Total Time

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:04 pm

widow a personal log book is only a legal document when you present it to the regulator for proof of time for a license, type rating, endorsement or proof of recency. Or to an insurance company for insurance coverage.

Those recorded times are a statement that you have in fact flown what you logged.

Any other time you log in your personal log is not a legal requirement but " your " statement as to what you flew so if you exagerate the time by padding or claim time you never flew and do not use it as proof of time for TCCA requirements or proof of time for isurance coverage your personal log is just another piece of fiction you can treasure.

Hint, the insurance companys are far more to worry about than TC.

Hope that helps.

A lot of older pilots just quit keeping a personal log because they get so far behind they just finally decide not to bother.

One of my wifes kept mine and I just never bothered to keep one since then.

Cat.

g5 · Post by g5 » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:06 pm

i think parker penning is like masturbation, any guy who says they haven't done it is lying. i also think that you should get a crayon and write a few type ratings on your license to make yourself that much more employable.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:14 pm

" I think parker penning is like masturbation, any guy who says they haven't done it is lying. i also think that you should get a crayon and write a few type ratings on your license to make yourself that much more employable. "

Can you be a little more specific with that broad statement?

Are you suggesting that all of us have logged time in our log books that are false and were not flown/

Or are you saying all of us have masterbated?

Cat

Widow · Post by **Widow** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:17 pm

g5 wrote:i think parker penning is like masturbation, any guy who says they haven't done it is lying.

Boy that's encouraging. But I don't believe it. You don't have to be a non-masturbator to be ethical.

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:42 pm

G5

Speak for yourslef G5 every hour in my logbook is one I have flown. I can't imagine "faking" an entry in my logbook and I know plenty of pliots who have never and would never do that. Your log book is a legal document, and I would not wanna be the guy who got nailed later on in there career for that one.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:49 pm

electraguy...I bet people like G5 make you wonder about your colleauges you have to fly with huh?

yycguy · Post by **yycguy** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:50 pm

On the flip side I know of a guy who actually flew 1000 hours on a float plane that he never had certified in his logbook. Since then he has been unable to find his old employer and the plane plus it's books were sold to a company in South America.

He has been turned down for two separate jobs because his logbook is not certified.

Lommer · Post by **Lommer** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:59 pm

YYC, then why not find someone to certify it - anyone can certify anyone elses log book if I understand the regs correctly.

G5, can you share some of your fishing tricks, it seems like you're getting even the big ones to bite

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:20 pm

" G5, can you share some of your fishing tricks, it seems like you're getting even the big ones to bite. "

Lommer, widow is asking serious questions to try and get some answers as to why her husband died in an airplane accident.

Fishing for responses to stupid posts should be kept in some less serious descussion.

Cat

. ._ · Post by **. ._** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:25 pm

This is a good thread. Especially for the folks starting in the biz.

I applied for a dock job and had a minimal resume that I whipped up the night before.

It was like this:

ISTP
(address and phone number)

250TT
15 float

The last 3 places of employment.

3 references.

That's it. The owner gave me beer, sent me on my way and said more or less, "Come back when you have 50 float and I'll look at your resume."

A really nice guy.

And I might just go back there.

Bottom line is that I lowballed my times on the resume to nice round numbers. Who gives a farthing whether I had 16.1 on floats, right?

I can stand by my logbook. Funny comments and all.

This is where we should reflect on the old addage brought back to us by the Duke anecdotally when he posted on 2003-05-22.

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... r+man+duke

Good stuff.

-istp

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:36 pm

Cat,

Ya i have heard "rumors" of people doing it in the past, saying that the industry owed them those hours, i don't believe in it, for any reason, if you gotta pad your log book maybe you better take a look at what your doing in the industry. I know why Widow is asking questions, but what happend to her has nothing to do with this thread. Her situation has many angles, but I don;t think the pilots time was in question. From what i read that fella got the plane down, but nobody went too look for them, thats the real crime in her situation. I understand where she is coming from, but looking for devil in everything we do in aviation is startin to bother me a bit. I agree there are some un-ethical operators out there, but not everyone is flying on the unsafe side of the fence. I also agree that some changes need to be made within TC, but hacking constantly on the industry is not going to gain support from aviation people. Just a thought.

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:42 pm

electraguy wrote:Cat,

Y ai have heard "rumors" of people doing it in the past, saying that the idustry owed them those hours, i don't believe in it, for any reason, if you gotta pad your log book maybe you better take a look at what your doing in the industry. I know why Widow is asking questions, but what happend to her has nothing to do with this thread. Her situation has many angles, but I don;t think the pilots time was in question. From what i read that fella got the plane down, but nobody went too look for them, thats the real crime in her situation. I understand where she is coming from, but looking for devil in everything we do in aviation is startin to bother me a bit. I agree there are some un-ethical operators out there, but not everyone is flying on the unsafe side of the fence. I also agree that some changes need to be made within TC, but hacking constantly on the industry is not going to gain support from aviation people. Just a thought.

