If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
The way I read 61.57(d) (the requirement for an IPC), it's just an extra
requirement that kicks in under certain circumstances. It's not a subpart of 61.57(c) (6 approaches etc in 6 months), and (c) does not have any exceptions related to (d). So if an IPC is essentially a checkride, it could be done by a proficient pilot with (say) 3 approaches. Would that pilot be legal for IFR if he had gone into the IPC needing it (no approaches within 6 months)? -- Ben Jackson AD7GD http://www.ben.com/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
... The way I read 61.57(d) (the requirement for an IPC), it's just an extra requirement that kicks in under certain circumstances. It's not a subpart of 61.57(c) (6 approaches etc in 6 months), and (c) does not have any exceptions related to (d). So if an IPC is essentially a checkride, it could be done by a proficient pilot with (say) 3 approaches. Would that pilot be legal for IFR if he had gone into the IPC needing it (no approaches within 6 months)? Not as the regulation is written. As you note, 61.57d sets forth an additional requirement, not a substitution for or exception to the requirements of 61.57c. So an IPC might indeed include only three approaches, but that wouldn't qualify the pilot to fly IFR unless the pilot has flown three other approaches within the past six months. --Gary |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
So an IPC might indeed include only three
approaches, but that wouldn't qualify the pilot to fly IFR unless the pilot has flown three other approaches within the past six months. Gee, I never looked at it that way. But, OTOH, an instrument rated pilot who goes nine months without any instrument time, and subsequently does six approaches, holds, and intercepts under the hood, would not need the IPC, since he at that point DOES meet the original requirement. This would make the IPC irrelevant, which I'm sure is not what they had in mind. What =were= they thinking?? (my question every time I read the regs) Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
"Jose" wrote in message
. com... So an IPC might indeed include only three approaches, but that wouldn't qualify the pilot to fly IFR unless the pilot has flown three other approaches within the past six months. Gee, I never looked at it that way. But, OTOH, an instrument rated pilot who goes nine months without any instrument time, and subsequently does six approaches, holds, and intercepts under the hood, would not need the IPC, since he at that point DOES meet the original requirement. This would make the IPC irrelevant, which I'm sure is not what they had in mind. After just nine months without instrument time, a pilot would not necessarily need an IPC to regain currency. The IPC requirement kicks in six months after instrument currency expires. At that point, though, just the six approaches (and holds and intercepts) do not suffice to reestablish currency; there has to be an IPC. So the IPC isn't irrelevant in that case. --Gary |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
After just nine months without instrument time, a pilot would not
necessarily need an IPC to regain currency. Oh right. Duh! But it does seem that an IPC even within six months is not sufficient to restablish currency. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
Jose wrote: But it does seem that an IPC even within six months is not sufficient to restablish currency. An IPC automatically starts your clock again regardless if your last currency was 2 weeks ago or 30 years ago. The manuevers required of the IPC are called out in the IFR PTS. -Robert, CFII |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:52:35 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
wrote: "Ben Jackson" wrote in message ... The way I read 61.57(d) (the requirement for an IPC), it's just an extra requirement that kicks in under certain circumstances. It's not a subpart of 61.57(c) (6 approaches etc in 6 months), and (c) does not have any exceptions related to (d). So if an IPC is essentially a checkride, it could be done by a proficient pilot with (say) 3 approaches. Would that pilot be legal for IFR if he had gone into the IPC needing it (no approaches within 6 months)? Not as the regulation is written. As you note, 61.57d sets forth an additional requirement, not a substitution for or exception to the requirements of 61.57c. So an IPC might indeed include only three approaches, but that wouldn't qualify the pilot to fly IFR unless the pilot has flown three other approaches within the past six months. --Gary This is from the last set of FAQ's that we are not supposed to have anymore. It used to be stated as FAA policy, but someone decided that they didn't want to stick their neck out anymore. I believe it to be accurate. Since an IPC is essentially an instrumet checkride given by a CFII, and an instrument checkride consists of only 3 approaches anyway, it stands to reason that an IPC and currency needs not be something more than the original practical test consisted of. The sucessful instrument applicant left the checkride current to fly IFR in the system with only 3 approaches demonstrated. QUESTION: A question has arisen about the "6 in 6" rule and the IPC as they relate to pilots out of currency for more than 6 months. Paragraph (d) says such pilots may not act as PIC under IFR until they get an IPC. However, the way it is worded, one might conclude that the pilot must also achieve the 6 approaches/intercept/track/hold criteria in paragraph (c) before he can be PIC under IFR -- that the IPC is a necessary but not