Who was flying, and in what capacity, is one of the most important things a logbook records, and it is also where the two big regulatory systems differ most. Getting the function right is what makes your hours count for the licence or rating you are working towards. This builds on our guide to keeping a digital logbook.
This is general educational information, not operational, legal, or regulatory advice. Rules differ by authority and change over time. Always verify against current official sources and follow your operator's approved procedures.
The EASA functions
Under EASA and the UK CAA, the pilot functions are set out in FCL.050 and its acceptable means of compliance, and the main ones are:
- P1 (pilot-in-command). You are the commander, responsible for the flight, and you log P1.
- PICUS (pilot-in-command under supervision). A co-pilot performs the duties and functions of the commander under the supervision of the commander. Under defined conditions, PICUS time can be credited as P1 for licensing purposes, which is its whole point: it is how a co-pilot builds command experience.
- P2 (co-pilot). You are a required co-pilot in an operation that needs more than one pilot, carrying out co-pilot duties.
- Dual. You are a pilot under instruction, receiving training from an authorised instructor.
There are further functions for instructors, examiners, and student pilots flying supervised solo, but these four are the backbone of most logbooks.
The FAA categories
The FAA, in 14 CFR 61.51(e), uses a different set:
- Pilot-in-command (PIC).
- Second-in-command (SIC).
- Solo.
- Dual received.
The categories look similar to the EASA ones, but they do not line up exactly, and the PIC category in particular behaves differently, which is the source of most confusion.
Logging PIC versus being PIC
This is the distinction worth getting clear, because it trips up pilots moving between systems. There are two different ideas wearing the same words:
- The acting pilot in command is the person legally responsible for the operation and safety of the flight. This is defined in 14 CFR 1.1 and is a question of responsibility.
- Logging pilot-in-command time is a separate, bookkeeping question governed by 61.51(e).
The FAA deliberately separates them. Under 61.51(e)(1), a sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log PIC time whenever they are the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which they are rated, even if another, more experienced pilot is the acting pilot in command. So a rated private pilot flying a checkout with an instructor aboard logs PIC time as sole manipulator while the instructor is the one legally in command. The logbook PIC and the legal PIC are simply answering different questions.
Note who is on that list, and who is not. Student pilots are not, so a student under instruction cannot log PIC as sole manipulator. The only route a student has to PIC time is 61.51(e)(4), which lets a student log PIC when they are the sole occupant of the aircraft, hold a solo endorsement, and are undergoing training for a certificate or rating. A student flying with an instructor is logging dual received, not PIC, however much of the flying they did.
The acting pilot in command has a narrower logging route than most pilots assume, too. Under 61.51(e)(1)(iii), acting as PIC only earns you loggable PIC time when more than one pilot is required by the aircraft's type certificate or by the regulations under which the flight is conducted. In an aircraft that needs only one pilot, being the commander is not, by itself, enough to log the time.
EASA has no exact equivalent of that sole-manipulator rule, which is exactly why you must not carry it across. PICUS, similarly, is an EASA concept with conditions attached and no direct FAA twin.
A worked example
Two pilots fly a light twin that requires only one pilot. Pilot A, fully rated and acting as commander, occupies the left seat. Pilot B, also rated, flies the whole sector as the sole manipulator of the controls.
- Under the FAA, only Pilot B may log PIC time, as the sole manipulator of an aircraft for which they are rated. Pilot A is the acting pilot in command and carries the legal responsibility, but the aircraft needs only one pilot, so 61.51(e)(1)(iii) gives Pilot A no route to log the time. Being in command and logging command time come apart here, and they come apart in the direction that surprises people. (Two exceptions are worth knowing: an authorised instructor may log PIC for the time they are giving instruction under 61.51(e)(3), and if the operation itself requires a second pilot, a safety pilot for simulated instrument flight under 91.109 being the usual case, then more than one pilot is required and the acting PIC is back inside 61.51(e)(1)(iii).)
- Under EASA, only Pilot A logs anything as a crew function: P1, as the commander. There is no P2 and no PICUS here, because AMC1 FCL.050 conditions both on an aircraft certificated for a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or on an operation that requires more than one pilot, and this flight is neither. There is no sole-manipulator route to P1 either, so Pilot B's flying simply does not produce a loggable EASA function unless the flight was dual instruction with an authorised instructor.
Same flight, same two people, and the logbooks look different because the systems define the function differently. Notice that the popular version of this example, in which both pilots cheerfully log PIC, is wrong under both systems.
