On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:48:24 -0500, Roger
wrote:

On 24 Feb 2007 22:14:22 -0800, "Dan" wrote:

So what does everyone think about the proposed new IFR currency
requirements? The major changes seem to be that 1 hour of cross-
country time will be required, along with six approaches, consisting
of BOTH precision and non-precision, and two types of holds.

Some of this can be completed in a PCATD, but an instructor must be
present. (I wonder if a remote MSFS console via the Internet counts..)

I make no guarantee for the accuracy of my interpretation of what I
think they said or what they meant.

It would still need to be approved and as MS emphatically states MSFS
is a game I seriously doubt it'd be accepted.:-))

OTOH it's supposed to represent the plane, or class of plane the pilot
flies. I think there is going to be a fair amount of rewording
between now and the final document.

We are not going to be doing unusual attitude recoveries at Vne in my
plane VFR or IFR! There is a very fine line between staying safe and
breaking something when moving at Vne. I'm pretty sure what they meant
and I don't think it's quite what they said.



Most of it sounds OK to me, however I think the 1 hour of cross-
country time is pointless. What would be considered cross-country? It
is a little vague...

The way it is phrased I read it as just flying between to points that
are far enough apart require using departure and approach at each
airport and fit in the tracking and interception part for a total of
one hour. IOW it's a pretty short cross county:-)) As it requires
flying a missed a lot of the requirements could be combined. They
probably intend it to be "more than" 50 miles between airports, but
who knows.

To me, that amounts to nothing more than following a course, airway,
radials, or vectors and I don't think it'd add much of anything to
experience. If a pilot can do the approaches and holds they certainly
can fly from point A to point B. About the only thing the cross
country would do that's not in an approach the way it's phrased
*might* include being handed off to a center some where. Otherwise you
get the same thing flying approaches.


Here is the link:

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...df/E7-1467.pdf

The interesting bit starts on page 31 of the PDF.

Other than the PCATD it sounds much like it was before then went to
the current requirements. That and changing the definitions from "at
least" to "More than" which seems kinda needless and could cause some
problems in some cases.

--Dan
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Nowhere in the proposal is unusual attitudes mentioned where it is
required they be done in an aircraft.