From: utzoo!decvax!cca!Elias@MIT-MULTICS@sri-unix Newsgroups: net.aviation Title: Re: safety pilot requirements Article-I.D.: sri-unix.3075 Posted: Thu Sep 2 23:38:20 1982 Received: Wed Sep 8 06:37:08 1982 From: Antonio EliasI 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. -- Antonio