LOW TIME; INST RATED PAX; SAFETY PLT OBSERVED SEVERAL PROCEDURAL ERRORS BY PA28 PLT ON AN IFR FLT. PAX WAS NOT AWARE THAT THE PLT WAS NOT INST RATED.

Narrative

I WAS APCHED BY A FELLOW PLT APPROX 3 DAYS BEFORE THIS FLT OCCURRED AND WAS ASKED TO SERVE AS A SAFETY PLT/PAX SO THAT THE PLT COULD PRACTICE INST PROCS ON A FLT WITH STOPS AT VARIOUS ARPTS ALONG THE RTE TO PRACTICE INST PROCS. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PLT WAS INST RATED AND CURRENT AND WAS WANTING ME TO COME ALONG TO ENSURE THAT HE COULD GET THE 6 INST APCHS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR INST CURRENCY WHILE I WATCHED FOR TFC DURING VFR PORTIONS WHILE THE PLT WAS SIMULATING INST CONDITIONS WITH A HOOD. ON THE DAY OF THE FLT THE PLT WANTED TO FILE AN IFR FLT PLAN SO THAT HE COULD PRACTICE COMMUNICATING WITH ATC DURING INST PROCS. THE PLT ALSO INFORMED ME THAT HE HAD FLOWN THE EXACT SAME RTE UNDER IFR WITH HIS INSTRUCTOR DURING HIS TRAINING. DURING THE BEGINNING OF THE FLT I ONCE AGAIN ASSUMED THAT THE PLT WAS INST RATED AND CURRENT AND I TOOK ON THE ROLE OF A PAX LOOKING OUT FOR TFC. DURING THE FILING OF THE PLT'S IFR FLT PLAN IN THE AIR AND HANDLING OF THE AIRPLANE INTO IMC DURING THE CLBOUT AND CRUISE; I BEGAN TO SUSPECT THAT THE PLT DID NOT HAVE ADEQUATE EXPERIENCE OR PROFICIENCY IN SOME INST PROCS. THE PLT BEGAN TO DEVIATE FROM THE ASSIGNED ALT OF 5000 FT MSL TO 5300 FT MSL WITHOUT ASKING FOR A CLRNC. I MENTIONED THE DEV TO THE PLT AND HE EVENTUALLY GOT A CLRNC TO CRUISE AT 5300 FT MSL. DURING THE FLT; I WAS TAKING THE ROLE OF A PAX AND ENJOYING THE VIEW OUTSIDE THE AIRPLANE AND ASSUMED THAT THE PLT AS PIC WAS LISTENING TO THE RADIOS AND COPYING CLRNCS. I BEGAN TO BECOME DISCONNECTED FROM THE RADIO COMS AND NAV RTE. I GLANCED AT THE DME TO THE IAF FOR THE VOR/DME RWY 11 APCH; AND MENTIONED TO THE PLT THAT WE WOULD BE REACHING IT SOON. ONCE AGAIN; I BEGAN LOOKING OUTSIDE THE ACFT UNTIL THE PLT ASKED ME WHAT THE INITIAL HDG ON THE APCH WAS. I TOLD HIM THAT WE WOULD NEED TO TURN TO A HDG OF APPROX 270 DEGS AND ASSUMED THAT HE HAD ALREADY BEEN CLRED FOR THE APCH AND CONFIRMED THE CLRNC. THE PLT BEGAN THE DME ARC FOR THE APCH AND WAS UNABLE TO MAINTAIN THE ARC AND SEEMED IGNORANT OF HOW TO PERFORM DME ARC PROCS. I IMMEDIATELY BECAME VERY SUSPICIOUS AND HAD TO BEGIN OFFERING HELP ON FOLLOWING THE APCH COURSE. SHORTLY AFTER THAT; CTR CAME OVER THE RADIO AND ASKED FOR THE PLT'S HDG. THE PLT REPLIED THAT HE WAS 'ON THE DME ARC FOR THE VOR/DME RWY 11 APCH.' CTR REPLIED TO THE PLT THAT HE WAS NOT CLRED FOR THE APCH. THE PLT REPLIED TO CTR WITH AN APOLOGY AND SAID THAT HE WAS A 'VFR PLT FLYING IN INST CONDITIONS AND HAD A SAFETY PLT ON BOARD.' CTR REPLIED INFORMING THE PLT OF HIS VARIOUS