Night Currency

[bwgilchrist]

Odd question - but I can't see a clear answer to this.

If you want to carry passengers at night, you have to do 5 take offs and landings at night within the last 6 months.

So, what happens if you exceed the 6 months?

You can still do night flying, just not with passengers?

Can you do 5 solo night take offs and landings to regain your currency for passengers?

Or do you need to do a night proficiency flight with an instructor?

[Donald]

You can still do night flying, just not with passengers?

Can you do 5 solo night take offs and landings to regain your currency for passengers?

Correct.

It's OK to crash/kill yourself, but less desirable to do it with passengers.

[bwgilchrist]

You can still do night flying, just not with passengers?

Can you do 5 solo night take offs and landings to regain your currency for passengers?

Correct.

It's OK to crash/kill yourself, but less desirable to do it with passengers.

That's what I thought.

You know how sometimes, your brain just goes "what?". This was one of those things for me.

[photofly]

You don't have to be PIC to "conduct" the 5 takeoffs and landings that mean you can carry passengers at night - so you don't actually need to be solo. Someone else can be PIC, even with passengers, and you can still takeoff and land without meeting the recency rules, and those landings and takeoffs count towards the 5.

[Big Pistons Forever]

You don't have to be PIC to "conduct" the 5 takeoffs and landings that mean you can carry passengers at night - so you don't actually need to be solo. Someone else can be PIC, even with passengers, and you can still takeoff and land without meeting the recency rules, and those landings and takeoffs count towards the 5.

I do not agree with the above. The night recency requirement specifies "no holder of a flight ...license"

The privileges associated with the PPL license is for PIC only and for the CPL PIC or co-pilot ( for aircraft where a minimum of 2 crew is required, ie transport category aircraft). Therefore there can only be one pilot exercising the privilege's of his/her license, the PIC in light aircraft, and any other pilot on board is a passenger even if they are manipulating the controls. The regulation is clear no passengers can be carried unless the PIC meets has the 5 take-offs and landings in the previous 6 months. Therefore the takeoff and landings would count towards the total for the PIC who must be current as he/she is carrying passengers, not the passenger manipulating the controls.



Recency Requirements
401.05
----------------------------------
(2) Despite any other provision of this Subpart, no holder of a flight crew permit or licence, other than the holder of a flight engineer licence, shall exercise the privileges of the permit or license in an aircraft unless the holder

(a) has successfully completed a recurrent training program in accordance with the personnel licensing standards within the 24 months preceding the flight; and

(b) where a passenger other than a flight test examiner designated by the Minister is carried on board the aircraft, has completed, within the six months preceding the flight,

(i) in the case of an aircraft other than a glider or a balloon, in the same category and class of aircraft as the aircraft, or in a Level B, C or D simulator of the same category and class as the aircraft, at least

(A) five night or day take-offs and five night or day landings, if the flight is conducted wholly by day, or

(B) five night take-offs and five night landings, if the flight is conducted wholly or partly by night,


Division VI — Private Pilot Licence
Aeroplanes — Privileges
401.26 The holder of a private pilot licence — aeroplane may act as

(a) pilot-in-command or co-pilot of an aeroplane of a class and type in respect of which the licence is endorsed with ratings;

(b) pilot-in-command of an ultra-light aeroplane; and

(c) pilot-in-command or co-pilot of any aircraft for the sole purpose of the holder’s flight training or flight test where

(i) in the case of flight training,

(A) it is conducted under the direction and supervision of a flight instructor qualified in accordance with section 425.21 of Standard 425 — Flight Training, and

(B) no passenger is carried on board,

Division VII — Commercial Pilot Licence
Aeroplanes — Privileges and Requirements
[SOR/2006-352, s. 8]
401.30 (1) Subject to subsection (3), the holder of a commercial pilot licence — aeroplane may, by day or night,

(a) exercise the privileges of a private pilot licence — aeroplane;

(b) exercise the privileges of a VFR OTT rating;

(c) while engaged in providing a commercial air service by means of an aeroplane of a class and type in respect of which the licence is endorsed with ratings, act as

(i) pilot-in-command of the aeroplane, if the minimum flight crew document for the aeroplane specifies a minimum flight crew of one pilot, or

(ii) co-pilot of the aeroplane;

(d) if qualified as a flight instructor in accordance with section 425.21 of Standard 425 — Flight Training, conduct flight instruction; and

(ii) in the case of a flight test,

(A) it is conducted in accordance with section 401.15, and

(B) no passenger is carried on board.

