The Taxi Time Poll
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
The Taxi Time Poll
I know a lot of people are sitting silently watching this taxi time thing.
It would be interesting to see what people think Transport's interpretation is going to be.
Bearing in mind, they may not make it official.
It would be interesting to see what people think Transport's interpretation is going to be.
Bearing in mind, they may not make it official.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
It's not a very good poll; options 1 and 2 are the same.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:38 pm
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
It's not a good poll because it's a stupid question. 0.2 hours doesn't mean anything to anyone. You can log how many hours you spent staring at a tire for all I care. Transport wont care either as long as you're not trying to use that time towards a higher licence.
This kind of inane minutia isn't worth anyone's time, effort or attention. Don't bug transport with stupid questions when there are plenty of real questions that need answering. Questions about things that cause aircraft to smash into things, with exhausted pilots at the controls, would be a good, for example. Why there are companies with an ongoing history of burying pilots and passengers that still have an operating certificate would be another one.
Just because you're bored doesn't mean a civil servant needs to entertain you.
This kind of inane minutia isn't worth anyone's time, effort or attention. Don't bug transport with stupid questions when there are plenty of real questions that need answering. Questions about things that cause aircraft to smash into things, with exhausted pilots at the controls, would be a good, for example. Why there are companies with an ongoing history of burying pilots and passengers that still have an operating certificate would be another one.
Just because you're bored doesn't mean a civil servant needs to entertain you.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Well then, why don't you ask about the things you've decided are important.tired of the ground wrote:It's not a good poll because it's a stupid question. 0.2 hours doesn't mean anything to anyone. You can log how many hours you spent staring at a tire for all I care. Transport wont care either as long as you're not trying to use that time towards a higher licence.
This kind of inane minutia isn't worth anyone's time, effort or attention. Don't bug transport with stupid questions when there are plenty of real questions that need answering. Questions about things that cause aircraft to smash into things, with exhausted pilots at the controls, would be a good, for example. Why there are companies with an ongoing history of burying pilots and passengers that still have an operating certificate would be another one.
Just because you're bored doesn't mean a civil servant needs to entertain you.
I'm not bored. If you tired, get some sleep.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
I suppose that's true.photofly wrote:It's not a very good poll; options 1 and 2 are the same.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
I thought that was intentional, so that with the addition of just one more ambiguous sounding answer option the poll could be adapted as a question on a TC exam.cncpc wrote:I suppose that's true.photofly wrote:It's not a very good poll; options 1 and 2 are the same.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Maybe then you should look at the 3 pages already posted on the subject.tired of the ground wrote:It's not a good poll because it's a stupid question. 0.2 hours doesn't mean anything to anyone. You can log how many hours you spent staring at a tire for all I care. Transport wont care either as long as you're not trying to use that time towards a higher licence.
This kind of inane minutia isn't worth anyone's time, effort or attention. Don't bug transport with stupid questions when there are plenty of real questions that need answering. Questions about things that cause aircraft to smash into things, with exhausted pilots at the controls, would be a good, for example. Why there are companies with an ongoing history of burying pilots and passengers that still have an operating certificate would be another one.
Just because you're bored doesn't mean a civil servant needs to entertain you.

