FROM lede92.fed: Second, you questioned, "can a non-instrument rated private pilot log pilot-in-command time in actual instrument flight conditions while receiving instruction from a CFI or CFII? The pilot is rated in this aircraft." The answer is yes. FAR 61.51(c) addresses logging of pilot time: (2) Pilot-in-command flight time. (i) A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only that flight time during which that pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or when the pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or, except for a recreational pilot, when acting as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification or the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted. There is nothing in the FARs which prohibits an appropriately rated private or commercial pilot from logging pilot-in-command time in accordance with Section 61.51(c)(2)(i) when receiving any flight instruction from a certificated flight instructor (CFI). This includes the logging of instrument instruction under actual or simulated IFR conditions. We stress, however, that here we are discussing logging of flight time for purposes of FAR 61.51, where you are keeping a record to show recent flight experience or to show that you meet the requirements for a higher rating. There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. Section 61.3(e)(1) provides in part that no person may act as pilot-in-command of a civil aircraft under instrument flight rules, or in weather conditions less than VFR minimums unless that person holds an instrument rating. A non-instrument-rated pilot who is taking instrument instruction in IFR conditions may log that as PIC time, but may not actually serve as the PIC. The other pilot must be the PIC, as that term is defined under Section 1.1 of FAR. Enclosed are two prior interpretations concerning the logging of pilot-in-command flight time. We hope that these interpretations will be of further assistance to you. FROM lejau9.fed: Dear Mr. Ewing: Thank you for your letter of March 14, 1992, concerning pilot-in-command time. In your letter you request a copy of a "FAA Formal Opinion dated May 8, 1990, which deals with the logging of Pilot-in-command time." You also raise an additional question and comment which concern Part 61.51(c)(2)(i) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) addresses Pilot-in-command flight time: A recreational, private, or commercial pilot may log pilot-in-command time only that flight time during which that pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which the pilot is rated, or when the pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or, except for a recreational pilot, when acting as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted. Your question concerning Part 61.51(c)(2)(i) centers on the sentence "for which the pilot is rated." You ask "If the airplane in question requires a type rating (for example, KC-135 or B- 707), does a pilot have to possess the type rating for that aircraft before he can log PIC time during that portion of the flight during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls? Or, to the contrary, are possession of a private pilot certificate and merely being the sole manipulator of the controls sufficient to log PIC time in that aircraft?" Under section 61.51(c)(2)(i), a private or commercial pilot may log as PIC time only that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which that pilot is rated. "Rated", as used under section 61.51(c)(2)(i), refers to the category, class, and type as appropriate. Therefore, pilots must be appropriately rated for the aircraft, as the term is defined above, before they may log PIC time under Part 61. The possession of a private pilot certificate and merely being the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft is not necessarily sufficient to log PIC time. In addition to your question, you also make the comment that, "The second part of 61.51(c)(2)(i) in question concerns logging PIC time '...when acting as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification...' It would appear that a pilot, although not in possession of the type certificate for that aircraft, could 'act' as pilot in command (during the portion of the flight that he/she is the sole manipulator of the controls) and therefore log PIC time for that portion of the flight." Under section 61.51(c)(2)(i), concerning the logging of PIC time, the sentence "when acting as pilot-in-command of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification..." does not mean that a pilot, not in possession of the type certificate for that aircraft, can nonetheless act as PIC during the portion of the flight that he is the sole manipulator of the controls and therefore log PIC time for that portion of the flight. The FAA letter dated May 8, 1990, which you requested is attached. It further explains this issue. I hope this satisfactorily answers your questions and concerns. Sincerely, Donald P. Byrne Assistant Chief Counsel Regulations Division FROM leoc92.fed: October 30, l992 Mr. David M. Reid Dear Mr. Reid: Thank you for your letter of June 12, 1992, concerning the logging of pilot-in-command (PIC) time under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). In your letter you ask four questions. First, you ask whether there are "any circumstances when, during a normal flight, two Private Pilots may simultaneously act as (and therefore log the time as) Pilot-In-Command?" The answer is two private pilots may not simultaneously act as PIC but they may, under certain circumstances, simultaneously log PIC time. There is a difference between serving as PIC and logging PIC time. PIC, as defined in FAR 1.1, means the pilot responsible for the operation and safety of an aircraft during flight time. FAR 61.51 deals with logging PIC flight time, and it provides that a private or commercial pilot may log as PIC time only that flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated, or when he is the sole occupant of the aircraft, or when he acts as PIC of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft, or the regulations under which the flight is conducted. It is important to note that FAR 61.51 only regulates the recording of PIC time used to meet the requirements toward a higher certificate, higher rating, or for recent flight experience. Therefore, while it is not possible for two pilots to act as PIC simultaneously, it is possible for two pilots to log PIC flight time simultaneously. PIC flight time may be logged by both the PIC responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time in accordance with FAR 1.1, and by the pilot who acts as the sole manipulator of the controls of the aircraft for which the pilot is rated under FAR 61.51. Enclosed please find two prior FAA interpretations concerning logging of PIC time. We hope that these will be of further assistance to you. 2 In your second question you ask "[h]ow shall two Private Pilots log their flight time when one pilot is under the hood for simulated instrument time and the other pilot acts as safety pilot?" The answer is the pilot who is under the hood may log PIC time for that flight time in which he is the sole manipulator of the controls of the aircraft, provided he is rated for that aircraft. The appropriately rated safety pilot may concurrently log as second in command (SIC) that time during which he is acting as safety pilot. The two pilots may, however, agree prior to initiating the flight that the safety pilot will be the PIC responsible for the operation and safety of the aircraft during the flight. If this is done, then the safety pilot may log all the flight time as PIC time in accordance with FAR 1.1 and the pilot under the hood may log, concurrently, all of the flight time during which he is the sole manipulator of the controls as PIC time in accordance with FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i). Enclosed please find a prior FAA interpretation concerning the logging of flight time under simulated instrument flight conditions. We hope that this interpretation will be of further assistance to you. In your third question you ask "[d]uring instrument training, how shall a VFR Private Pilot log the following flight time: Pilot-In- Command time, Simulated Instrument time, and Actual Instrument time, when that pilot is...A)...under the hood? B)...in actual instrument conditions? C)...under the hood in actual instrument conditions?" The answer is the VFR private pilot may log all of the flight time you described as PIC flight time under FAR 61.51(c)(2)(i) if he was the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which he is rated. Under FAR 61.51(c)(4) the pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions. Please note that the FARs do not distinguish between "actual" and "simulated" instrument flight time. Enclosed is a prior FAA interpretation concerning the logging of instrument flight time. We hope this interpretation will further assist you. Finally you ask "[d]oes FAR 61.57 affect how the VFR Private Pilot shall log Pilot-In-Command time during instrument training, either before or after meeting the 6/6/6 requirement, and if so, how?" FAR 61.57 does not affect how a pilot logs PIC time during instrument training; FAR 61.51(c)(2) and (4) govern logging of instrument flight time. FAR 61.57(e) provides currency requirements for acting as PIC under instrument flight rules (IFR) or in weather conditions less than the minimums for visual flight rules (VFR). Enclosed 3 please find a prior FAA interpretation on instrument flight time and FAR 61.57(e). We hope this interpretation will further assist you. We hope this satisfactorily answers your questions. Sincerely, Donald P. Byrne Assistant Chief Counsel Regulations Division Enclosures