Mandatory Logbook Fields

[snag]

Does anyone know what the mandatory entries are that have to go into a personal logbook? And for bonus marks what the CAR's reference for that info is?

Basically what I need to find out is if I need to log all my takeoff's and landings enroute, or if I can just put the start and destination airport for that day, and a total time.

[aileron]

401.08 (2)

[Aeros]

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

(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.

Keep in mind (as per para 1) that you don't need to keep a logbook to log every flight. You only need to log the flights that you want to count towards obtaining a higher licence or rating. If you aren't planning on getting any more licences or ratings then you only need to log enough flights to prove your recency (PIC or co-pilot every five years, t/o and ldg in last six months if you want to carry passengers {or 90 days in the commercial word}, 6 & 6 in the last six months if you are in the second year of your instrument rating etc....)

[snag]

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

So if I'm submitting a logbook for the ATPL, which of the following can I use as an interpretation of the above. Say that I fly from Vancouver to Victoria and back 5 times in one day and log 1 hour for each trip. Do I...:

a) log each separate leg at 1hr each?

b) log YVR in "From and To", 5 hrs total, and in comments put "to YYJ to YVR to YYJ to YVR to YYJ..." etc.?

c) log YVR in "From and To", 5 hrs total, and write "10 day landings"?

[altiplano]

So if I'm submitting a logbook for the ATPL, which of the following can I use as an interpretation of the above. Say that I fly from Vancouver to Victoria and back 5 times in one day and log 1 hour for each trip. Do I...:

a) log each separate leg at 1hr each?

b) log YVR in "From and To", 5 hrs total, and in comments put "to YYJ to YVR to YYJ to YVR to YYJ..." etc.?

c) log YVR in "From and To", 5 hrs total, and write "10 day landings"?

I think you could do all of the above.

I used to do every leg but it becomes a pain when you do 10 legs in a day. A guy I used to work with told me he just did an entry for the day.

ie. YVR - YVR via YYJ/YVR/YYJ/YVR/YYJ or whatever the case was with total time for the day as one entry. So that's what I do now. Saves you from going through a lot of paper and stops the writing cramps when you update your shit. I haven't submitted to TC for an ATPL yet but I don't expect a problem...

I have never wrote in the t/o & landings? Seems kinda silly, It's pretty feckin obvious I took off and landed I didn't taxi down the highway... Maybe if you're a once every 6 months recreational flyer you need to? Whatever...

[Hedley]

I guess I get lazy sometimes .... when I do a lot of flights in one day on the same aircraft, I only have to make one entry in the journey log, so I just put one entry in my personal log.

For example, last summer I did 25 aerobatic flights in one day. As if I'm going to put 25 entries in my personal log ... I just put one - 9 hours (or whatever it was) and the remarks was "CYSH - 25 acro flights"

[Hornblower]

Don't worry Hedley, as long as you have enough entries to show the following:

(a) experience acquired in respect of the issuance of the flight crew permit, licence or rating; and
(b) recency;

The rest of the stuff you do is entered at your option, and really only used for bragging rights (including impressing the insurance companies and prospective employers)

[Hornblower]

Oh yah, ... also, unless you are applying for another licence or rating, you don't have to enter it until the day you die, ... and then who really would care?

[co-joe]

When it comes time to fill out that damn 8.5 X 14 application for flight crew permit license or rating form for the ATPL you will be very happy you divvied your log bookk up like this.

Single engine Day: pic, dual
Night pic, dual
Total SE

Multi Engine Day: PIC, DUAL, SIC
Night PIC, DUAL SIC
Total ME

Cross country Day: PIC, Dual, SIC
Night PIC, Dual, SIC

In addition to all the other categories.

Yes it's a royal pain in the keester, but do it now and you'll be glad when the time comes. I had that green paged Jepp one with the brown cover and gold leaf signature and of course it doesn't have those columns, and when application time came it was a nightmare to go back and split all the time up into those columns.

[ei ei owe]

I've made entries seperated like co-joe but for the destination/point of departure, I just enter the log sheet number. Has anyone been burned by doing this?

[TC Guy]

I've made entries seperated like co-joe but for the destination/point of departure, I just enter the log sheet number. Has anyone been burned by doing this?

You will get "burned" unless you can provide the log sheets, which I am guessing is impractical.

What many people have done, especially when doing sched flights, is put "route A" in the routing. Then, somewhere in the logbook or supporting documentation, they provide an explination of what "route A" actually is.

TC will have no issues with that.

Even "route A x 5" is just fine.

-Guy

[gorgesailor]

I agree with TC Guy - when I had mine processed, the inspector/licencing officer didn't need to see actualy routing, just a flight number. You could include a post-it or document stating what routes the flight numbers refer to, but it's not actually required as TC can look them up in their database.