[CpnCrunch]

I do not agree with the above. The night recency requirement specifies "no holder of a flight ...license"

The privileges associated with the PPL license is for PIC only and for the CPL PIC or co-pilot ( for aircraft where a minimum of 2 crew is required, ie transport category aircraft). Therefore there can only be one pilot exercising the privilege's of his/her license, the PIC in light aircraft, and any other pilot on board is a passenger even if they are manipulating the controls. The regulation is clear no passengers can be carried unless the PIC meets has the 5 take-offs and landings in the previous 6 months. Therefore the takeoff and landings would count towards the total for the PIC who must be current as he/she is carrying passengers, not the passenger manipulating the controls.

It talks about exercising privileges of the licence to carry passengers as PIC, but I don't see where it says anything about exercising licence privileges to get current on those landings. From my understanding, it's legal to let a passenger manipulate the controls and land the plane, so as long as the PIC is current. So I guess in the hypothetical example being discussed, the pilot getting night currency would be a passenger.

I'm not saying this is a good idea, especially for the night currency. Just go up every 6 months and do the required circuits.

[photofly]

You don't have to be PIC to "conduct" the 5 takeoffs and landings that mean you can carry passengers at night - so you don't actually need to be solo. Someone else can be PIC, even with passengers, and you can still takeoff and land without meeting the recency rules, and those landings and takeoffs count towards the 5.

I do not agree with the above. The night recency requirement specifies "no holder of a flight ...license"

The privileges associated with the PPL license is for PIC only and for the CPL PIC or co-pilot ( for aircraft where a minimum of 2 crew is required, ie transport category aircraft). Therefore there can only be one pilot exercising the privilege's of his/her license, the PIC in light aircraft, and any other pilot on board is a passenger even if they are manipulating the controls. The regulation is clear no passengers can be carried unless the PIC meets has the 5 take-offs and landings in the previous 6 months. Therefore the takeoff and landings would count towards the total for the PIC who must be current as he/she is carrying passengers, not the passenger manipulating the controls.

The recency rule 401.05(2)(b) requires merely the licence holder to have "completed" 5 takeoffs and landings, under the relevant conditions (day or night). It specifically doesn't say "completed as pilot in command or copilot" which is the parallel wording in 401.05(1)(a), as it clearly would have, if that was the intent.

Although the word "completed" is not defined in the regulations, it seems to me to be 100% clear that to have "completed" a takeoff or landing, the "passenger" (who by virtue of their need to regain recency already holds a pilot licence) it is necessary and sufficient that they are manipulating the controls at the time.

No regulation requires that "completing" a landing is a privilege reserved to a pilot exercising the privileges of their licence: if it were, then no student could could "complete" a landing with an instructor, and no pilot who already holds a licence could regain their recency with an instructor on board (since the instructor could not lawfully be a passenger, and must therefore be PIC.) Those consequences are sufficiently ridiculous to damn such an interpretation.

If it were held that "completing" a landing was a privilege only of someone whose licence already met the recency requirements then every licensed pilot would be required to regain their recency as the sole occupant of the aircraft. Again, that is not the intention or meaning of the regulation. Recency requirements are very often met by flying five circuits with an instructor.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The person doing the landings must be flying the airplane and therefore is acting as a "Flight crew member" as per CAR 101 Interpretation

CAR 101: flight crew member means a crew member assigned to act as pilot or flight engineer of an aircraft during flight time; (membre d’équipage de conduite)

I would suggest it would be unreasonable to say someone performing a landing and takeoff isn't "acting as a pilot"

This person must be the PIC as the only other descriptor for someone in a GA airplane is "passenger"

CAR 101 passenger means a person, other than a crew member, who is carried on board an aircraft; (passager)

Since passengers can't act as a flight crew member they can't "pilot" and aircraft. The example given by photofly is therefore IMO landings and takeoffs not eligible for meeting the night landing and takeoff recency requirements. While my argument may seem picayune, it may matter very much in the case of an accident on a subsequent night passenger carrying flight by the passenger counting the landings. If you are PIC then the JL entry plus your personal logbook entry would be how you would prove to TC and the insurance company you were current. Again in the example provided the only entry in the JL under "crew" would be the name of the other person who was acting as PIC.