Cross-crediting between licences
Pilots move between systems, converting or validating a licence from one authority to another, and the function you logged your hours under matters when they do. The key principle is that the receiving authority decides how your existing experience is counted, against its own rules, not yours.
When experience is assessed for a conversion, the assessor looks at what role you actually performed, so the way your logbook recorded the function becomes important evidence. This is where PICUS earns its place in the EASA system: it is the recognised route by which a co-pilot's command-under-supervision time can be credited towards the pilot-in-command experience required for a command upgrade or a licence, under the conditions in FCL.050 and its acceptable means of compliance. Logged honestly and within its conditions, PICUS is the bridge to command; claimed loosely, it is the kind of entry that does not survive scrutiny.
A few practical rules follow:
- Keep the source records. When hours may be assessed by another authority, the original logbook and any operator records are what back up your totals. Reconstructed or rounded figures are weaker evidence.
- Do not retro-relabel. You cannot go back and re-badge a flight as a more favourable function after the fact to suit a conversion. The function is what it was on the day.
- Expect the categories not to map cleanly. As covered above, EASA P1, PICUS, P2 and dual do not translate one-for-one into FAA PIC, SIC, solo and dual received, so a conversion involves judgement by the receiving authority, not a simple copy of column totals. The UK CAA, for instance, sets out how it assesses experience for the licences it issues.
The broader lesson is that the function column is doing long-term work. It is not only how this flight is recorded; it is part of the evidence base for the licences and commands you may seek years later, which is the strongest argument for getting it right, entry by entry, from the start. A function logged correctly on the day needs no defending later; one logged loosely can quietly cost you the credit you were counting on.
A worked two-crew sector
A fuller example shows how the same flight is logged differently under each system. A two-pilot aircraft flies one sector. In the left seat is a training captain who is the legal commander; in the right seat is a co-pilot flying the sector and, under supervision, performing the duties of commander as part of a command course.
Under EASA, the training captain logs P1, as the commander. The co-pilot, performing the commander's duties under supervision and meeting the conditions for it, may log PICUS, which can later be credited towards the pilot-in-command experience needed for command, under FCL.050. Had the conditions for PICUS not been met, the co-pilot would log P2.
Under the FAA, the picture is framed differently. The training captain, as the acting pilot in command, may log PIC, and here they may do so because the aircraft is one on which more than one pilot is required, which is exactly the condition 61.51(e)(1)(iii) sets. The co-pilot, as the sole manipulator of the controls for the sector and appropriately rated, may also log PIC time under 14 CFR 61.51(e), even though they are not the acting pilot in command, because the FAA separates logging PIC from being PIC.
That is the difference from the light twin above. Two pilots may both log PIC on the same flight only when the aircraft or the operation actually requires two of them; in the single-pilot twin it required one, and only the sole manipulator could log the time.
So the same sector, the same two people, produces P1 and PICUS in an EASA logbook, and two entries of PIC time in an FAA one. Neither is wrong; they are two systems answering different questions about who was flying and in what capacity, which is exactly why you log to the rules of the system your licence belongs to and never translate the figures straight across. The discipline that follows is to decide which system an entry belongs to before you write it, log the function by that system's definitions, and keep the original record intact, so that years later, when the hours are assessed for a rating, a command upgrade, or a licence conversion, the entry still says exactly what role you performed and under whose rules.
Common pitfalls
- Confusing logging PIC with being PIC. They answer different questions, especially under the FAA.
- Assuming the acting PIC can always log PIC. Under 61.51(e)(1)(iii) they can only when more than one pilot is required by the type certificate or the operation, so in a single-pilot aircraft the commander who is not flying has nothing to log.
- Letting a student log PIC as sole manipulator. 61.51(e)(1) does not list student pilots; a student logs PIC only when sole occupant on an endorsed solo, under 61.51(e)(4).
- Carrying sole-manipulator PIC into an EASA logbook. It has no EASA equivalent.
- Logging PICUS without meeting its conditions. PICUS is bounded; do not claim it loosely.
- Mapping the categories one to one. EASA P1, PICUS, P2 and dual do not translate directly to FAA PIC, SIC, solo and dual received.
- Logging a function you cannot support. If a licence or rating might rest on it, the entry has to be defensible.
In Pilot EFB
Pilot EFB records the pilot function against each flight in its electronic logbook, so your time in each role totals up as you record it. It is a convenient personal record that follows what you enter: you choose the function for each flight, and you should make sure the choice matches the rules of the system your licence belongs to, and reconcile it with any logbook your operator or training organisation treats as the official record. Entries you have saved stay available offline. Pilot EFB is offline-first and is not a certified or authority-approved electronic logbook.