PIC Under Supervision

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

PIC Under Supervision

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Quick question, when doing the PIC under supervision, I have a form where I can list the flights and their times which I can then submit to Transport. Do I log this in my personal logbook under the PIC section, or still as co-pilot with a notation stating that those specific entries were used to top up the rest of my PIC requirements and are thus still counted as co-pilot when adding up my total time? I have posted the relevant TC standards below relating to this topic:

421.11 Airline Transport Licence Training (Pilot-in-command Under Supervision)
(amended 1998/12/01; previous version)

(6) When an application for an Airline Transport Pilot Licence is based in part on pilot-in-command under supervision flight time, the applicant shall:
(amended 1998/12/01; no previous version)

(a) submit a personal log or other reliable record that contains a summary of the pilot-in-command under supervision flight time and the number of takeoffs and landings; and

(b) enter a notation on the application form showing the portion of pilot-in-command flight time that was done under supervision
---------- ADS -----------
 
Spank-me
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:29 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by Spank-me »

I logged the flights under co-pilot , put brackets around the times and noted on a blank spot on the top of the page that "() indicates PIC Under-Supervision flights"...They accepted that method and never even questioned it...hope that helps
---------- ADS -----------
 
DeltaHotel
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:53 am
Location: Montreal CYUL

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by DeltaHotel »

I am in the process of applying for the ATPL as well.

I was told to log it all COPILOT. Then I will substract 200 hours from my copilot column and add 100 to my PIC column noting that this was PIC Under Supervision time.

Hope it works
---------- ADS -----------
 
Vortex_driver
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:14 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by Vortex_driver »

When I did it, I called TC and the lady had to do a quick research and came back to me saying that I HAD to log it as Co-pilot. Then, you submit your logbook with the sheet showing the hours as PIC-under-suppervision and they'll do the math.

Like someone said, you can put a note in the remarks so it'll make it easier for them...

had no problem, even if my hours were very close to the 1500 ... recount it 10 times though and make sure it works!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Thanks for the help! I suspected it went under co-pilot, but just wanted to make sure from some people who've gone through the process.
---------- ADS -----------
 
whiteguy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1059
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: YYC

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by whiteguy »

I was told to put it in the PIC column with an asterix beside it. Then put a note at the bottom of the page stating it was PICUS. I'm not sure if that'll work or not, haven't applied yet.
---------- ADS -----------
 
BibleMonkey
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:23 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by BibleMonkey »

DHC-1 Jockey wrote:Quick question, when doing the PIC ....... Do I log this in my personal logbook under the PIC section, or still as co-pilot with a notation stating that those specific entries were used to top up the rest of my PIC requirements and are thus still counted as co-pilot when adding up my total time? I have posted the relevant TC standards below relating to this topic: ...
Whoa, this sounds way too complicated. I'd advise you to quit flying and become, say, a plumber.

Doing that, soon you'll have enough money to buy a farm. Once you have the farm, buy some cows.

Then you can buy a little airplane to count your cows-tell your wife that cows need to be counted every second day.

Don't buy more than twenty cows at a time though ( voice of experience ) -unless you are really good at circling around a point, it's really tough to count more than 19, 20, cows in one crack.

Best of luck.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by trey kule »

Am I the only one who shudders when they read thrreads like this?

It seems no matter how much lower TC seems to set the bar, there are those who will do exactly what is necessary to meet the minimums.

Perhaps then, instead of making certain your 100 hrs or whatever of PIC under supervision is properly documented, you give some thought to getting some PIC without supervision, and exceed the minimums.

I dont need a crystal ball to forsee the future accidents if we continue to issue licenses and give command to bigger equipment to less and less experienced people.

Now before anyone jumps on me, as I bellieve they will, 100 PIC under supervision, on type and usual routes is, in my opinion, a great idea and one that will ultimately prove a good thing....as long as the supervising Captain has an understanding of the objectives...I have seen some supervising captains who do not seem to understand their role in the process.

But having to use that to meet the ATPL minimums...as I started out...makes me shudder.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

trey kule wrote:Am I the only one who shudders when they read thrreads like this?

It seems no matter how much lower TC seems to set the bar, there are those who will do exactly what is necessary to meet the minimums.

Perhaps then, instead of making certain your 100 hrs or whatever of PIC under supervision is properly documented, you give some thought to getting some PIC without supervision, and exceed the minimums.
Considering that I have over 2200 hours and half of that being X-Country (500+ night X-Country I might add in 703/704 ops) I am now at the point of wanting to get my A's done and only need the remainder of the night PIC X-Country under supervision. What would be more relevant time in your opinion.. bombing around in a 152 on my own or learning to do the job I currently do better from a well qualified line pilot? Think twice before posting about people who only want to do the "bare minimum" without knowing their background or history.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DeltaHotel
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:53 am
Location: Montreal CYUL

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by DeltaHotel »

Trey Kule, I agree with you that some Captains don't use the 100PIC US how it is intended, however the PIC US is a useful tool for good guys who paid their dues (gaining thousands of hours doing some real flying) to move forward in their careers.