Re: The Taxi Time Poll
LOL. Yeah, I guess that's true.GyvAir wrote:I thought that was intentional, so that with the addition of just one more ambiguous sounding answer option the poll could be adapted as a question on a TC exam.cncpc wrote:I suppose that's true.photofly wrote:It's not a very good poll; options 1 and 2 are the same.
Maybe I should start over.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
I can't even decide which way to vote myself.
Other than I know it's not the second option.
Other than I know it's not the second option.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
You have to be kidding. No flying equals no flying time. Who is o desperate to log a run up, or any other taxi time? In that case you should log the trip to the airport.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Well, the people who say different have some reasonable arguments to make for their position.Leerboy wrote:You have to be kidding. No flying equals no flying time. Who is o desperate to log a run up, or any other taxi time? In that case you should log the trip to the airport.
It's a poll. It doesn't decide what the law is. It merely asks people what they think TC will say as to the requirement to have an actual flight in order to put flight time in your log book. Some people say this only is important when submitting your logbook for a licence.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
As Photofly points out, the poll is poorly designed. Option 1 and option 2 are really the same thing. i.e. can't log it if there isn't an actual flight.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
This is a stupid thing to worry about. What's .1 or .2? I've had it happen before where I taxi out and just return due to issues, never even thought of logging it. If you want to, go ahead but it will not make any difference.
My shortest flight is .1, took off, teardropped back onto the runway and shut down. Not even worth it, took longer to do the paperwork than the flight.
My shortest flight is .1, took off, teardropped back onto the runway and shut down. Not even worth it, took longer to do the paperwork than the flight.
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 8:32 am
- Location: CFX2
- Contact:
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
It can be the difference between $10K/year for insurance or $2K/year.Krimson wrote:This is a stupid thing to worry about. What's .1 or .2?
As an amateur float pilot (not yet but that's the dream) if I have 49.9 hours I will
pay $10K for insurance. At 50.1 hours I will pay $2k for the same plane.
<small print>
According to my research, if anyone knows of a company that will give low
time float pilots a decent insurance price outside of a licensed aviation operation
please let me know
</small print>
LF
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
This closes soon. I haven't been able to contact someone at TC yet, but have the calls in.
Spoke with two of the biggest flight schools in the west and they both said that if there is no flight, there is no logging of flight time.
But, the poll is about what TC says.
Spoke with two of the biggest flight schools in the west and they both said that if there is no flight, there is no logging of flight time.
But, the poll is about what TC says.
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Well if you could log taxi time you should fly into yyc you would pick up about 15 mins heading all the way down to 34 when the winds are calm....hmmmm did you really need another runway yyc or new controllers....I guess as they say make hay when the sun shines....or oil...whatever you know what I mean...
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Well then you might as well log all 50 right off the bat. You could sleep in the plane with the engine running and never have to even leave the ground.LousyFisherman wrote:It can be the difference between $10K/year for insurance or $2K/year.
As an amateur float pilot (not yet but that's the dream) if I have 49.9 hours I will
pay $10K for insurance. At 50.1 hours I will pay $2k for the same plane.
Seriously though, if you're worried about .2 for lowering your premium, why not extend a flight by 9 minutes instead of starting up just to taxi and shut down. If you did the latter and something happened involving insurance, it just might be the out they need to call fraud and wipe their hands clean of your problems.
-
- Rank 8
- Posts: 975
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 5:27 am
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Should Relief or Augment pilots log time?
When the Capt is on break, should he/she be logging PIC?
If you take Controlled Rest at the controls, should you log time?

When the Capt is on break, should he/she be logging PIC?
If you take Controlled Rest at the controls, should you log time?



-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 8:32 am
- Location: CFX2
- Contact:
Re: The Taxi Time Poll
Sure that'll improve my skills and be lots of funKrimson wrote:Well then you might as well log all 50 right off the bat. You could sleep in the plane with the engine running and never have to even leave the ground.LousyFisherman wrote:It can be the difference between $10K/year for insurance or $2K/year.
As an amateur float pilot (not yet but that's the dream) if I have 49.9 hours I will
pay $10K for insurance. At 50.1 hours I will pay $2k for the same plane.

I'm sorry, but I have yet to consider my total hours at any point in any flight. Is this something I should add to my routine?Krimson wrote:Seriously though, if you're worried about .2 for lowering your premium, why not extend a flight by 9 minutes instead of starting up just to taxi and shut down.

If you cannot imagine circumstances in which the above can happen inadvertently and result in substantial additional costs, then you have my sympathies. Would I deliberately taxi to get the 0.2, no. If I end up 0.2 short and there was an aborted flight, yes I would log it. If I didn't need the 0.2 and there was an aborted flight, no, I would not log it. However, for me to to get an additional 0.2 of float time would involve 3 days, 16 hours of driving and two hours of flying.
YMMV
LF