jackg@sri-unix (08/30/82)
As I understand it, the real reason for a safety pilot when flying with a hood on in vfr conditions is simply to satisfy the see and be seen principle of vfr flight. The safety pilot is not responsible for controlling the aircraft so he doesn't need a complex endoresement, multi-engine rating, type endorsement, instrument rating, or any other thing required by the pilot in command. A private pilot rating seems to qualify him as a competent observer of other aircraft in vfr conditions. Whether currency or a valid medical certificate is implied here is not clear. The FARs don't seem too clear. Probably the real answer comes from how it has been interpreted in past cases relating to the rules.
PS@MIT-MC@sri-unix (09/03/82)
From: Peter E. Seissler <PS at MIT-MC> As far as currency status and medical certificate are concerned, I'm not sure either, but you refered to multi-engine and complex ratings. These are required of the safety pilot by 91.21. This refered to "an appropriately rated safety pilot." Yes, any pilot can see traffic, but you gotta know how to fly the bugger to avoid. Pete
Elias@MIT-MULTICS@sri-unix (09/03/82)
From: Antonio Elias <Elias at MIT-MULTICS>
I beg to disagree with that last interpretation. First, FAR91.21(b)1
states that the pilot must be "appropriately rated'; "rating", as
defined by FAR1.1, indicates something written on your pilot's
certificate, e.g. single-engine land, type rating for over 12,500 lbs,
etc. Also, the safety pilot becomes "required pilot flight crewmember"
in the spirit of FAR61.53, so there goes your medical requirements in.
About the only thing left would be the recency requirements (FAR61.57),
since, by implication, the non-safety pilot would not be counted as a
passenger.
So much for the letter; as for the spirit of the regulation, I also
disagree that the function of the safety pilot is to watch for traffic:
such a requirement would be satisfied by the "competent observer"
mentioned in section FAR91.21(b)3. If your FAR's are current (at least
as of ammendment #154, dated 12-5-78), you will note the mention of
"fully functioning dual controls". What are dual controls for except to
take over the aircraft under emergency (therefore demanding) conditions?
Never mind the regs, I ALWAYS have an IFR-rated safety pilot when I go
under the hood; it's also easier to arrange: we exchange safety-ing for
each other.
-- AntonioMary.Shaw@CMU-10A@sri-unix (09/03/82)
The principle is "see and avoid", not "see and be seen". By definition,
"SEE AND AVOID -- A visual procedure wherein pilots of aircraft
flying in visual meterological conditions, regardless of type
of flight plan, are charged with the responsibility to observe
the presence of other aircraft and to maneuver their aircraft
as required to avoid the other aircraft...."
Seems to me that the responsibility to maneuver your own aircraft
implies that the safety pilot must be able to fly the airplane -- in
case of a conflict, there just isn't time to explain to the other
pilot what needs to be done.
FAR 91.21 requires that for simulated IFR
"an appropriately rated pilot occupies the other control seat
as safety pilot"
which sure sounds to me like a required pilot crewmember (as well
as a requirement for type rating, complex endorsement, or whatever.)
FAR 61.53 says
"No person may act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity
as a required pilot flight crewmember while he has a known
medical deficiency ... that would make him unable to meet the
requirements for his current medical certificate."
which I interpret as requiring a current medical.
My own rule is that my safety pilot should be qualified to fly PIC of
the airplane during the flight. This means licensed, current, rated
for type or multi, current medical, no alcohol within 8 hours, high
performance or complex endorsement if appropriate, ... the whole bit.
Since the simulated IFR is flown in VMC, I don't believe an IFR
rating is required, though.
Mary Shawark (09/08/82)
Two notes:
1. The complex-airplane signoff is not a rating. From a practical
viewpoint, it does not take any significant special training to
know how to run away from traffic in a complex airplane if you
already know how to do so in a simple airplane.
2. There was a period of time (and I'm not certain whether it encompasses
the present) when it was explicitly permited to conduct practice
approaches and, for that matter, instrument instruction in actual
IFR, in an airplane equipped only with a throw-over control wheel.
Presumably this was put there to keep Bonanza owners happy.