Flight Time Vs. Air Time Personal Logbook

[Freewheel]

  

Oh no. Not another discussion about an association/union. I love the part about "and I'll join". ?

Thanks. I put that in just for you. The MAYBE in that sentence is a very big one. I don't realistically see myself joining a helicopter pilots association/union in my lifetime....Nor do I need one or want one..but hey...I never say never.

 

I certainly shouldn't need a union to have an open discussion with my regulator about compliance requirents. I'm hardly "hard done by", nor am I a follower. Cheers.

[old]

 

Thanks. I put that in just for you. The MAYBE in that sentence is a very big one. I don't realistically see myself joining a helicopter pilots association/union in my lifetime....Nor do I need one or want one..but hey...I never say never.

 

I certainly shouldn't need a union to have an open discussion with my regulator about compliance requirents. I'm hardly "hard done by", nor am I a follower. Cheers.

 

well answered freewheel. It seems I was a little quick to lump you in with the Union winers. This has been an interesting thread with regards to the logbook issues and good on you for persevering. Cheers.

[Freewheel]

With it being so slow these days, thought you guys might be looking for some reading material. This recent court case is pretty interesting:

 

http://www.internationallawoffice.com/Newsletters/Aviation/Canada/Bersenas-Jacobsen-Chouest-Thomson-Blackburn-LLP/Helicopter-pilot-fails-in-constructive-dismissal-case#

[Freewheel]

I noticed the link above doesn't akways work with registering.

 

Here''s link to the actual Supreme Court of BC documents.

http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc2214/2016bcsc2214.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQCO4oCcYWlycGxhbmXigJ0gT1Ig4oCcYWlybGluZeKAnSBvciDigJxoZWxpY29wdGVy4oCdIE9SIOKAnEF2aWF0aW9u4oCdIE9SIOKAnGFpcmNyYWZ04oCdIE9SIOKAnGFpcndheeKAnSBPUiDigJxhaXJwb3J04oCdIE9SIOKAnGFpciBzZXJ2aWNlc-KAnQAAAAAB

[Winnie]

It sucks, but if you sign the dotted line...

 

Interesting that BC Transport's opinion differ from Ontario...

[Freewheel]

While you're right that Transport Canada BC's interpretation is in direct conflict with the most recent official interpretation offered by Ontario Region, that would depend which inspector you ask I think. The Ontario region was echoing what headquarters and the Directors General of Civil Aviation were telling them.

Aside from that it's also in direct contradiction with the official interpretation offered by Directors General. Mr. Aaron McCrorie recently when he offered an official interpretation that stated Flight Time = Air time for skid equipped helicopters. He claimed he was responsding on behalf of the Minister of Transport. He also claimed this interpretation was distribute Nationally through TC internal information systems.i guess BC chose not to follow what Headquarters were telling them or their distribution system doesn't work.

 

I don't think any of that matters now though; since the BC Supreme Court agreed that the Directors General and HQ interpretation was incorrect and stated so in it's ruling they've set precedence.

 

The real shame is that this pilot was standing firm Based on what he believed the law stated (using the same interpretation offered on behalf of the minister of Transport by the highest ranking officials at TC - just a few months ago)

 

It's unfortunate TC refuses to listen for the past SEVERAL years: this whole mess likely could have been averted had they been accountable and taken appropriate action almost 6 years ago when the confusion was identified in a CAIRS report and PVI. Instead they cancelled the only guidance material on the topic and refused to acknowledge the confusion they had created.

 

If I was this operator or pilot I'd be talking to my lawyer about TCs culpability in this mess. They are the ROOT CAUSE; maybe the Minister of Transport should pick up the pilots bill on this one...I bet it was significant and I'd say this case caused significant inconvenience for all involved.

 

Root Cause:

Either there is a systemic failure at TC, or something unethical is going on

[R0T0R]

This is clearly a guy that wanted a free endorsement. If you read the ruling it's obvious that the guys was planning to move back to GSH and reneg on the commitment and had issues keeping the facts straight. I can't count how many times I've received a better offer ( when times were better ) and declined on principal. Such a shame that you have to distrust the guys working next to you all the time. This is why this industry has devolved from a hand shake to training agreements.

 

This is a separate issue from flight time and air time in my opinion he just manufactured an issue from an obvious grey area.

 

If a guy got a 205 endorsement off you I'm sure you would be pissed if he went to work elsewhere.

[Freewheel]

Oh it's happened before and it's not something anyone likes. I'm not defending anyone's actions here. I don't know either Party and I'm just reading the ruling. It sounds like the operator handled it effectively, but I bet they'd tell you it was something they could have done without. Correcting this very well known issue and confusion would pretty much eliminate a persons ability to manufacture an issue like this for one...

 

I understand this case has several interesting story lines and separate issues; you could very well be right that the pilot manufactured an issue, but clearly there is a great deal of relevance. Regardless of whether it was manufactured...the judge had to rule on it and much of the info provided in the ruling is very relevant IMO. The judge also clearly states he felt the pilot misunderstood the requirements for logging flight time and air time. No surprise there, this forum alone demonstrates that many pilots and TC inspectors are confused...and that's relevant.

[88is]

Although this case is about logging "flight time", it is unfortunate there still was no input about how pilots are supposed to record in their personal logbooks. As I've always seen it since the first day I started flying, flight time is engine start to throttle off, and air time is skids up to skids down. Flight time is what you put in your personal log book (in flight school), because TC requires 100 hours of flight time to receive to complete your CPL.

 

Yes, I am a "low-timer". I have spoken with lots of pilots I work with about logging air vs flight time and it seems everyone has a different opinion. Does anyone else care to give their input on which time they put into their PERSONAL logbooks?

[Freewheel]

There are only 2 times a pilot is required to log under the CARs: Air Tine and Flight time. There is also only 1 way to correctly calculate each one. If the CARs asks for "Flight Time" in your Flight/Duty records.as well as in your Personal logs and the journey log book then those numbers should be the same.

 

I can assure you that CARs calls for flight time in your personal log book and you can easily verify; check CARs 401.08 and 700.15. Both call for flight time not air time.

 

When it comes to Journey log, there is no requirement to log flight time in the JLB for domestic flights....only international. With that being said if the operator you work for has both an Air Time column and Flight Time column then you should be putting the same flight time figure in JLB as in your personal log and flight duty records.