INFRACTIONS OF THE FARS AND THAT THE CTLR HAD CALLED THE ADJACENT AIRSPACE TO WARN THEM OF THE PLT'S ACFT. THE PLT THEN REQUESTED TO GO TO ZZZ FOR THE VISUAL APCH AND WAS GIVEN A HOLDING CLRNC AT ZZZ VOR BY CTR. THE PLT THEN ASKED ME TO TAKE CTL OF THE RADIOS AT THIS POINT AND I REPEATED THE HOLDING CLRNC AND DIRECTED THE PLT TOWARD ZZZ VOR. AT 5000 FT MSL WE WERE IN THE CLOUDS AND WERE BEGINNING TO EXPERIENCE SOME LIGHT AIRFRAME ICING. I REQUESTED AN ALT OF 3000 FT MSL TO ESCAPE THE ICING AND WAS INITIALLY DENIED DUE TO TFC. SHORTLY THEREAFTER; WE WERE CLRED TO DSND TO 3000 FT MSL AND RPT WHEN WE HAD ZZZ IN SIGHT. UPON REACHING 3000 FT MSL; WE WERE CLR OF THE CLOUDS IN VMC AND I RPTED ZZZ IN SIGHT AND CANCELED THE IFR FLT PLAN. THE PLT RESUMED COMS AND ACFT CTL AT THIS POINT AND LANDED UNDER VFR. WHEN ON THE GND; THE PLT AND I DISCUSSED THE PRECEDING EVENTS. THE PLT INFORMED ME THAT HE THOUGHT THAT HAVING AN INST RATED SAFETY PLT WOULD ALLOW HIM TO PRACTICE INST PROCS ON AN IFR FLT PLAN. I INFORMED HIM THAT HE WOULD NEED A CFII TO BE ABLE TO FLY IN INST CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A PVT PLT CERTIFICATE AND THAT I THOUGHT HE WAS INST RATED AND CURRENT WHEN WE LEFT TO GO ON THE FLT. WE THEN DECIDED TO ABANDON OUR TRIP AND RETURNED TO THE ACFT'S HOME ARPT IN VFR CONDITIONS. ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROBS DURING THIS FLT WAS THE FACT THAT I ASSUMED THAT THE PLT WAS INST RATED AND CURRENT AND DID NOT VERIFY THE PLT'S RATINGS AND CURRENCY. I ALSO ASSUMED THAT THE PLT UNDERSTOOD THE FAR'S REGARDING SAFETY PLTS AND FLYING UNDER IFR. ANOTHER FACTOR THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROBS DURING THIS FLT WAS THE FACT THAT THE PLT WAS 50 YRS OLD; OWNED THE ACFT THAT WAS FLOWN AND THAT I WAS 19. I HAD KNOWN THE PLT FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE; TRUSTED HIM AND THOUGHT THAT HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING SINCE HE WAS 30 YRS MY SENIOR AND OWNED THE AIRPLANE. THIS MADE IT HARDER FOR ME TO CORRECT THE PLT; ESPECIALLY SINCE I WAS ASSUMING THAT I WOULD BE FULFILLING A PAX/SAFETY PLT ROLE DURING THE FLT. I LEARNED THAT IN THE FUTURE I SHOULD ALWAYS VERIFY PLT'S QUALIFICATIONS AND NEVER ASSUME THAT ANOTHER PLT HAS THE RATINGS THAT HE/SHE WOULD NEED TO LEGALLY ACT AS PIC ON A FLT. I ALSO LEARNED THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO VERIFY YOUR ROLE IN A FLT AND TO NEVER BE AFRAID TO OFFER SUGGESTIONS IF YOU SEE A PROB; EVEN IF THE PLT IS 30 YRS YOUR SENIOR OR IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT SENIORITY. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO BE ALERT TO THE ACFT OPS AND COMS WHEN YOU ARE A PAX WITH A PLT'S CERTIFICATE ON A SMALL ACFT.