"Richard Kaplan" wrote
How helpful do you think practicing a circling approach on a CAVU day is in
preparing you to fly a circling approach on a low visibility day?

Better than nothing, but far from optimal. On the other hand, you can
get about a 90% simulation on an overcast night with a little haze
and/or mist. Even a clear night gets you a good simulation if you
pick your airport carefully (meaning in a poorly lit area).

Circling in CAVU weather is basically a matter of flying a tight pattern at
a lower than usual pattern altitude. There is somewhat of a learning curve
needed especially in a hilly or mountainous area, but this is not
particularly challenging in my opinion for it to take precedence over any
number of other items not mandated in the new PTS.

I have two issues with this argument. First, there is the transition
issue. There's a pretty big difference between circling in a
Skyhawk-class airplane and a Bonanza-class airplane, and much of that
difference can be taught in CAVU. Practically all of it can be taught
at night.

Second, I can't think of anything more important than circling (even
in CAVU) that is not already required.

On the other hand, a circling approach in low visibility is indeed a
challenge even in a piston airplane. One of the reasons it is a challenge
is that it is so difficult to train for this effectively either in the
airplane or in a piston FTD/simulator. I do not think the new PTS solves
this problem.

The FAA doesn't ever solve problems. At best, by taking action it
might raise awareness that the problem exists without making it
substantially worse. The new PTS has, in fact, raised awareness -
people are discussing this, and that's positive. The question is, has
the FAA made the problem substantially worse. I'm not sure about
that. I doubt that the people getting recurrent sim training really
NEED an IPC from a regulatory standpoint anyway, so I doubt much
damage is being done.

Michael