"Taxi only" flight

[photofly]

A pilot intends to depart on a cross country flight.

He or she taxis to the runup area where they discover a badly fouled plug that they can't clear.
They taxi back to the ramp and shut down.

The Hobbes meter indicates 0.2 hours elapsed between their taxi out and their return.

Should they log 0.2 PIC?

[shitdisturber]

Technically yes because they taxiied out with the intention of flight; but why would you?

[PilotDAR]

From the CARs:

"flight time" - means the time from the moment an aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking off until the moment it comes to rest at the end of the flight;

Therefore to log PIC for a flight, you would have had to have been a "pilot" for a "flight". If there was no flight, how could there have been a pilot? No PIC, who could log the time?

I suggest that if you want to retain a record of the intention to fly that flight, you make the log entry with a zero PIC time. No one could argue that!

[Colonel Sanders]

I personally wouldn't log anything. However,
if you choose to do so, it would be valid IMHO.

Why? Because if anything went wrong, TC
could charge you and either fine you or suspend
your pilot's licence.

As a very rough rule of thumb, if you're doing
anything that TC could hang you for, log it.

An old flight instructor once said, "Log any time
when you could kill someone". Good enough for
me.

PS Lean the mixture for max RPM on the ground
at all times - immediately after start, and after
landing. Admittedly it's more of a problem in
the summer, but still, cleaning spark plugs sucks.
And, if you must wait on the ground for whatever
reason, with the engine running, do it at 1200 RPM.

[iflyforpie]

I logged my first half hour of floats without taking off. Of course, that was the toughest half hour of 'flying' I'd done up to that point.... sailing and docking and learning to start and stop the engine without a checklist.

I suppose that it depends on whether you want to log the time or not. If you log it, that means it is in the journey log and that means you will get billed for it, because you have also burned up 0.2 engine reserve and maintenance. Personally, I wouldn't log it... grab the time as free practical experience... and tell the flight school not to bill it out or you will rip them a new one.... as they are only technically out a little fuel (at far from cruise consumption rates).

[CFR]

I logged my first half hour of floats without taking off. Of course, that was the toughest half hour of 'flying' I'd done up to that point.... sailing and docking and learning to start and stop the engine without a checklist.

I suppose that it depends on whether you want to log the time or not. If you log it, that means it is in the journey log and that means you will get billed for it, because you have also burned up 0.2 engine reserve and maintenance. Personally, I wouldn't log it... grab the time as free practical experience... and tell the flight school not to bill it out or you will rip them a new one.... as they are only technically out a little fuel (at far from cruise consumption rates).

Journey log records air time. He never took off so no entry in the log I would think! Most FTU's will not charge for a maintenance failure and the one I used didn't charge for .2 warmup time in the winter when it was extremely cold.

edited - Shouldn't have used "most" as I have only rented at 3 places. I should have said "All the ones I have rented at". But I would be royally pissed if I taxied out and found a failure during runup that precluded the flight and they tried to charge me for it.

[photofly]

As an aside, charging practices vary, I guess, but my local FTU charges per Hobbes increment with the Hobbes wired directly to the master. The clock starts ticking as soon as the master goes on. No allowances. One time I incurred the first $23 in costs just for lowering the flaps before a preflight inspection. (I guess that's another reason not to lower the flaps then )

I don't know what their policy was for maintenance failures because the maintenance was so good I never had one.

Which is all a bit off-topic.

[thatlowtimer]

I suggest that if you want to retain a record of the intention to fly that flight, you make the log entry with a zero PIC time. No one could argue that!

That has got to be the worst advice I've seen, if he logs it but not as PIC then what was he? Better yet, who was the PIC doing the taxiing? I would love to quote the CARS about logging "copilot time" without a type rating and all that, but then I got to thinking and realized that there would have to be a captain on board for a copilot to even exist.

"I swear sir, the airplane taxied itself into the hangar, I'm just the (copilot, dual, second officer?) today."

[PilotDAR]

if he logs it but not as PIC then what was he?

Perhaps I was not clear when I suggested that the OP log it as PIC time, with zero time against the entry. The event was recorded (which seems to be the OP's preference), but it is evident that no flight took place. I'm not suggesting that a copilot was present.

I do this in my personal log for certain aircraft types (particularly turbine or helicopter) where I would like to retain a record of recency in at least starts and aircraft systems familiarity. I do ground testing of aircraft which are not yet flight ready, and it's a record that I did. Yeah, it's only a fraction of the "flying" familiarity, but should someone inquire, it's evidence that you did something in the plane.

I'll do a maintenance entry under my pilot's license in a journey log, when I ground ran a plane for maintenance purposes, and there will be no accumulated flight time (though could be an engine run cycle). As long as a log book entry reflects the truth of what happened during a compliant activity, TC is not going to object to what is recorded.

[B-rad]

One time I incurred the first $23 in costs just for lowering the flaps before a preflight inspection.

I'd log that shit.

[RVR12]

I had a friend that was going out on a multi flight test many moons ago... they did the run-up and they called it off for mechanical reasons. The DFTE told him to log it as they were intending to fly. And as we all know, its harder to say no in this racquet we call aviation. So learning experience? yes. Log it? why not if you really care about .2 more in your logbook.

Me personally, when I had less then 1000 hours, I was on that like flies on... well.. you know....
Now that I have thousands, I really don't care, I'm sure I have lost over a hundred hours from .1's that were rounded off on flight times.

