A selection of John Yodice's
Pilot-Counsel Columns
Select a title below or scroll down to view all
pilot in command unless he actually was. He did originally claim some time as second in command because the company listed him as second in command on the company manifests for the flights. In two entries, amounting to less than 8 hours, he logged this second-in-command time with explanatory notes such as “charter crew concept.” But then he was told by the POI that the flight could not be logged as second in command because he was technically not a required flight crewmember on the Part 135 flights and the company was not approved to train second in command. So, he crossed out the two second-in-command entries but still listed the total time. After that, while he did not log the time as second in command, in the remarks section he recorded that he was “acting” second in command. He felt that since he was an observer, performing functions, and being paid by the company, it was proper. He saw nothing in the regulations that prevented it. The company knew how he was logging the time.
Here is how his logged flight time was called into question. He was ready to upgrade to captain on the Baron. He was scheduled with the company’s FAA Principal Operations Inspector to take a check ride in the Baron for the addition of multiengine privileges under Part 135. The company, as a favor to him, asked the FAA inspector to give him the practical test for an airline transport pilot certificate at the same time using the company Baron. He presented himself to the FAA inspector with his application and logbook to take the certification test. On his application (FAA Form 8710-1, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application), he claimed 1926 hours of total pilot time, 1846 hours of pilot-in-command time, and 598 hours of cross country pilot-in-command time. These times came right out of his logbook, and included the time he flew for the company. The inspector, in reviewing the logbooks to confirm the flight time, noticed that some of the entries showed time in multiengine aircraft, some in fairly sophisticated multiengine aircraft (the King Air), and some indicated that the time was flown under Part 135 or annotated with the word “charter.” The inspector knew that the pilot had not yet been qualified to fly multiengine under Part 135. The inspector questioned the entries. After some discussion with the inspector, including a review of Part 61, the pilot became convinced that he had been mistaken in how he recorded some of the time. So, he made changes to the entries in his logbook to comport with what the inspector told him he could log under Part 61. Even though none of the disputed time was necessary for the ATP or Part 135 multiengine check, that didn’t solve his problem. The check ride was suspended. The FAA ultimately charged him with a violation of FAR 61.59. The FAA, on an emergency basis (an immediate grounding), revoked all of his FAA certificates, including his commercial pilot and flight instructor certificates. The FAA charges focused on ten entries in his logbook, amounting to some 23 hours of pilot time, all paid time, flying for the company. Was the pilot padding his time, or more importantly, was he guilty of fraud and intentional falsification in violation of FAR 61.59? The FAA believed so, and so did the NTSB. The pilot appealed the case to the NTSB. The NTSB sustained the FAA charges as well as the revocation of all of his certificates. Whether we agree or disagree with the outcome of this case, it is a dramatic illustration of what can happen to a pilot who, innocently or otherwise, pads his or her flight time. Pilots need to know about it. Let’s take a look at the regulation in question. FAR 61.59(a) provides that: “No person may make or cause to be made: (1)Any fraudulent or intentionally false statement on any application for a certificate, rating, authorization, or duplicate thereof, issued under this part [Part 61, which deals with the certification of pilots, flight instructors, and ground instructors]; (2)Any fraudulent or intentionally false entry in any logbook, record, or report that is required to be kept, made, or used to show compliance with any requirement for the issuance or exercise of the privileges of any certificate, rating, or authorization under this part [the same Part 61].” Recognizing how strict the FAA and NTSB can be, it is also a good idea to review FAR 61.51 which covers pilot logbooks, and tells in detail what needs to be logged, and how. FAR 61.51 always generates a lot of questions from pilots. It is too long to deal with in this column. We will address it in future columns. Copyright © Yodice Associates 2000. All rights reserved. John Yodice is the Senior Partner of the Law Offices of Yodice Associates, a law firm experienced in aviation legal matters involving DOT, FAA and TSA certification and compliance, corporate governance, aircraft transactions and more. www.yodice.com
2 Comments
Barton Matthew Tiernan
4/25/2021 09:11:22 am
Kathleen:
Reply
3/10/2022 03:26:00 am
Pilots are required to log a certain amount of flight time in order to keep their license current. But, what if they don't fly as often as they're supposed to? Is there a way to make up for the missed time? In most cases, the answer is yes.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2022
Categories |