[photofly]

Since passengers can't act as a flight crew member they can't "pilot" and aircraft.

That's circular. As soon as someone is assigned a duty they become a crew member, and are no longer a passenger. If that duty involves piloting, then they are, by definition, a flight crew member.

I agree that the person "performing" the landing is assigned the duty and therefore a flight crew member, but there's no regulation to say that a second or subsequent flight crew member of a single-pilot airplane has to meet the recency requirements while doing so or indeed have a pilot licence at all. Such is the status of a student pilot on every training flight. On that basis I don't really understand your argument at all.

Are you seriously suggesting that someone who flies 5 circuits accompanied by an instructor, in order to meet the recency requirements, doesn't achieve that aim?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Are you seriously suggesting that someone who flies 5 circuits accompanied by an instructor, in order to meet the recency requirements, doesn't achieve that aim?

That flight would be logged as dual and the persons name would be entered in the “crew” section of the Journey Logbook. Nobody is going to have a problem with that.

That is quite different from having PPL Joe let his PPL buddy Bill fly some night circuits with him in the airplane and then makes a Journey log entry with his name as crew and therefore by definition PIC wth no mention of Bill because he can’t.

Well I think it’s pretty problematic if Bill uses those circuits to establish night recency and then goes flying at night with passengers.

I don’t see the point in gaming the CAR’s, Go fly your 5 landings solo or with an instructor and you are good to go.

[photofly]

Are you seriously suggesting that someone who flies 5 circuits accompanied by an instructor, in order to meet the recency requirements, doesn't achieve that aim?

That flight would be logged as dual and the persons name would be entered in the “crew” section of the Journey Logbook. Nobody is going to have a problem with that.

That is quite different from having PPL Joe let his PPL buddy Bill fly some night circuits with him in the airplane and then makes a Journey log entry with his name as crew and therefore by definition PIC wth no mention of Bill because he can’t.

I think that’s a perfectly acceptable way to regain night currency.

What is or isn’t entered in the JL is a red herring: for domestic flights there is no requirement (605.94) to enter any flight crew names in it. Merely for the PIC to make the relevant entry.

In respect of the pilots’ personal log, it would be a requirement (401.08) for Joe to write a line in his log that he flew with Bill, and for Bill to enter a flight in his log (listing Joe as PIC) stating that he completed 5 takeoffs and landings himself.

There’s no difference under any regulation in this scenario whether Joe is a PPL or an ATPL, or an instructor since this is not “dual instruction flight time” towards particular any licence or rating.

The regulations even specify that such a flight should be recorded in the pilot’s personal logs which are maintained explicitly for the purposes of demonstrating recency.

Well I think it’s pretty problematic if Bill uses those circuits to establish night recency and then goes flying at night with passengers.

I really don’t: it complies with both the spirit and the letter of the regulations.

I don’t see the point in gaming the CAR’s, Go fly your 5 landings solo or with an instructor and you are good to go.

I agree with the comment about gaming the CARs but I don’t think this is such a thing. Nothing in the regulations privileges or prefers instructor Fred to be PIC while licensed pilot Bill “completes” takeoffs and landings over PPL Joe being PIC while Bill does the same thing.

[photofly]

Here’s another question:

Can two PPL holders neither of whom meets the recency requirement for carriage of passengers at night legally make a single night flight together in which they each perform five takeoffs and landings and thereby both meet the recency requirement?

[rookiepilot]

Here’s another question:

Can two PPL holders neither of whom meets the recency requirement for carriage of passengers at night legally make a single night flight together in which they each perform five takeoffs and landings and thereby both meet the recency requirement?

The only valid answer to this thread is what the insurance company says.

[Bede]

[Big Pistons Forever]

Here’s another question:

Can two PPL holders neither of whom meets the recency requirement for carriage of passengers at night legally make a single night flight together in which they each perform five takeoffs and landings and thereby both meet the recency requirement?