You think a guy with 5000 hours Copilot time hasnt earned his 4th bar ? Or is a danger in the air?

I recently went through that PIC US process (as useless as it may be) after YEARS of hard work and YEARS of learning from some of the best captains out there. Had I known I would of been an instructor, do some circuits for a thousand hours in clear blue sky ...

I know pilots with 1000 hours that Id rather fly with than some 5000 dummies who collect the cadors and close calls.
I know your kind, you just cringe at the fact that some guys just had it easier than you.

We are all just people trying to make a living here. Lots of good guys trying to move forward.
So Keep shuddering your Holyness MR Captain Kule.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by trey kule »

I thought I might ruffle a few feathers but let me clear about a coupe of things

1. I agree with PIC US...I think it is excellent in general. The only thought I had on it was that sometimes the Captains who are supervising really dont do a good job on it. from my experience..nuff said. A quick questioN I ask supervising captains is what they have as objectives and standards for their PIC under supervision, and how do they plan to achieve it...you would be suprised at some of the answers.

2. I know this is unpopular, but there simply is no substitute for command experience. It is not about anyone having it easier or harder. It is about a Captain with about 200 hours total PIC. And the ususal answer I get is that as co-joe they have thousands of hours of cross country time etc.etc. in the real world...It is not command time, and no matter what anyone thinks, the Captain has certain responsibilities that only come with experience. It is only the Captain that has to make the final decision and only the captain that takes responsability for it. As to just meeting minimums. The sense I get from the original post is that the PIC US is needed to make the minimums..

Anedotal references to instructor time, time in a light single etc. really beg the whole question.
One could just as easily ask how sitting on your butt in the right seat of a navajo
teaches you anything. People learn from whatever they fly, whenever they fly...or at least they should. But the left seat person is the ultimate decision maker (students excepted).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Justjohn
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Just over the horizon ... & headed the wrong way.

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by Justjohn »

There is NO substitute for real Pic. Instructing, Jumper Dumping. 703 Air Taxi. The Least important thing about being 'Captn' is flying the Airplane. The ATPL requirements are absurdly low to start with. Finding a way to lower the bar even further sells the prospective ATPL candidate short. It is a disservice to the public as well.

But then, I'm just a Mean Old Man.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Flying is better than walking. Walking is better than running. Running is better than crawling. All of these however, are better than extraction by a Med-Evac, even if this is technically a form of flying.
User avatar
flying4dollars
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:56 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by flying4dollars »

trey kule wrote:Am I the only one who shudders when they read thrreads like this?

It seems no matter how much lower TC seems to set the bar, there are those who will do exactly what is necessary to meet the minimums.

Perhaps then, instead of making certain your 100 hrs or whatever of PIC under supervision is properly documented, you give some thought to getting some PIC without supervision, and exceed the minimums.

I dont need a crystal ball to forsee the future accidents if we continue to issue licenses and give command to bigger equipment to less and less experienced people.

Now before anyone jumps on me, as I bellieve they will, 100 PIC under supervision, on type and usual routes is, in my opinion, a great idea and one that will ultimately prove a good thing....as long as the supervising Captain has an understanding of the objectives...I have seen some supervising captains who do not seem to understand their role in the process.

But having to use that to meet the ATPL minimums...as I started out...makes me shudder.
So how does an f/o who starts his flying career at a company that only operates 1900's (like CMA for example), get his necessary PIC time for the ATPL?
trey kule wrote:As to just meeting minimums. The sense I get from the original post is that the PIC US is needed to make the minimums..
In some pilot's cases, it is!! A guy at CMA isn't entitled to earn his or her ATPL just because there isn't a machine at the company that the candidate can log PIC time on?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Justjohn
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Just over the horizon ... & headed the wrong way.

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by Justjohn »

Entitled ? Nope. Not at all. Not in any way. Sorry.

Don't get yourself on an airplane that you can never go capt'n of. It's poor carreer planning. No doubt many ppl would think that right seat on a 1900 is a real score for a first job, but it isn't . It Is better than not having a flying job however. Just understand that you will have to find a seat on a 'smaller' airplane to get that needed pic. The rules have been created to firstly protect the public. They are published. Nobody got misled.

The Commercial to ATPL progression is a form of graduated licencing. It is designed to limit the # of ppl you can hurt until your experiance grows. Hopefully nobody gets hurt .. Ever. But, ...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Flying is better than walking. Walking is better than running. Running is better than crawling. All of these however, are better than extraction by a Med-Evac, even if this is technically a form of flying.
whiteguy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1059
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: YYC

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by whiteguy »

What a load of crap! It seems to have worked for many that have gone through their careers this way!

Maybe the way of logging time should be changed. In the UK, if your the PF you log it as PIC2 the Capt is always logging it as PIC1. Thats why people can advance their careers quicker over there.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
flying4dollars
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:56 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by flying4dollars »

Justjohn wrote:Entitled ? Nope. Not at all. Not in any way. Sorry.