GS

[TC Guy]

I agree with TC Guy - when I had mine processed, the inspector/licencing officer didn't need to see actualy routing, just a flight number. You could include a post-it or document stating what routes the flight numbers refer to, but it's not actually required as TC can look them up in their database.

We do not have any such database (that I am aware of, anyways). Flight numbers are fine, provided you indicate somewhere what they mean.

Please remember-- I am not guessing how the licensing is done. I do it.

-Guy

[dangerous]

TC Guy,

When you apply for your ATPL, who looks at your logbook? Is it an actual flight training inspector, or is it the clerk working at the front desk at a TC office? What are some common reasons an application gets rejected?

[TC Guy]

TC Guy,

When you apply for your ATPL, who looks at your logbook? Is it an actual flight training inspector, or is it the clerk working at the front desk at a TC office? What are some common reasons an application gets rejected?

Good question.

Historically, the ATPL is the most complex of all of the licenses to process, given the wide variety of possible experience.

All licenses are processed by Licensing Officers or Inspectors, not the "clerk at the front desk". ATPL's are usually done by Inspectors or very senior Licencing Officers.

The main reasons why an application might be rejected:

1) Requirements not being met (time, exams, etc.)
2) Unable to prove SIC time (single pilot aircraft, no proof of PPC or PCC)
3) Poor logbook practices (cross country time not properly indicated is common)

...there are many other reasons, such as fraud, foreign experience issues, etc. that are less common. There is a story about an applicant that came in for ATPL processing and left with a PPL because of fraudulent logbook entries.

-Guy

[dangerous]

3) Poor logbook practices (cross country time not properly indicated is common)

Thanks for the response. How do you properly indicate cross country time. I don't think TC defines cross country time, so what's your take on it? How do you and other inspectors you know of want to see cross country time logged? Any other poor logbook practices we should avoid?

[TC Guy]

3) Poor logbook practices (cross country time not properly indicated is common)

Thanks for the response. How do you properly indicate cross country time. I don't think TC defines cross country time, so what's your take on it? How do you and other inspectors you know of want to see cross country time logged? Any other poor logbook practices we should avoid?

As quoted above in CARS 401.08(2)(e):

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

So, you must indicate your point of departure and arrival. Also, in the case of aeroplanes:

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

As far as defining what cross-country is... well, it is more of a concept than a definition. I am sorry I cannot be more specific, because the people making the policies have decided not to give us any formal guidance.

We look at cross-country as what a reasonable person would consider as acceptable.

If you try to pass off 100 hours of back-forth to an airport that is 15nm away and wish to use that towards your ATPL requirements, we are going to have issues with that.

As far as logbooks are concerned... try to be as neat as possible, be sure your totals are correct.

A good practice: when you bring your application into the TC office, see if there is a licensing person that can look at it quickly to make sure you haven't missed anything critical. If your application is refused, you will not get beck the application fee of $100.

Hope that helps.

-Guy

[Spokes]

As far as defining what cross-country is... well, it is more of a concept than a definition. I am sorry I cannot be more specific, because the people making the policies have decided not to give us any formal guidance.

We look at cross-country as what a reasonable person would consider as acceptable.

If you try to pass off 100 hours of back-forth to an airport that is 15nm away and wish to use that towards your ATPL requirements, we are going to have issues with that.

Hope that helps.

-Guy

This sounds a bit screwy to me. Just how do we determine what a TC examiner might consider to be reasonable for xc?

clearly from your post 15nm between departure and destination does not count. What about 20? 25? what if I took off from one airport, flew through the cz of another and landed at a third 21nm away? I know of some people who would think this is reasonable, some not? Don't yet know the TC position on this. If this is not reasonable to TC, what If this rout was flown IFR?

Not trying to be difficult, just unhappy that licencing requirments, (not to mention the fate of your hundred bucks) are arbitraily left to the examiner, and his mood of the day or personal take on the matter.

[Lommer]

The way I read that, he wasn't saying that 15 nm didn't count, he was saying that if traversing that same 15 nm a bajillion times was your only XC then he'd have a problem issuing an ATPL based on that.

[TC Guy]

The way I read that, he wasn't saying that 15 nm didn't count, he was saying that if traversing that same 15 nm a bajillion times was your only XC then he'd have a problem issuing an ATPL based on that.

Exactly correct. That was what I was trying to say.

This has not been an issue with ATPL licensing (in my experience).

Again, would a reasonable person consider that experience valid? Despite what some have said here, TC Licensing is not trying to return ATPL (or any) applications. There is no "quota".

Most issues come with people claiming cross-country flight time, but not providing a point of departure, destination, or any enroute stops. If you claim cross-country experience, you must show the routing. See the logbook regulations quoted above for details.

I hope this makes it more clear.

-Guy

[ei ei owe]

For Applicants working CMA, Gorgian, Perimeter etc, one would still have to show flight numbers/routing for the all days? I've just put down the sheet number, how many lanidngs and the IFR time. From what I've read above I should now go back and find out the routing because the actual flight numbers don't usually indicate what the routing of the day was. The scheduled routing changes all the time given specific loads and often changes while on route. Is it worth going to my local TC office, showing them the book and asking if it's ok or that I could change from that point on?