I would suggest the bigger question here is that IMO, with respect to GA light airplanes, there is often misunderstandings about who is PIC vs who is flying. Your question being a good example. For GA light aircraft CAR's recognizes only 2 kinds of occupants, PIC and passengers.

The PIC can absolutely let a passenger fly the aircraft but he/she still maintains all responsibilities for the flight including meeting the relevant recency requirements. So in the example above for the first 5 landings the person flying would be the PIC and the other person would be a passenger. The person flying does not meet the recency requirements to fly with a passenger.

In the grand scheme of things does this matter....well not really unless the person flying the airplane crashes and injures the passenger in which case it might matter quite a bit, especially when dealing with the insurance company.

As a general flight safety concern it is important that if 2 pilots are flying in a GA light aircraft and at points either may be manipulating the controls both have a clear understanding of who is PIC. Going back to my Joe and Bill example. Lets say Joe has rented a C 172 and Joe is in the left seat and Bill is in the right. Bill is flying and during one landing he flares too low hits nosewheel first and the airplane bounces back into the air. Who is responsible for recovery ? What if Bill wants to try to salvage the landing but Joe wants to go around ?

These are not theoretical considerations. I know of one accident where ambiguity on who was responsible for saving a landing that went sideways resulted in neither pilot acting and a wrecked airplane.

At the end of the day with respect to the original question my recommendation, and it is worth every penny you paid for it is simple. Don't over think this. If your night currency has expired and you expect to carry passengers, go do 5 solo circuits. If you are a little bit unsure of your own skills, go do 5 night circuits with an instructor. When you are done make sure you note the night landings in your personal logbook.

[photofly]

I would suggest the bigger question here is that IMO, with respect to GA light airplanes, there is often misunderstandings about who is PIC vs who is flying. Your question being a good example. For GA light aircraft CAR's recognizes only 2 kinds of occupants, PIC and passengers.

I agree with the first part, and I agree that knowing who is PIC is very important and sometimes misunderstood or left un-agreed.

I don't agree with the second part: that "For GA light aircraft CAR's recognizes only 2 kinds of occupants". It's not true for training, for example: when a student flies with an instructor neither is a passenger. Supposing a CASARA flight occurs with a pilot and an observer: the observer is crew, not a passenger.

CARs defines a crew member as someone assigned duties during flight time. It doesn't say (in either a positive or negative sense) who has the authority to make such a assignment. I don't see anything that means that in respect of a GA light aircraft nobody other than the PIC can be assigned duties during flight time, which would be a necessary restriction if the only two options for an occupant were PIC or passenger.

[Bede]

The PIC can absolutely let a passenger fly the aircraft but he/she still maintains all responsibilities for the flight including meeting the relevant recency requirements.

I should add, that as per the CARs, that is correct. However, many insurance policies contain a clause that say that only the named insured or a qualified flight instructor providing instruction to the named insured may manipulate the controls. Worth mentioning because I didn't know until someone pointed it out.

[Big Pistons Forever]

CARs defines a crew member as someone assigned duties during flight time. It doesn't say (in either a positive or negative sense) who has the authority to make such a assignment. I don't see anything that means that in respect of a GA light aircraft nobody other than the PIC can be assigned duties during flight time, which would be a necessary restriction if the only two options for an occupant were PIC or passenger.

CAR's work from the general to the specific. General definitions are at CAR 101. That sections lists only 2 categories of aircraft occupants, Flight Crew Members ( a crew member assigned to act as pilot or flight engineer of an aircraft during flight time) or passengers ( a person, other than a crew member, who is carried on board an aircraft).

Follow on Subparts amplify the general direction in order to address circumstance's not covered by the general definition. So if a pilot decided that he/she wants to go with an instructor to regain night currency than the flight would be logged as dual as per the definition at CAR 400.01 (1)of Dual Instruction Flight Time (the flight time during which a person is receiving flight instruction from a person qualified in accordance with section 425.21 of Standard 425). Both are crew members.

