New IFR Currency requirements...!

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..)

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...

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.

--Dan

The AOPA has a nice chart that summarizes all the changes...
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...1-position.pdf
Pilots: What do you think about Part 61 changes?

The FAA's proposed overhaul of the pilot certification
regulations needs some tweaking, and AOPA wants your ideas.

"We need to know how these changes would affect your
flying," said Luis Gutierrez, AOPA director of regulatory
and certification policy. "Some of the benefits and problem
areas are obvious, but others are a little more gray."

You can start by reviewing a chart that explains all of the
FAA's proposed changes - in plain English - and AOPA's
position. You can send us your feedback on the changes and
our position via e-mail. Top 10 proposed changes that would
affect GA...

(February 20)

"Dan" wrote in message
ps.com...
| 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..)
|
| 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...
|
| 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.
|
| --Dan
|

"Dan" wrote in message
ps.com...
So what does everyone think about the proposed new IFR currency

AOPA has a comparision chart and summary. They also provide the opportunity
to respond with thoughts.

I hope that they clarify it, but my read of the sentence structure is that
it will not require 1-hour of cross-country time. Here is the text, "One
hour of simulated cross-country practice operation that involves
intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigation systems
while performing a takeoff phase, area departure phase, enroute phase, area
arrival phase, approach phase, and a missed approach phase of flight."

They used the word "simulated" and in that same sentence refer to all the
other stuff you're supposed to do. I also don't believe that they meant to
use "cross-country" to mean flying to another airport more than 50 miles
away. Once you have done all the other stuff, there won't be much time for
cruise. It doesn't say do all that stuff plus an hour of cross-country.

I believe (and I hope that the clarification shows) that they just wanted to
have the pilot demonstrate skills in all phases of flight.

However, what does area departure and area arrival phase really mean? Is it
formal procedures? Does it mean only using airports with SIDs and STARs? Or,
did they just mean transitioning between enroute airways and the airport.

What about teakoff phase? Do I need to go under the hood shortly after
rotation? That may create unsafe situations with a pilot trying to
transition to under the hood during a busy time, close to the ground.

Does this all have to happen during the same sequence of events? Why 1-hour?
Is that a calculated time based on how long they think it will take to do
all that?

I'm all for scenario-based training. I think it makes sense. Requiring the
use of SIDs or STARs; requiring 1 hour of enroute tracking; or requiring a
cross-country (by the reg's definition) - is going too far.

-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

"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.

This all seems perfectly reasonable. The old rules (previous to what we
operate under today) required "six and six", i.e. 6 approaches and 6 hours
of flight time. Getting rid of the 6 hours of flight time was a rather
drastic reduction; this moves us back a little bit towards where it used to
be.

The way the rules are written today, you can maintain currency by getting
vectors to the same ILS at your home drome 6 times and doing one hold.
Repeat every six months. By this time, you should have the fixes and
altitudes memorized and can probably read back the vectors in your sleep.
You can do it in broad daylight, and pick a day when there's no wind, no
traffic, and the weather is CAVU. And 5 months after this pencil-whipping,
you're still current to launch into single pilot night IFR in rain and 20
kts of wind and 200 foot ceilings.

All the one hour of cross-country flying does is make you get out of the
pattern of your home airport. You might have to get a real weather
briefing before you launch instead of just sticking your head out the door
and looking up.

I like the hold requirement too. More and more, we're becoming dependent
on GPS and forgetting traditional techniques. If twice a year you need to
tune in a real VOR and play with the needles, is that going to kill you?

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...

Pointless? No. I do agree with you that's it's a little vague. I'd like
to see them define better what they mean by "cross country". There are
various definitions of cross country in the book for various purposes. I
think what makes sense here is "a full stop landing at an airport 50 miles
from your point of departure", although I suppose Alaska bush pilots might
object to having their destination limited to an airport.

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..)

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...

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.

I've never done a takeoff under the hood. I wonder if it would be ok if
I did that just before rotating or if it needs to be done for the
entire roll. I'm glad my home airport runway is 100 feet wide...

Yes, I know we can legally take off zero zero. It's just not something
I think I need to practice every six months.

With a /G plane, the hold over the radio station and intersection are
no different. I wonder where these requirements are coming from? Has
someone been complaining that pilots aren't doing holds very well and
should practice more? An hour cross country? My last currency ride actually
did last more than an hour. We didn't cross much country though. We
did a GPS at Chapel Hill and from the hold at the missed went to the
nearby IAP for the GPS at my home airport at Sanford. They're 21 miles
apart.


