, if the safety pilot logs PIC, they gotta split the cost. Sec. 61.113 — Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. (a) Except as provided in paragraphs ( through (h) of this section, no person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor may that person, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft. © A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees. If the safety pilot isn't paying for the flight (in part or in whole), then the safety pilot should not act as PIC nor log PIC as it would be a violation of 61.113c. On the other hand, acting as nothing more than SIC (61.51f2), the safety pilot can log the time as SIC without paying a dime and can even be paid by the pilot for being the lookout.

Right on Paul. Just one thing. I think it is possible to hand over PIC after the flight has begun FAR 1.1: Pilot in command means the person who: (1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight; (2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and (3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight. Thus it is possible for the flying pilot to be PIC for takeoff/landing and then hand over PIC responsibility to the safety pilot when he puts the hood on so that they could both log time. What this makes me wonder though is what the "default" concept of PIC is? The above talks about "designating." When I fly with another pilot in my own airplane, can't it be assumed that I am PIC unless agreed upon otherwise? BTW for folks who said safety pilot is responsible for safety during flight, this isn't necessarily being PIC. Safety pilot can say that he sees traffic ahead or clouds but it is still the PIC's call on how to proceed. If they bust airspace (and both pilots are equally rated), the one acting as PIC under the hood would still be to blame even though the safety pilot may have warned him. On the other hand if the safety pilot accepts PIC and they bust airspace, then it's the safety pilot's neck on the line. Acting as PIC is more than just looking out for things.

Quote: Cruiser Greg, there is no SIC time to log, if you want to log the time, (I usually don't), log it as PIC. That is the correct way. You not need to specifically agree to who will be PIC before the flight because it is understood that as soon as the other pilot puts on the view limiting device you become responsible for the safe operations of the flight and as such you are acting as PIC but only for that time he is under the hood so your PIC time will be less than his. (That's why you were asked to go along on the flight)

Read what I wrote again and especially the regulation. It has nothing to do with meteorological condition nor the purpose of the training. It has to do with the flight rules under which the aircraft is being operated. If the flight is being performed under instrument flight rules in VMC, the safety pilot is required to have an instrument rating. Example, an instrument rated pilot wants to shoot some approaches to assure instrument currency does not lapse. He grabs his non-instrument rated pilot friend to act as safety pilot. The sky condition is scattered 2,500. They can perform this flight under VFR but may be forced to dodge clouds. It might be preferable to do it IFR to be cleared into clouds and practice being in the system but since the safety pilot is not instrument rated, the flight cannot be performed with the instrument rated pilot under the hood.

^Sounds like a scam to sucker us into buying renter's insurance

Quote: galt1074 201er, So in this case, he rents the aircraft and both of us are fully qualified in the aircraft and for the type of flight. He tells me before we take off that I am the safety pilot but we never stated that I would be the PIC...though I did correct a couple things and help him with some local airspace since I've been here a while. In the best spirit of the intent of the CFR, what would you say I should log? I don't need the time, I've got more than I'll ever need to get a job after the Air Force, I just want to log it properly.

Quote: N601RX You log PIC and he logs simulated instrument time. An IFR rating is not required for someone to act as safety pilot, because the flight is not in IMC.

Yes, to the FAA it probably would be fine as commercial pilot. But then you'd have to make sure all other things pertaining to commercial operations such as a recent annual or hundred hour and other things begin to apply. Also it could be a big insurance issue if anything were to happen so a darned good reason to get named. Just let me point out that you don't log PIC for being "responsible for maintaining safe seperation and backing him up?" That is SIC. The only way to both log PIC is if you are actually acting as pilot in command which means meeting all requirements and agreeing that you are pilot in command. This would make more sense in this scenario: You are flying left seat in your own airplane. You did takeoff/landing and are clearly the PIC. In flight you tell your Private Pilot (with nothing else, not even complex) buddy to pop the hood on and act as auto pilot for the next 2 hours under the hood. Even though he is not complex and thus not qualified to act as PIC, he can still log PIC as sole manipulator of the controls (FAR 61.51ei). You still log PIC for the entire flight because you were acting as pilot in command (your plane, your complex, your responsibility). Likewise this can go the other way if you're in the right seat of someone else's plane but they have to bestow upon you acting as PIC which may not go well with their insurance unless you are named or meet the open pilot clause. So my point is that the difference between logging PIC or SIC as safety pilot is the legal role you play even though you're really just doing the same thing keeping him from running into any one/thing.

Quote: galt1074 Okay, so it sounds like I log PIC. He was under goggles, I am fully qualified in the aircraft to include being instrument qualified and current on everything. It was "his airplane" in that I was flying on his dime and for his practice. So I guess he logs PIC time because he was manipulating the controls and I log PIC time because I was responsible for maintaining safe seperation and backing him up? That to me sounds strange but you guys are better at this than me.

You can't just log PIC by acting as safety pilot. You would have to act as PIC which means being responsible and fully qualified for the flight. You must have all ratings and endorsements, flight review, medical, and currency requirements met. Also you would probably need to be qualified for the insurance or flight school requirements for acting as PIC in that airplane. You would also require an instrument rating if on an instrument flight plan or in IMC. Once all of these requirements are met, you can both log PIC time for the length of time that he is flying under the hood as sole manipulator of the controls and you are acting as PIC of the airplane. Otherwise yes, you can log SIC.

Quote: Becca An LLC won't protect you personally from liability due to an accident you've piloted into. What an LLC will do is it WILL protect you against is liability if someone ELSE flies your plane into an accident. E.G., if you had a partner on your plane and no LLC, and your partner crashes, the passenger can come after everyone who has a stake in ownership of the airplane.

Quote: Piloto It will no change the sound quality but improve the noise quieting. The tubing conduct noise from the outside into your ears. The shorter the better. José

Quote: Bnicolette Wouldn't ten million be more appropriate?... Why is 1 million going to protect you but 100K isn't. Where is the basis for these numbers and past court proceedings that says this is the norm and this is the amount of protection you need?

Do your cords droop down like that as well? I just don't like when they get caught on my collar or something. The weighs isn't noticeable. This is a "pilot's headset." so I really wouldn't recommend keeping them for anyone but the pilot or maybe a permanent flying companion that has his/her own headset. Not only is it more personal cause of the tips but it's also a little strange at first and requires some getting used to. I've gotta say though the foam tips are so comfortable and unnoticeable. Just like you, the David Clark and Bose headsets are for everybody else. After not using any other headset for 3 months and trying my Bose back on it felt so heavy/tight!!! I remember when I went from David Clark to Bose i marveled at the imporvement but now there's no going back!

I'm afraid of trimming them cause it says the length is made like that for best sound clarity (which is why I'm using Halo). But I've seen a picture where it's tucked in neatly but can't figure out how to keep mine from drooping. Once in a while they do get a little caught on something but for the most part I don't feel it. The only other complaint is that the wires are so thin that I feel like they're inevitably going to get torn some day. Other headsets normally come with some heavy duty wiring. Piloto, that's the pic I was referring to. Can't figure out how to make em stay like that.