I can see some truth to this post.

Widow · Post by **Widow** » Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:54 pm

I certainly apologize for giving the impression of "hacking constantly on the industry". You are absolutely right, the accident pilot in our case had plenty of hours and type. However, having taken it upon myself to try to better understand the charter industry and change it for the better, it falls to necessity that things like pilot training and log books - pilot and maintenance log books - should be of importance.

I can't, and won't, go around criticizing Transport Canada without being aware of some of the unethical practices of the pilots, operators, ame, etc. If I expect to defend my position to the officials, I need to have as much knowledge as possible. That includes the knowledge gleaned from this kind of thread.

Edited to add: Perhaps there is something lacking in training such that anyone in the industry would think it is ok to falisify documents. Just a thought.

co-joe · Post by **co-joe** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 12:14 am

bob sacamano wrote:between 250 and 500, there is little of a difference. Once you're being checked out on the airplane, a good pilot will know the difference and the level that you're at.

There is little of a difference? What does that mean?

Bob I hope I misunderstand you. To me the is a Freeking HUGE difference between the skills of a pilot with 250 hours and one with 500 hours.

At 250 total time you have a license to learn.

No Brakes · Post by **No Brakes** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:20 am

co-joe wrote:At 250 total time you have a license to learn.

I know that's what I still have. When did you stop learning?

G5, not everyone shares your work ethics/fishing abilities. I just hope that the newcomers to the industry won't see your remark as something that is common practice or even remotely acceptable. It's just not.

Oh and by the way, hello all, I've been a lurker on this site for a while (well, a couple years anyway) and I just decided to not be transparent anymore.

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:53 am

No i don;t think its a lack of training, I think its a lack of ethics on those pilots who do faulsify there log books, they know its wrong yet choose to do it anyways. You can learn alot about aviation from reading this site, but the only way is too get out there and experience it first hand. I know that you are trying to make changes and I applaud you for that effort, but aloy of the knowledge you seek you would have to go out and experience first hand. Its easy to sit on the sidelines and critisize the operators, pilots, AME's etc but until you have seen the industry from our side you can't really know what its all about. I am sure that any of us in the industry would be happy to give you info on what we do, but with all the negativty floating around on this site I would not take all you read here as the gospel. I think the aviators in Canada could use a pat on the back now and then, pilots, AME's, the sweat and blood of this industry who work so hard to keep them in the sky. My hats off to all of us who keep Canada in the air! I have done some research on the FAA and some of the other countrys regulatory bodies for aviation, people might not like TC bit consider the alternatives!! Just some more thoughts!

And if you stop learning in this industry its because your retired or dead!
We all rememebr, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots but there are no old, bold pilots

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:34 am

" My hats off to all of us who keep Canada in the air! I have done some research on the FAA and some of the other countrys regulatory bodies for aviation, people might not like TC bit consider the alternatives!! Just some more thoughts! "

I think we should have a more clear examination of the above statement.

I have spent decades working in other countries and hold authorizations to fly under CASA / SACAA / FAA / JAR-JAA and would be interested in examining how your research compares to what I observed.

Or have you been reading Merlin Preuss to much?

RB211 · Post by **RB211** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:54 am

Widow wrote:... Perhaps there is something lacking in training such that anyone in the industry would think it is ok to falisify documents. Just a thought.

Sadly, for those lacking integrity no amount of 'training' will stop them from flasifying their logbook.

For me the primary reason I have never, nor will ever, falsify my logbook: When I look in the mirror I know I have been honest with myself.

It seems there is a general lack of integrty/ethics in society today which is illustrated by G5's comments.

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:19 am

Cat,

Each body has its ups and downs. When i speak of the FAA its more on the maint side than the flying side, there regs are less stringent than TC's is many ways, but they do have some better parts too. I am talking about some of the systems elsewhere in the world. Ever had any dealings with the transport mnistry from India for instance?? I have heard plenty of storys from folks from that system talking about bribes and alot of other un ethical dealings that keep there people flying, some pretty scary stuff.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:55 am

No I have never had any dealings with India.

However I have spent enough money on bribes in other countries that I can't even remember them all.

Do you suggest that the aviation community use these countries as a benchmark for intregrity at TCCA?

In that case lets get it going right now because I'd far rather bribe a dishonest TC inspector and continue to work safely following the rules that ensure safety than deal with thugs that are dishonest but get paid enough they don't have to take bribes just to survive like a lot of other countries where we work.....as mechanics and pilots.

So my vote goes to bribes rather than power trippers protected by a system that is far worse in my opinion than officials taking bribes because their pay is so low.

Just my take on this having worked in both cultures.

Cat

Total Time

nope

hey cat

Re: hey cat

widow

system