Jump to content

Flight Time Vs. Air Time Personal Logbook


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 728
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Sure, use air-time for A/F time, but if the client is paying for it I will be logging it." Really...   So what your saying is a good few hundred hours of your 20k is actually with the skids on

Can't find the amendment to CARs for definition of helicopter flight time so do we revert back to logging air time?       General Aviation Policy Letter (GAPL) No. 2005-02   Reference Canadian

Twiddling your thumbs too : )

Posted Images

I do have to specify that I don't bill the client what I log. That's up to the contract. I typically write my time up right before I roll up to 100% and time down when I throttle back. If they want to dick around on a ****** pad...their paying. If I roll back then have to go back to 100% I write a time down. It's amazing how many .1's stack up when you do that.

There's also no such thing as a .1. If I start up on the customers request - that's a .2... All flights are at least 9 min.

Blades tuning time in my book.

GPS moving time in the JL.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reviewing my posts, I can see how hybrid feels I was being condescending, but in reality I'm just trying to have a discussion. He also has a point in his original post that if a pilot was to log Flight Time as Air Time it would be hard for any TC inspector or lawyer to "hang a pilot out to dry using that formula", but I'm talking about minimum requirements for compliance.

 

If a pilot chooses to log air time as he does, then so be it. IMHO, they are applying a higher level of safety standard than required by law. As long as the pilot realizes he is applying a higher standard than is required by law then there is no issue. If a pilot or operator is doing it because his TC inspector told them that they had to...and meanwhile his competitors are being held to a much lower standard....then there's a big problem. Even a 0.1 per hour increase in air time would result in a 10% increase in maintenance costs.

 

In this case many operators & pilots are applying the flight time = air time interpretation (opposite to the way hybrid is). So question 1 would be 0.6/0.6.; whereas hybrid's answer is 1.2 Flight Time/1.2 Air Time. So these operators also benefit from decreased crew requirements, crew change costs, crew training, etc. (with reduced maintenance costs); these operators are also usually still billing the 1.2 - 1.3 hrs.

 

Of course the Moosonee example is an extreme example, but it is real world. That being said many jobs in the country involve significant time on ground with blades turning.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure any reasonable ombudsman would see it your way. And there free and have power.

Hi bs205, I think I know who you are, but not 100% sure. Here's a question for you; I'll inderstand if you don't feel comfortable answering.

 

Didn't you once tell me one your past employers asked you to use air time (skids up/dN) in your flight time records to remain below CARs 700.15 flight time limits (while billing ICAO flight time)?

 

If I recall correctly it was one of the larger operators out west.

 

If I'm way off base feel free to say so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. I was asked so I could fly longer. Just 1 time. And every company I've worked at out west, where I am right now, air time is skids up till skids down. Flight time was billing time. Big difference let's say on fire in Ontario, where you might be servicing fires and spooled down on the ground, your still being paid, but ac parts are not ticking away. Say you land 4 times in an hour and spool down for 6 min each time. Thats 1 hour flight and billing time, and .6 air time. It's that simple, and everyone I know does this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I blame the operator mind u. If I was to subscribe to the Flight Time = Air Time interpretation, that's exactly what I would do.

 

That appears to be what the latest interpretation from TC is telling us to do. I would not interpret it so that Air Time = Flight Time as it would be costly from a maintenance perspective and is contrary to what the manufacturers expect.

 

I would also continue to bill most clients with Flight Time (first movement to last landing). Of course, as Rotor says, billing can vary depending on contracts. Several provincial forestry agencies require billing to be air time (and cross check flight reports with radio logs). In those cases, I can't imagine pilots continue to log time on the ground as air time in the JLB (even though not getting paid for it). How we bill is not TCs concern.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...