[CpnCrunch]

As an aside, charging practices vary, I guess, but my local FTU charges per Hobbes increment with the Hobbes wired directly to the master. The clock starts ticking as soon as the master goes on. No allowances. One time I incurred the first $23 in costs just for lowering the flaps before a preflight inspection. (I guess that's another reason not to lower the flaps then )

I don't know what their policy was for maintenance failures because the maintenance was so good I never had one.

Which is all a bit off-topic.

I've never heard of that particular scam before, but I guess I don't usually check how the Hobbs is wired up when I rent a plane. What you can do to get your own back on them is turn the battery master off as soon as you start the engine, then your entire 4hr flight will be billed at $23

Right now I pay by Tach time which seems a more sensible way of billing, because it doesn't encourage the renter to thrash the engine and it more accurately corresponds to engine wear and tear. The problem with FTUs charging by tach time is that they would have to increase their hourly rates, and that would scare off customers.

[PilotDAR]

When I did my helicopter training, the Sw300 was wired Hobbs on the Master. I was billed by the Hobbs, and I logged by the Hobbs. My qualifying time based on Hobbs, and everyone seemed happy about that. It just meant some discipline in the cockpit, to be sure your were ready to go before you turned on the master.

I never taxiied it without flying it though....

[iflyforpie]

I haven't flown a plane with a working Hobbs meter in years.... and the tach times look suspiciously high compared to the airframe times....

I did leave the master on once to get my last 0.1 of night..... the tailwinds went both directions that night....

[DanWEC]

The engine was running. The pilot was in control of it, and had previously learned how to taxi the plane and use the radio. The entry will be made in the FTU's ledger, under the airplanes TT and engine TSMOH.
As a minnow trapper float pilot you could log 8 hours PIC in a day, but only 3 of that might be flight time....the rest spent sitting on the float picking up traps.
So short answer, sure, log it if you really want the .2.

Now..... The AME doing the exact same run up test can't log it, but with a pilot license you can. Funny.

[200hr Wonder]

DanWEC you are missing two key points, 1 is starting the AC with the intent to go flying, a ground run you have no intent to the airplane into the air therefore no flight no PIC time. Second AMEs are not pilots so there is nothing for them to log.

So lets say your sitting around your local club and you AME up to his you know what in work looks at a snag about a rough running engine and says you Dan you mind running this and see what the heck this snag is all about? Get the engine good and warm for me and bring it back. So you being a nice guy out and run her up and report back to your friendly AME. You can not log that time as you never intended to go flying. The same as an AME who works for the local flying club and is a PPL holder. There was never any attempt to to fly.

Also remember that TT and TSMOH are all based on Air Time, not flight. So a taxi out, run up and return to the flight time does not cost the Airframe or Engine any time with respect to overhaul or inspections. No logbook entry is required. How often do you see a logbook entry with regards to time for an engine run by maintenance. It just says "Blah blah cylinder this and that. Ground Run and Leak Test Complete". Not Ground Run 0.2.

[cncpc]

You can't log a flight that doesn't have air time in the aircraft log book.

[Masters Off]

I logged a 0.3 or 0.4 once, when we were intending for a flight, came up to having a system fail before take-off and ended up going to hanger the aircraft. At the low hours I was at, at the time, it was a valuable lesson to show a no go decision. When it came up to my CPL being signed off years later, there were no questions asked.

[jump154]

You can't log a flight that doesn't have air time in the aircraft log book.

You can log pulling on your underwear in the morning if you want

Personal Logs

401.08 (1) Every applicant for, and every holder of, a flight crew permit, licence or rating shall maintain a personal log in accordance with subsection (2) and with the personnel licensing standards for the documentation of

(a) experience acquired in respect of the issuance of the flight crew permit, licence or rating; and
(amended 2001/03/01; previous version)

(b) recency.

(2) A personal log that is maintained for the purposes referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) shall contain the holder's name and the following information in respect of each flight:

(a) the date of the flight;

(b) the type of aircraft and its registration mark;

(c) the flight crew position in which the holder acted;

(d) the flight conditions with respect to day, night, VFR and IFR;

(e) in the case of a flight in a aeroplane or helicopter, the place of departure and the place of arrival;

(f) in the case of a flight in an aeroplane, all of the intermediate take-offs and landings;

(g) the flight time;

(h) in the case of a flight in a glider, the method of launch used for the flight; and

(i) in the case of a flight in a balloon, the method of inflation used for the flight.

(3) No person shall make an entry in a personal log unless the person

(a) is the holder of the log; or

(b) has been authorized to make the entry by the holder of the log.

specifies minimum information, does not say anywhere "and nothing else".

Now, that does not mean that underwear pulling time will be counted towards a higher rating or recency, but if you want to log it go ahead, it's your book after all.

[GUMPS]

The engine was running. The pilot was in control of it, and had previously learned how to taxi the plane and use the radio. The entry will be made in the FTU's ledger, under the airplanes TT and engine TSMOH.
As a minnow trapper float pilot you could log 8 hours PIC in a day, but only 3 of that might be flight time....the rest spent sitting on the float picking up traps.
So short answer, sure, log it if you really want the .2.

Now..... The AME doing the exact same run up test can't log it, but with a pilot license you can. Funny.

Please elaborate on this? Other than the pilot who's pen and papering his PIC time how is this beneficial to anyone else? That's another 5 hours a day flight-duty time, thats another 5 hours burned before next inspection. Or is this logged in your logbook but not the journey logs? (This could come back to haunt someone)
It's early an I might be missing something here but utilizing the extra .2 is one thing but adding an extra 5 hours PIC a day?