Single Pilot IFR
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Re: Single Pilot IFR
if it's not a dedicated training flight... then No. Your friend should not accept the flight.
--In his wrapup remarks, the FAA chief said, "If you think the safety bar is set too high, then your
standards are set too low."
standards are set too low."
Re: Single Pilot IFR
I didn't ask you to rephrase it, AuxBatOn did. I was just answering the question for him.freakonature wrote:Cap'nP8, I don't think I can phrase it any different. I know it happen's. I'ts just like the dummy in the right seat of a car in the HOV lane mentality. Train the person, pay the person, and then go flying.
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
freakonature
- Rank 5
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:36 pm
-
Liquid Charlie
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
- Location: YXL
- Contact:
Re: Single Pilot IFR
To me it's pretty simple. If you can be legally entered into the log book as a crew member and are you can log the time. If you name does not appear in the log book as a part of the crew you can't.
Brings to mind a few years ago where a particular company designated the guy in the right seat as a flight attendant because the passenger load was above 9 (in think that was the number) but they were legal to operate VFR single pilot -- talk about a classic end run.
Brings to mind a few years ago where a particular company designated the guy in the right seat as a flight attendant because the passenger load was above 9 (in think that was the number) but they were legal to operate VFR single pilot -- talk about a classic end run.
Black Air has no Lift - Extra Fuel has no Weight
ACTPA
ACTPA
Re: Single Pilot IFR
That's interesting...Liquid Charlie wrote:To me it's pretty simple. If you can be legally entered into the log book as a crew member and are you can log the time. If you name does not appear in the log book as a part of the crew you can't.
Brings to mind a few years ago where a particular company designated the guy in the right seat as a flight attendant because the passenger load was above 9 (in think that was the number) but they were legal to operate VFR single pilot -- talk about a classic end run.
Were they authorized to operate 704? because that's what is required to carry 10 to 19 pax (and I think two crew as well.)
Flight attendants are not required unless there are 20 or more pax (705)
If you're talking about a two crew airplane, then he can't be an FO and an FA at the same time.
This is just a really weird thing you're describing?
What type of a/c BTW? C208, DHC3, DHC6? I know down in the carribean they fly more than 9 pax in the singles i mentioned.
I'm confused
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
Liquid Charlie
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
- Location: YXL
- Contact:
Re: Single Pilot IFR
You have to understand that was before CARS (sorry for not making that clear) -- the passenger exemption was lower then and what it is now -- the F/O's were looking for more money so the company removed them as flight crew and designated them as flight attendants/crew person -- it was management trying to make a point that a 2 otter was not necessarily a 2 crew airplane, which it isn't under certain circumstances. If my memory serves me correctly it was a BC operator with -6's and it was long before a lot of you were more than a twinkle in someone's eye 
-- except for Cat -- haha
-- except for Cat -- hahaBlack Air has no Lift - Extra Fuel has no Weight
ACTPA
ACTPA
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Re: Single Pilot IFR
Liquid Charlie Air West used F.O.s who were also cabin attendants as well on their Twin Otter sched flights.
We operated them IFR on floats with center stored flight plans and of course that was why those poor souls who the company called cabin attendants needed IFR ratings.....the old bend e'm over and use them trick was alive and well back then.
We operated them IFR on floats with center stored flight plans and of course that was why those poor souls who the company called cabin attendants needed IFR ratings.....the old bend e'm over and use them trick was alive and well back then.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
just curious
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 3592
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:29 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
Re: Single Pilot IFR
Unregistered, and the quoted regs from AuxBatt's TC quotes are correct.
The safety pilot (even if they did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night ) Adds nothing legally to the trip unless:
The safety pilot (even if they did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night ) Adds nothing legally to the trip unless:
- they are PPC'ed or PCCed for the right seat;
- Are current on the type
- Have completed their line indoctrination
- the company has 2 crew SOPs
- The company is authorized 2 crew ops in their ops spec.