sufficient criterion for returning to currency after more than 6 months out of currency. So, is a successful IPC sufficient for IFR currency regardless of the number of approaches completed in the last 6 months? Does this change if you are out of the 6 months-without-currency grace period? ANSWER: Ref. § 61.57(d); An instrument proficiency check (IPC) conducted in accordance with the § 61.57(d)/ Instrument Rating PTS meets all the requirements to "start the clock" over for remaining instrument rated current. Passing an IPC fulfills the requirement for currency. Back in 1997-1998 it was questioned what was meant by § 61.57(d) in stating that passing IPC "... consisting of a representative number of tasks required by the instrument rating practical test . . ." was required. This question was answered by AFS-630 that write the PTS's. In the Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards, FAA-S-8081-4C a task table was added with "PC' as one of the columns in change #2, on page 15 of the introduction portion of the PTS. Conducting an IPC in accordance with this standard is a requirement now. When a pilot completes such an IPC of at least 3 approaches (Area of Operation VI) and in a multiengine airplane of at least one more approach (Area of Operation VII), the person will then be considered to be instrument rated current for that category of aircraft. {Q&A-514} |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
... This is from the last set of FAQ's that we are not supposed to have anymore. It used to be stated as FAA policy, but someone decided that they didn't want to stick their neck out anymore. I believe it to be accurate. Since an IPC is essentially an instrumet checkride given by a CFII, and an instrument checkride consists of only 3 approaches anyway, it stands to reason that an IPC and currency needs not be something more than the original practical test consisted of. The sucessful instrument applicant left the checkride current to fly IFR in the system with only 3 approaches demonstrated. I agree that both an instrument checkride and an IPC need not include more than three approaches. Still, as the regs are written, neither a just-completed instrument checkride, nor a just-completed IPC, waives the requirement of 61.57c to have flown six approaches in the past six months in order to be instrument-current. But I have no idea whether the FAA interprets the regs as written (the FAQ you cite suggests that they don't). --Gary |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
d) Instrument proficiency check. Except as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section, a person who does not meet the instrument experience requirements of paragraph (c) of this section within the prescribed time, or within 6 calendar months after the prescribed time, may not serve as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR until that person passes an instrument proficiency check consisting of a representative number of tasks required by the instrument rating practical test. (1) The instrument proficiency check must be- (i) In an aircraft that is appropriate to the aircraft category; The check is available at any time and fully meets the requirements of legal currency... a person who does not meet the instrument experience requirements of paragraph (c) until that person passes an instrument proficiency check consisting of a representative number of tasks required by the instrument rating practical test. "Gary Drescher" wrote in message ... | "Bill Zaleski" wrote in message | ... | This is from the last set of FAQ's that we are not supposed to have | anymore. It used to be stated as FAA policy, but someone decided that | they didn't want to stick their neck out anymore. I believe it to be | accurate. Since an IPC is essentially an instrumet checkride given by | a CFII, and an instrument checkride consists of only 3 approaches | anyway, it stands to reason that an IPC and currency needs not be | something more than the original practical test consisted of. The | sucessful instrument applicant left the checkride current to fly IFR | in the system with only 3 approaches demonstrated. | | I agree that both an instrument checkride and an IPC need not include more | than three approaches. Still, as the regs are written, neither a | just-completed instrument checkride, nor a just-completed IPC, waives the | requirement of 61.57c to have flown six approaches in the past six months in | order to be instrument-current. But I have no idea whether the FAA | interprets the regs as written (the FAQ you cite suggests that they don't). | | --Gary | | |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?
On 2006-08-25, Jim Macklin wrote:
The check is available at any time and fully meets the requirements of legal currency... As written, I don't see where you get that. For one thing, if the IPC supersedes the 6-in-6 rule, when does IPC-induced currency run out? If I flew three approaches last month, and then flew an IPC this month with three more, do run out in 5 months or 6? To consider a parallel set of regulations -- does a BFR make you current to fly passengers at night? -- Ben Jackson AD7GD http://www.ben.com/ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GNS480 missing some LPV approaches | Dave Butler | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | October 27th 05 02:24 PM |
FS2004 approaches, ATC etc | henri Arsenault | Simulators | 14 | September 27th 03 12:48 PM |
Logging instrument approaches | Slav Inger | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | July 27th 03 11:00 PM |
Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 18th 03 01:43 PM |