Don't get yourself on an airplane that you can never go capt'n of. It's poor carreer planning. No doubt many ppl would think that right seat on a 1900 is a real score for a first job, but it isn't . It Is better than not having a flying job however. Just understand that you will have to find a seat on a 'smaller' airplane to get that needed pic. The rules have been created to firstly protect the public. They are published. Nobody got misled.

The Commercial to ATPL progression is a form of graduated licencing. It is designed to limit the # of ppl you can hurt until your experiance grows. Hopefully nobody gets hurt .. Ever. But, ...
Sorry mate, gotta disagree with you here. If the PIC under supervision program is properly followed, it is a great way for an f/o to exercise command practice. I don't see how it's unacceptable. If the f/o demonstrates good, safe and efficient decision making, then I don't see how he can't be given command. If he's successful in the ride and the line indoc, then it means he's been deemed suitable to command his airplane. That is something you cannot decide, because it isn't up to you. It's up to the candidate to show he's ready, up to the ride examiner to determine a successful captain ride, and up to the company to recognize his suitability and promote him to that rank of captain. If he's successful in all of these avenues, then I don't see what the issue is.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by trey kule »

flying4dollars...I dont think to many people are disagreeing with you at all. The issue, however, is that the time under supervision is being used to meet the minimum requirements for a license upgrade. The sense I get is the majority of us feel that the ATPL minimums are already a bit lean to ensure a proper command position on a heavier machine, and that simply meeting the minimums is now being stretched a bit to include 100 hours command.....under supervision. As opposed to straight command time.

It seems, from some of the posts, that they feel their extensive FO time puts them in a better position to make command decisions then a pilot flying as PIC as an instructor , or in a 172.
Then they make the argument that the PIC US to meet some of the minimumsfor a license upgrade.

Lastly, I expect that in the future we will see some accidents attributed to poor command decisions from the inexperienced...significantly enough to have TC rethink the requirements...but as with many things the government does, foresight is not on the radar.
Incidently. I hope I am wrong about this, but the attitude of some of the posters makes me think I have it right.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
User avatar
flying4dollars
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:56 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by flying4dollars »

trey kule wrote:Lastly, I expect that in the future we will see some accidents attributed to poor command decisions from the inexperienced...significantly enough to have TC rethink the requirements...but as with many things the government does, foresight is not on the radar.
Incidently. I hope I am wrong about this, but the attitude of some of the posters makes me think I have it right.

I see your point, and this may very well be the case, but I think someone who gains his pic time on a smaller airplane like a Navajo or King Air (where the ATPL is not necessary to act as PIC) is just as susceptible to making the same poor command decisions as he would on a larger aircraft like a 1900. After having flown both machines myself, I can say with some conviction that at times, life would have been easier commanding a 1900 than a Navajo. The real difference with making a poor decision, is the potential loss of life/aircraft damage factor being higher on the 1900, but essentially, the same mistake can be made no matter what the aircraft type. I hope I'm making sense here.
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by trey kule »

I agree with you about the ease of the two aircraft, as I have flown both of them One of my concerns with the Navajo is that it is such a pussycat when everything is working as it should, but it can quickly turn into a tiger. As it usually one of the first step ups, it also takes some huge abuses from improper pilot technique. In any event that is not the real issue here and so I will not digress further.

The PIC US, was never, in my opinion intended to be a training platform for a license upgrade.
And my point is that is what some are suggesting it should be used as...and to meet just the minimums. The other thing about the whole PIC US is that many companies simply do not have any sort of plan for how that should progress and leave it up to the Captain supervising, so there is a great deal of variance in the quality of the time. Pilots also, in general, at most small operators, are not selected for potential as Captains, the thinking being that every one with a pilots license is Captain material..I am not sure that is a correct assumption.

I really only posted because fo the sense of entitlement some poster's seem to have, their belief that their "real" world experience as an FO is somehow more valuable than anyone else's PIC time etc. Those, again, in my opinion are not necessarily the attributes one wants to see in future Captain....but hey...some of them will work for peanuts and their is companies out there that will exploit that attitude.

I think the industry would be a great deal safer if the PIC requirements for the ATPL were a little more stringent, and a further restriction on the requirements for FO positions...something Contrail and similar auditors I think agree on (the FO requirements...not the ATPL)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
User avatar
flying4dollars
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1289
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:56 am

Re: PIC Under Supervision

Post by flying4dollars »

Fair enough, I see your point a little better now and I more or less agree with you. Pilots being pilots, the sense of entitlement is always going to plague us though. I guess, all other things being equal, the suitability and effectiveness of the PIC under supervision program is dependent on the company and candidate. There are some people who go through the program and attain their A's, who may or may not deserve it. Then again, there are also pilots who gain PIC on smaller machines, obtain their A's, and go on to command larger planes requiring the license upgrade, when they may not be deserving of it either.

Point taken though.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”