An other mention of persons on board an aircraft that are not flight crew members or passengers is for Commercial operations covered by CAR 702 ( Aerial Work). Aerial work may require what CAR's calls "persons essential during flight" such as survey equipment technicians. So for flight conducted pursuant to CAR 702, a third category of aircraft occupants are permitted. The Standards for CAR 702 then go to specify the required training those other persons must have, how they are accounted for in the OFP etc etc

Flight Attendants are also specifically defined in CAR 101. However it is important to note that they along with all the other than flight crew member or passenger are defined as part of commercial operations. So with respect to the CASARA example given above, again because this private flight is operated pursuant to CAR 602, none of the above provisions apply and the aircraft will only have flight crew members and passengers. Furthermore there can only be 1 flight crew member because the certified crew requirement for GA light aircraft is 1 pilot. There is no way for someone to act as co-pilot ( a flight crew member position) in this operation.

So why should anyone care ? Isn't this just regulatory navel gazing ? Well Yah to some extent but it IMO can matter because who ever is deemed to be the PIC bears all the responsibility for the flight, and that responsibility can't be delegated to passengers. So in the case of the CASARA flight the pilot will not unreasonably elect to unofficially delegate duties such as navigation to another person on the aircraft but they still are totally responsible for the flight. Again with respect to CASARA operations I have personally observed problematic delegation of flight crew member duties, including a statement that because the person is qualified as a CASARA navigator they are responsible for the flight navigation and the pilot just flies the airplane.

[photofly]

CARs defines a crew member as someone assigned duties during flight time. It doesn't say (in either a positive or negative sense) who has the authority to make such a assignment. I don't see anything that means that in respect of a GA light aircraft nobody other than the PIC can be assigned duties during flight time, which would be a necessary restriction if the only two options for an occupant were PIC or passenger.

CAR's work from the general to the specific. General definitions are at CAR 101. That sections lists only 2 categories of aircraft occupants, Flight Crew Members ( a crew member assigned to act as pilot or flight engineer of an aircraft during flight time) or passengers ( a person, other than a crew member, who is carried on board an aircraft).

One of us is misreading CAR 101. To my eye, all three definitions of passenger, crew member, and flight crew member all appear in CAR 101, not in CAR 700. There's no need to appeal to part 7 at all. Can you explain why you think "crew member" applies only to part 7 operations?

Furthermore there can only be 1 flight crew member because the certified crew requirement for GA light aircraft is 1 pilot. There is no way for someone to act as co-pilot ( a flight crew member position) in this operation.

The minimum crew requirement for a GA light aircraft is typically one pilot; I'm not aware for any particular model that there's a maximum. We agree that on a training flight (in a light GA aircraft) both the instructor and the student are flight crew (violating your stipulation that only one crew member is permitted in such an aircraft).

I would say this is permitted under the CARs because the student is assigned duties during flight time and therefore becomes a member of the flight crew. One therefore asks by whom is he assigned such duties? The answer must be, by the instructor.

It would be possible to argue that an instructor has some special authority to assign responsibility during flight time to the student; but this isn't explicitly dictated in the regulations. If the instructor does have such authority - it must therefore come from their status as PIC. Logically, therefore, any PIC can make that same assignment.

Your comments about the PIC not being able to assign responsibility to a "navigator" applies whether the navigator has the formal status of crew or of passenger, so while I agree with it, it doesn't really help us out.

[digits_]

Furthermore there can only be 1 flight crew member because the certified crew requirement for GA light aircraft is 1 pilot. There is no way for someone to act as co-pilot ( a flight crew member position) in this operation.

I undestand your reasoning up until this point. What CAR would prevent you to have more than 1 flight crew member?

Commercially there are plenty of single crew certified aircraft planes flying around multi crew. You're using the 'GA light aircraft' a lot, but there's no clear definition for that.

Privately, regulation wise, I don't see any difference between fying a navajo single/multi crew or a 172 single/multi crew.

[photofly]

Furthermore there can only be 1 flight crew member because the certified crew requirement for GA light aircraft is 1 pilot. There is no way for someone to act as co-pilot ( a flight crew member position) in this operation.

I undestand your reasoning up until this point. What CAR would prevent you to have more than 1 flight crew member?

Commercially there are plenty of single crew certified aircraft planes flying around multi crew. You're using the 'GA light aircraft' a lot, but there's no clear definition for that.

