David Brooks wrote:


Despite what others have said, here is a "yes, but it doesn't help much"
response from the Seattle FSDO. Newsgroupies from some other parts of the
country have said that their ATC contacts like the idea.

-

Following is the only reference I could find to the subject in the FAQs to which
you referred. I agree with the following language and it is quite different
than the BS you got from the Seattle FSDO. FSDOs are so often full of it.

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.57(d); If you’re intending to serve as the pilot in command
during the instrument proficiency check (and in most cases the flight instructor
is always considered to be the pilot in command on a flight where flight
training/checking is being provided) and you intend to file an IFR flight plan,
regardless whether the flight is in VMC or IMC, you must be instrument current
in accordance with § 61.57(c). As per § 61.57(c), “. . . no person may act as
pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than minimum prescribed
for VFR, unless . . .”