![]() |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 149701 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199006 |
| Day | Sat |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : zzz |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Widebody, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 0 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 3000 |
| ASRS Report | 149701 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer observation : company check pilot |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
Due to sick leave, I had become noncurrent because of being out for over 90 day. On return since I was past my grace month for proficiency dhk so on return to duty I completed 3 day recurrent ground school and simulator proficiency check successfully. I asked the director of training whether I needed 3 takeoffs, lndgs since I had been out for over 90 days. He said since I had over 100 hours in type all I needed was 2 legs on revenue flight with check airman which I also completed successfully. However on later reading far 121.439 (C) (2), I found that the check airman must be the PIC and occupy the pilot seat. However, in my line check the check airman occupied cockpit jumpseat and a regular line captain was the PIC. I brought this to the attention of the director of operations and the vp of operations and they feel that I am legal even though this occurred. I am worried that check could be voided due to technicality but everyone feels that since I completed lndgs successfully I am legal.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AFTER 90 DAY REQUALIFICATION CHECK, REPORTER FINDS FAA RULE THAT SAYS THAT CHECK PLT MUST BE PIC AND OCCUPY PIC SEAT.
Narrative: DUE TO SICK LEAVE, I HAD BECOME NONCURRENT BECAUSE OF BEING OUT FOR OVER 90 DAY. ON RETURN SINCE I WAS PAST MY GRACE MONTH FOR PROFICIENCY DHK SO ON RETURN TO DUTY I COMPLETED 3 DAY RECURRENT GND SCHOOL AND SIMULATOR PROFICIENCY CHK SUCCESSFULLY. I ASKED THE DIRECTOR OF TRNING WHETHER I NEEDED 3 TKOFS, LNDGS SINCE I HAD BEEN OUT FOR OVER 90 DAYS. HE SAID SINCE I HAD OVER 100 HRS IN TYPE ALL I NEEDED WAS 2 LEGS ON REVENUE FLT WITH CHK AIRMAN WHICH I ALSO COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY. HOWEVER ON LATER READING FAR 121.439 (C) (2), I FOUND THAT THE CHK AIRMAN MUST BE THE PIC AND OCCUPY THE PLT SEAT. HOWEVER, IN MY LINE CHK THE CHK AIRMAN OCCUPIED COCKPIT JUMPSEAT AND A REGULAR LINE CAPT WAS THE PIC. I BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTN OF THE DIRECTOR OF OPS AND THE VP OF OPS AND THEY FEEL THAT I AM LEGAL EVEN THOUGH THIS OCCURRED. I AM WORRIED THAT CHK COULD BE VOIDED DUE TO TECHNICALITY BUT EVERYONE FEELS THAT SINCE I COMPLETED LNDGS SUCCESSFULLY I AM LEGAL.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.