Re: Single Pilot IFR
Found this on TC site under co-pilot flight time credits:
Many companies have an Ops Spec for single pilot IFR which defines the criteria for operations without a co-pilot. The operations manager and chief pilot may be the only employees that have met the single pilot IFR qualifications (1000TT, 100 multi, 50 IFR, 50 on type) and have a Pilot Proficiency Check (PPC) specifically for single pilot IFR. Other pilots employed by that company may not have a single pilot PPC, so a co-pilot is required by law. By way of example, in the case where an aircraft is dispatched in accordance with the ops spec for single pilot IFR, a co-pilot is not required and in fact is not permitted.
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." -Nietzsche
Re: Single Pilot IFR
Just found this, seems relevant. T.C's Notice of Proposed Amendment website.
REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
(This statement is not a part of the Regulations.)
Description
The Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Part VII) corrects an error in the current text of Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 703.88 (Flight Crew Member Qualifications). This regulation was published in Canada Gazette Part II on April 14, 1999. The intent of the amendment proposed at that time was to clarify previously ambiguous text which had led to the mistaken interpretation that for single-engined aeroplanes in air taxi operations, when not carrying passengers in Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight or in night Visual Flight Rules (VFR) flight, the chief pilot of the air operator did require a pilot proficiency check or a competency check on the type of aircraft. The earlier amendment was intended to state that a chief pilot, in command of an aeroplane, when not carrying passengers, under the circumstances outlined above, did not require either a competency check or a pilot proficiency check. Unfortunately, the wording of the amendment resulted in an exemption for a chief pilot in an air taxi operation from the requirement for a competency check or a pilot proficiency check when acting as:
1. pilot-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft or of a single-engined aeroplane carrying passengers in IFR flight or in night VFR flight;
2. pilot-in-command of a single-engined helicopter; and
3. second-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft, as well as under the intended circumstances.
The current amendment removes the unintentionally widened aspects of the exemption for the chief pilot while leaving such an individual free from the need for a pilot proficiency check or a competency check when in command of a single-engined aeroplane in IFR flight or in night VFR flight with no passengers on board.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/RegSe ... 2-703R.htm
REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
(This statement is not a part of the Regulations.)
Description
The Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Part VII) corrects an error in the current text of Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 703.88 (Flight Crew Member Qualifications). This regulation was published in Canada Gazette Part II on April 14, 1999. The intent of the amendment proposed at that time was to clarify previously ambiguous text which had led to the mistaken interpretation that for single-engined aeroplanes in air taxi operations, when not carrying passengers in Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight or in night Visual Flight Rules (VFR) flight, the chief pilot of the air operator did require a pilot proficiency check or a competency check on the type of aircraft. The earlier amendment was intended to state that a chief pilot, in command of an aeroplane, when not carrying passengers, under the circumstances outlined above, did not require either a competency check or a pilot proficiency check. Unfortunately, the wording of the amendment resulted in an exemption for a chief pilot in an air taxi operation from the requirement for a competency check or a pilot proficiency check when acting as:
1. pilot-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft or of a single-engined aeroplane carrying passengers in IFR flight or in night VFR flight;
2. pilot-in-command of a single-engined helicopter; and
3. second-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft, as well as under the intended circumstances.
The current amendment removes the unintentionally widened aspects of the exemption for the chief pilot while leaving such an individual free from the need for a pilot proficiency check or a competency check when in command of a single-engined aeroplane in IFR flight or in night VFR flight with no passengers on board.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/RegSe ... 2-703R.htm
Re: Single Pilot IFR
Up until about three years ago if the autopilot went u/s then you could just put another IFR pilot in the right seat. Then the rules changed to what has been stated several times above. IE: sop's etc.. The reasoning (as I was told) was that it was quite common to have a single pilot op., the autopilot would go down and any warm body with an IFR would be put in the right seat. If something went wrong they really where not going to be much help.