--Dan


--
Don Poitras

I
think what makes sense here is "a full stop landing at an airport 50 miles
from your point of departure", although I suppose Alaska bush pilots might
object to having their destination limited to an airport.

Why does that make sensse here? This is for instrument currency;
landings are not part of it, neither is a full stop, and fifty miles is
arbitrary.

What makes sense to me (that the FAA is aiming for) is that they want
you to transition from the departure mindset to a cruise mindset to an
arrival mindset, to an actual approach.

Whether this actually makes sense as a requirement for currency, or is a
waste of time that could better be spent on other things, is another
question. I would look at the accident statisitics to determine what it
is that tends to bite people, and concentrate on those items. Night
circle to land with low ceilings and visibility (a visual procedure)
seems to be such an animal, but I think that's kind of hard to practice
appropriately.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article ,
Jose wrote:

I
think what makes sense here is "a full stop landing at an airport 50 miles
from your point of departure", although I suppose Alaska bush pilots might
object to having their destination limited to an airport.

Why does that make sensse here? This is for instrument currency;
landings are not part of it, neither is a full stop, and fifty miles is
arbitrary.

A full stop landing damn well is part of instrument flying. The whole
point of an instrument flight is to get to another airport when the weather
is bad.

I can't tell you how many approaches I watch people make where they
couldn't possible land at the end. When I ask them how the approach went,
I get back, "I think it went pretty well". Then I ask them if they could
have landed, and they say something like, "Well, no, because I was still at
700 AGL over the threshold and doing 90 kts".

I suppose 50 miles is somewhat arbitrary, but it seems to me that the whole
point here is to get people away from their familiar home environment. If
taking two 50 mile flights twice a year is a hardship, I don't understand
what people are doing with their ratings.

What makes sense to me (that the FAA is aiming for) is that they want
you to transition from the departure mindset to a cruise mindset to an
arrival mindset, to an actual approach.

Yeah, right. And it's kind of hard to do that in much less than 50 miles.
On any kind of real IFR flight with weather that's at all marginal, one of
the first things I do once I get settled into cruise is call up flight
watch and get an update on weather along my route. There's neither time
nor reason to do that on a 25 mile hop to the next airport over.

Of course, you could just turn on the A/P and read a magazine during the
cruise portion. You can lead a pilot to currency, but you can't make him
actually learn anything while doing it.

I can't tell you how many approaches I watch people make where they
couldn't possible land at the end.

Ok, fair enough (though in the example you cite it seems like he could
have circled to land). I'd have to ask what you think the purpose of
currency requirements is. If it is to repeatedly prove that you can
still do =all= aspects of instrument flying by actually =doing= all
aspects of instrument flying, I'd say that's overkill.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

An instrument take-off can be done under the hood, but the
FAA practice has been to put the hood on at 100-200 feet.
And then fail an engine on a twin.


"Don Poitras" wrote in message
...
| 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..)
|
| 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...
|
| 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.
|
| I've never done a takeoff under the hood. I wonder if it
would be ok if
| I did that just before rotating or if it needs to be done
for the
| entire roll. I'm glad my home airport runway is 100 feet
wide...
|
| Yes, I know we can legally take off zero zero. It's just
not something
| I think I need to practice every six months.
|
| With a /G plane, the hold over the radio station and
intersection are
| no different. I wonder where these requirements are coming
from? Has
| someone been complaining that pilots aren't doing holds
very well and
| should practice more? An hour cross country? My last
currency ride actually
| did last more than an hour. We didn't cross much country
though. We
| did a GPS at Chapel Hill and from the hold at the missed
went to the
| nearby IAP for the GPS at my home airport at Sanford.
They're 21 miles
| apart.
|
|
| --Dan
|
|
| --
| Don Poitras

On Feb 25, 8:14 am, Roy Smith wrote:
Pointless? No. I do agree with you that's it's a little vague. I'd like
to see them define better what they mean by "cross country". There are
various definitions of cross country in the book for various purposes. I
think what makes sense here is "a full stop landing at an airport 50 miles
from your point of departure", although I suppose Alaska bush pilots might
object to having their destination limited to an airport.

The definition of cross-country time per FAR 61.1 (3) only requires
the flight to include a landing at a point other than the point of
departure. The 50 NM only apply for the purpose of obtaining
aeronautical experience for the obtention of a private, commercial and
ATP certificates.

(3) Cross-country time means-

(i) Except as provided in paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(vi) of
this section, time acquired during flight-

(A) Conducted by a person who holds a pilot certificate;

(B) Conducted in an aircraft;

(C) That includes a landing at a point other than the point of
departure; and

(D) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic
navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate
to the landing point.