[TC Guy]

For Applicants working CMA, Gorgian, Perimeter etc, one would still have to show flight numbers/routing for the all days? I've just put down the sheet number, how many lanidngs and the IFR time. From what I've read above I should now go back and find out the routing because the actual flight numbers don't usually indicate what the routing of the day was. The scheduled routing changes all the time given specific loads and often changes while on route. Is it worth going to my local TC office, showing them the book and asking if it's ok or that I could change from that point on?

I would certainly go and see your local TC office if you have any concerns. They can give you specifics on your case, and you can get some "face-to-face" advice-- not just from some guy on the internet.

At very least, start logging routings now... that way you can show that you are conforming to the logbook regulations.

-Guy

[gorgesailor]

Again, I agree with TCGuy. Just had mine processed not too long ago. I went into an office and went over what they wanted to the tee.

As far as XC time goes, I remember reading somewhere in my studies that it was anything further than 25nm (although it isn't stated in the CARs). Now, that's not really that far, so for most of those flying for companies that do sked, charter, or medevac flights, it's pretty much just transferring your actual flight time into the XC column. Obviously then, training flights for IFR renewals and those done at a flight school during your flight training days wouldn't really cover 25nm.

The XC time shouldn't really be a factor for many applying for their ATPL, as you only need 25 hours night PIC XC, and 100 hours PIC XC. If you aren't able to go back into the memory banks and figure out which exact flights sufficed from way back, simply forget about them. Just don't include them. Like I said, if you can manage to find the 25/100 somewhere logged in your book, that's all TC needs to worry about (obviously it wouldn't be the greatest idea to simply search out the minimum numbers though!)

That's what I did though, but again I wasn't handing anything in right on the bare minimums of any of the requirements within the ATPL.

As far as the routings go, I just wrote the actual routings into the very first entries of the given flight numbers. Afterwards, I just simply wrote in the flight numbers. So, if your routings changed from what normally would be filed under a specific flight number, then yes, it would be safer to include the specifics of those anomolies.

Help yourself out though by either sitting down with a TC licencing officer, or spending a good chunk of time on the phone with one, and you'll save yourself the possible grief of having erroneous paperwork sent back.

PHEW, that was long. Please correct me if I'm wrong TC Guy...

Cheers (and good luck!),

GS

[Spokes]

The way I read that, he wasn't saying that 15 nm didn't count, he was saying that if traversing that same 15 nm a bajillion times was your only XC then he'd have a problem issuing an ATPL based on that.

So, if it is cross country once, then why is it not cross country several times?

This is the arbitrary reasoning that I was referring to. So, now we have it narrowed down to more one 15nm cross country is okay, a bajillion is not. where do these two numbers meet?

Again, I am not being difficult here. I quite often fly the 21 nm route I mentioned before. From start, runup, travel to an overhead join, then the reverse to return it takes from about .8 to 1.0. If you do alot of these they add up. How many until they do not count?

[Spokes]

Again, I agree with TCGuy. Just had mine processed not too long ago. I went into an office and went over what they wanted to the tee.

As far as XC time goes, I remember reading somewhere in my studies that it was anything further than 25nm (although it isn't stated in the CARs). Now, that's not really that far, so for most of those flying for companies that do sked, charter, or medevac flights, it's pretty much just transferring your actual flight time into the XC column. Obviously then, training flights for IFR renewals and those done at a flight school during your flight training days wouldn't really cover 25nm.

The XC time shouldn't really be a factor for many applying for their ATPL, as you only need 25 hours night PIC XC, and 100 hours PIC XC. If you aren't able to go back into the memory banks and figure out which exact flights sufficed from way back, simply forget about them. Just don't include them. Like I said, if you can manage to find the 25/100 somewhere logged in your book, that's all TC needs to worry about (obviously it wouldn't be the greatest idea to simply search out the minimum numbers though!)

That's what I did though, but again I wasn't handing anything in right on the bare minimums of any of the requirements within the ATPL.

As far as the routings go, I just wrote the actual routings into the very first entries of the given flight numbers. Afterwards, I just simply wrote in the flight numbers. So, if your routings changed from what normally would be filed under a specific flight number, then yes, it would be safer to include the specifics of those anomolies.


GS

That is all good. I do similar things. We are all reasonable people here. My beef is that TC is creating a licencing requirement and not defining it.

For many float pilots, the night cross country time may very well be an issue. Most of this flying is done in daylight.

BTW 25nm is an American thing. If TC would come up with a similar number that would be great. 25, 20, 15, 50, whatever. They can do this for x-c on PPL, CPL, and IFR, why not pick a number for ATP. With all respect to TC Guy, this is not defendable from where I look.