Timothy wrote:
I have never signed a page, and I have just about every licence and rating that you need a logbook for.
This was in my case because as a print out, it was loose leaf / not bound together. As I said, they were pragmatic and did not insist on a handwritten logbook, but whatever I produced as it clearly identified me and I signed in blood…
Part of the paperwork I had to submit for the CRI was logbook entries.
The CAA accepted the printouts from electronics (I had to do the signature, “certify true bla bla”), with SELF when I’d log as PIC.
The advantage of electronic logbooks is that if SELF had been rejected I could have really quickly sent something else with my name instead.
Logging PIC / PUT (vs only PIC) has the advantage that you can go to the US system (only PIC), but the reverse is not true (at least in logbook format I use)
Anything is possible nowadays. The CAA would not accept a course completion certificate because it said “SEP/IR” which, they said, is not “single engine” which is just “SE”. The fact that a CCC has not been a legit requirement for years is another story; I believe it was eventually “sorted”.
I have never signed a page, and I have just about every licence and rating that you need a logbook for.
chflyer wrote:
and there is no universal agreement of required “columns” and/or meaning of the information in each
This is Europe, so of course there is a regulation for this. AMC1 FCL.050 is an acceptable means of compliance for logbooks. Each authority is free to establish other AMCs and publish them, of course.
The UK CAA have in the past been very relaxed about the exact format, but were quite specific of what needed to be included. I have used print-outs of my electronic logbook, and they asked me to include name and address, as well as sign every page as true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Has this changed?
Yes I think it was, she owned a blue Bulldog but I believe she sadly died not that many years later
On a tangent – I did once fly with a lady whose surname was SELF and I believe she did a instructor course later as well!
Genuine question, was her first name Susie?
Are they rejecting all logbooks that now have “SELF”?.
That would be strange considering my PPL, Night and IR(R) was all issued as “SELF”;
Probably the only truly accurate or “correct” column in my logbook is the number of tailwheel landings, that column being my own. 424 it says, with no change on the horizon now I’ve sold my tailwheel aircraft… and somebody else has wrecked it within their first 10 landings. The only number that matters to me matters to no government agency. Happily no government agency is likely to ever see my logbook so I may as well make the logbook entries in crayon 
Buckerfan wrote:
I need to send in my Logbook to the CAA as part of the process of obtaining a CBIR on the back of my FAA IR.
This shows how such a process is based on arbitrary decision(s) of the “target” CAA. First, in this case a request is being refused because the applicant is producing a logbook with information not in line with the “target” CAA format …. duh!! By definition, the applicant is using a logbook format defined by the authority of the existing certificate, not the target one. Unfortunately, each authority defines their own time reporting requirements, and there is no universal agreement of required “columns” and/or meaning of the information in each.
I know of a similar situation where the applicant was not given instrument time credit for the PIC hours before the IR rating was passed, even though according to FAA regulations all time at the controls of an aircraft are PIC time once the PPL is passed.
