View Single Post
  #8  
Old August 6th 03, 06:25 PM
Bill Zaleski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I fail to understand the logic of your statement, Robert. I am not
slamming or bashing, but just trying to understand.

If you "must be IMC from the IAF to the MAP" then legally, you must
have missed on the approach, since you have stated that you are in
"IMC at the MAP". Surely, one must not miss an aproach in actual in
order to use it for legal currency. This subject should have been
addressed in a more definitive policy statement or legal opinion a
long time ago.



On 5 Aug 2003 20:18:53 -0700, (Robert M. Gary) wrote:

Nothing in writing or offical. The local FSDO agrees with Mr Lynch's
opinion in the FAQ that you must be IMC from the IAF to the MAP. I
wouldn't log any of the ones you mentioned. I only log them if I just
see the runway at minimums. Log what you want, fly what you need.

-Robert


(Paul Tomblin) wrote in message ...
1. Vectored for the VOR 27 at Oshkosh in pouring rain, broke out and saw
the runway after I got established but before I started my descent,
cancelled IFR to help the guy behind me, did a visual descent and landed
on the green dot.

2. Vectored for the ILS 24(?) at Muskegeon, descended on the glide slope,
saw the runway almost as soon as I started descending, but did the ILS on
the gauges all the way down for practice (not wearing foggles).

3. Vectored for the ILS 22 at Rochester, was in the soup at 2500 feet at
the top of the glideslope, broke out on the glide slope just above traffic
pattern altitude (1400), asked for and got right traffic to runway 25.