Definition of simulated instrument conditions

At night, with no horizon and no moon you have actual
instrument conditions. You can simulate instrument
conditions in many ways, yellow plastic curtains and blue
goggles, Foggles, a hood or just look only at the panel.
There is no requirement for a hood.
About 20 years ago, the FAA in Wichita came up with a device
to block the pilot's view forward on the King Air 300, which
required a type rating and that the pilot be able to see the
entire cockpit and reach all the controls. They developed
and approved the use of a sheet metal device that was held
on the glare shield by a spring clamp. There were two metal
pieces attached in such a manner that the pilot could not
see straight ahead but allowed the examiner to see at an
angle through the pilot's windshield. The co-pilot and side
windows were not covered at all.
Eventually, they quit using it at all.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"bsalai" wrote in message
.. .
| Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is
defined anywhere?
|
| The reason for the question is whether one can log
instrument time, say
| at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear
foggles or a hood?
|
| I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated
instrument
| conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time
says both
| that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments
in actual or
| simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that
more is
| required than "solely by reference to instruments" and
therefore that
| some sort of view limiting device is required.
|
| It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated
insturment
| conditions though.
|
| Brad

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:48:41 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

At night, with no horizon and no moon you have actual
instrument conditions.

FWIW, according to the old FAQ,

"I agree with your statement that just because a person is flying “. .
.. by sole reference to instruments . . .” has nothing to do with
whether the flight can be logged as “actual instrument time” or
“simulated instrument time.” Only the weather conditions establish
whether the flight is in “actual instrument conditions.” And that is
dependent on the weather conditions where the aircraft is physically
located and the pilot makes that determination as to whether the
flight is in “actual instrument conditions” or he is performing
instrument flight under “simulated instrument conditions.” But for a
“quick and easy” answer to your question, it was always my
understanding if I were flying in weather conditions that were less
than the VFR weather minimums defined in § 91.155 and I was flying
“solely by reference to instruments” then that was the determining
factor for being able log instrument flight under “actual instrument
conditions.”

Otherwise, if I were flying solely by reference to instruments in VMC
conditions then I would log it as instrument flight in “simulated
instrument conditions.” In your example, the flight is clear of clouds
and in good visibility conditions at night over the desert with an
overcast above and no visible horizon. But other examples could
include flight between sloping cloud layers or flight between layers
of clouds at night. These could equally meet the requirement for
operations that can only be accomplished solely by reference to
instruments. But, the lack of sufficient visual reference to maintain
aircraft control without using instruments does not eliminate the
possibility of collision hazard with other aircraft or terrain."

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:4o6Df.69914$QW2.8391@dukeread08...
About 20 years ago, the FAA in Wichita came up with a device
to block the pilot's view forward on the King Air 300, which
required a type rating and that the pilot be able to see the
entire cockpit and reach all the controls. They developed
and approved the use of a sheet metal device that was held
on the glare shield by a spring clamp. There were two metal
pieces attached in such a manner that the pilot could not
see straight ahead but allowed the examiner to see at an
angle through the pilot's windshield. The co-pilot and side
windows were not covered at all.

We have something similar in our club's PA-28 - except we have a louvred
side-window cover as well, so that if you're right next to it, you can't see
out, but if you're in the other seat you can. Works very well, and is much
better than those lousy foggles.

Of course, there's nothing on the right-hand window; all you need there,
though, is a decent-sized instructor/colleague and the view through the
window can be amply blocked :-)

D.