Privately, regulation wise, I don't see any difference between fying a navajo single/multi crew or a 172 single/multi crew.

Single crew certified aircraft flying multi-crew are typically operating in commercial air service. We all agree there are rules for more than one pilot to be recognized as flight crew of such an aircraft in part 7 operations, as there are rules for the training and appointment of flight crew.

The question is - does the absence of such rules for training and qualification of further flight crew in private operations mean a) that such further flight crew cannot be appointed or b) the opposite, that they are easier to appoint since there are fewer restrictions?

To be clear, co-pilot time can only be credited to a second pilot where they are required flight crew in the commercial operation, but just because you can't log co-pilot time doesn't mean you aren't being a flight crew member.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The question is - does the absence of such rules for training and qualification of further flight crew in private operations mean a) that such further flight crew cannot be appointed or b) the opposite, that they are easier to appoint since there are fewer restrictions?

To be clear, co-pilot time can only be credited to a second pilot where they are required flight crew in the commercial operation, but just because you can't log co-pilot time doesn't mean you aren't being a flight crew member.

If you can't log the flight time how are you exercising the privilege's of your license ? So back to the OP's question. If you can't log the flight time as only one person can log the flight time in the GA night landings question, how is the other person refreshing the night currency of their license when they are acting as a flight crew member by piloting the aircraft ?

[photofly]

If you can't log the flight time how are you exercising the privilege's of your license ? So back to the OP's question. If you can't log the flight time as only one person can log the flight time in the GA night landings question, how is the other person refreshing the night currency of their license when they are acting as a flight crew member by piloting the aircraft ?

Who says you need to be exercising the privileges of your licence to "complete" a takeoff and landing? Unlicensed students complete takeoffs and landings without controversy; clearly a licence isn't required for that, nor is "completing a takeoff or landing" listed as a privilege of any licence category.

When I say you can't log the flight time, I mean that you can't claim the time towards the issue of any licence or rating. I don't mean that you can't enter the flight in your logbook. If you were claiming credit for the landings in your logbook you would in fact be required to enter the flight. I have many flights recorded in my logbook that I don't count towards flight time totals - flights where i received checkouts from other-than-instructors, for example. Just don't add the flight time in when you add up that page.

In the case of regaining recency, you aren't claiming credit for the time, and you (typically) already have a licence or rating.

Notice the difference in vocabulary when it comes to the recency requirement: one is required merely to have "completed" a certain number of landings. Not "completed them as PIC or co-pilot". I think that omission is deliberate and significant.

Here's another question:

Can a pilot without a multi-engine rating accompany an appropriately qualified pilot in a multi-engine aircraft and meet the recency requirement (for their own single engine privileges) by completing 5 takeoffs and landings in it?

Does it make a difference if the PIC is an instructor?

What if the PIC isn't an instructor but meets the requirements of Standard 425.21(5)?

[Aviatard]

I specifically asked our TC inspector the question of whether students are passengers or crew. I was asking in the context of the rule that says category 1 medical validity is 6 months or 12 months when 40 and over but less than 60 years old. It would make a difference to having to renew a medical. The answer I received is that students are not passengers, they are crew and therefore the medical validity period would be 12 months.

Of course your TC inspector may have a different opinion.

[photofly]

I specifically asked our TC inspector the question of whether students are passengers or crew. I was asking in the context of the rule that says category 1 medical validity is 6 months or 12 months when 40 and over but less than 60 years old. It would make a difference to having to renew a medical. The answer I received is that students are not passengers, they are crew and therefore the medical validity period would be 12 months.

Of course your TC inspector may have a different opinion.

... and I was told the same thing, except that a student is a passenger during a familiarization flight. That distinction made no sense to me since nothing distinguishes air exercise 1 from the others. Asking on what basis a student isn't a passenger is what led to this.

I did learn one thing though, which is that inspectors all have their own personal interpretations of different regulations, and once you ask an inspector for their interpretation of something contentious you are somewhat bound to abide by it, even when that interpretation is different to yours. So sometimes it's better to come to your own conclusion based on the text of the regulations, and existing jurisprudence, and not to ask an inspector at all.