Can you log PIC time in a Mooney without Complex Rating?

[Marauder]

If you're flying the plane, does the Open Pilot clause apply? Never heard of that. [mention=7052]Parker_Woodruff[/mention]???

The insurance clause calls out the PIC requirement in my policy. If I use a SP who is Basic Med, he/she will need to act as PIC.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Hank]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

The insurance clause calls out the PIC requirement in my policy. If I use a SP who is Basic Med, he/she will need to act as PIC.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

That's a common clause (I have one too) but never thought it applied to the safety pilot. THAT was my question . . . .

[Parker_Woodruff]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

If you're flying the plane, does the Open Pilot clause apply? Never heard of that. @Parker_Woodruff???

If the owner is good on the insurance policy to fly as sole PIC with passengers, then he is fine.  If the owner still needs dual prior to sole PIC operations, he will need to take care of that first with someone who qualifies (either via OPW or the CFI being specifically named).

The above advice comes with a standard statement from me: "read your policy and if any questions ask your agent." 

[RobertGary1]

3 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

The insurance clause calls out the PIC requirement in my policy. If I use a SP who is Basic Med, he/she will need to act as PIC.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Is that for the PIC or the person manipulating the controls?

 

-Robert

[midlifeflyer]

8 hours ago, skykrawler said:

It is my understanding that a pilot using basic med cannot act as a SP

A safety pilot can act as a SP so long as also acting as PIC. The silly prohibition comes in if they are not.

[jaylw314]

6 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

 

Wow, that's pretty open.  IIRC, mine specifies 300 hours, 100 in complex and 25 hours specifically in the M20J, not just any M20

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

A safety pilot can act as a SP so long as also acting as PIC. The silly prohibition comes in if they are not.

Wait, that's the first I've heard of it, what prohibition is this?  

[midlifeflyer]

13 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Wow, that's pretty open.  IIRC, mine specifies 300 hours, 100 in complex and 25 hours specifically in the M20J, not just any M20

Wait, that's the first I've heard of it, what prohibition is this?  

Really? It was all the rage and discussed extensively. Because of the way the statute and the regulations were written, we have the weird anomaly that BasicMed is only valid for  private pilot privileges when acting as pilot in command.

"A private pilot may act as pilot in command of an aircraft without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter..."

So, a safety pilot who is acting as PIC may rely on BasicMed but a safety pilot who is not acting as PIC may not.

[PT20J]

Unless acting as PIC, there is no regulation requiring a safety pilot to have a valid medical certificate of any kind.

Skip

[midlifeflyer]

11 minutes ago, PT20J said:

Unless acting as PIC, there is no regulation requiring a safety pilot to have a valid medical certificate of any kind.

Skip

It's exactly the same regulation which requires a PIC to have a medical certificate - 61.3(c).

(c) Medical certificate.
(1) A person may serve as a required pilot flight crewmember of an aircraft only if that person holds the appropriate medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter, or other documentation acceptable to the FAA, that is in that person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft. Paragraph (c)(2) of this section provides certain exceptions to the requirement to hold a medical certificate.

A safety pilot is a required crewmember and therefore requires a medical certificate (or alternative). The FAA Chief Counsel letter on that one was written more than 40 years ago.  An excerpt:

... a pilot who acts as a safety pilot during simulated instrument flight, as required by Section 91.21(b)(2)*,
is a required pilot flight crewmember. In such a case, although the pilot under the hood may be acting as a pilot-in-command and the type certification of the aircraft may only require one pilot, the second pilot would have to have an appropriate current medical certificate.  

[recodified as 91.109(c)(1)]

 

[PT20J]

4 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

It's exactly the same regulation which requires a PIC to have a medical certificate - 61.3(c).

(c) Medical certificate.
(1) A person may serve as a required pilot flight crewmember of an aircraft only if that person holds the appropriate medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter, or other documentation acceptable to the FAA, that is in that person's physical possession or readily accessible in the aircraft. Paragraph (c)(2) of this section provides certain exceptions to the requirement to hold a medical certificate.

A safety pilot is a required crewmember and therefore requires a medical certificate (or alternative). The FAA Chief Counsel letter on that one was written more than 40 years ago.  An excerpt:

... a pilot who acts as a safety pilot during simulated instrument flight, as required by Section 91.21(b)(2)*,
is a required pilot flight crewmember. In such a case, although the pilot under the hood may be acting as a pilot-in-command and the type certification of the aircraft may only require one pilot, the second pilot would have to have an appropriate current medical certificate.  

[recodified as 91.109(c)(1)]

 

You’re right - thanks for the citation. Skip. 

[RobertGary1]

13 minutes ago, PT20J said:

You’re right - thanks for the citation. Skip. 

I had that in mind too until I looked it up a couple years ago. I think it may have changed at one point. 

 

-Robert 

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, RobertGary1 said:

I had that in mind too until I looked it up a couple years ago. I think it may have changed at one point. 

 

-Robert 

Please show it.

[RobertGary1]

5 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Please show it.

Show what I think? Not sure how to prove thoughts. 
 

-Robert 

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

Show what I think? Not sure how to prove thoughts. 
 

-Robert 

Not what you think. What you saw when you looked it up that indicated it may have been different at some point. While many of the rules we are discussing in this thread go pretty far back, things do change along the way. So you might be right, which is why I asked.

[MikeOH]

13 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Not what you think. What you saw when you looked it up that indicated it may have been different at some point. While many of the rules we are discussing in this thread go pretty far back, things do change along the way. So you might be right, which is why I asked.

I, too, share RobertGary1's and PT20J's recollection.  I didn't have much luck figuring out how to research old FARs.  I am assuming that the Federal Register might have the history of FAR changes, but not sure about that.  Further, doesn't look the FR goes back before 1996 for online searching.  I gave up after 30 minutes of looking, however.

Edited November 8, 2020 by MikeOH

[carusoam]

I have a 94 FAR/AIM book... on the shelf... next to the 95, 96, 97....

The FAA is the king of documentation...

Every line gets numbered... every change gets documented...

They printed so many books, it was cheap enough that even student pilots could afford them...

It was easy to read through the changes...

As the internet developed and everything went on line... I didn’t keep any back copies... 

So if you need a rule out of the 94 book... let me know...

Best regards,

-a-