Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...

Even if you break out before the IAP?


Can you give me an example?

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ps.com...

Steven,
How many approachs do you normally get in that Aeronca?


None. It's not the only airplane I fly.

"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
t...

No not at all, that's my personal decision to count an approach as legit.
I figure if I get to the FAF and I'm not IMC then I'd need a hood and a
safety pilot to make it count as one of the 6 approaches.

Why do you feel it's not kosher otherwise?

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:18:09 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
et...

No not at all, that's my personal decision to count an approach as legit.
I figure if I get to the FAF and I'm not IMC then I'd need a hood and a
safety pilot to make it count as one of the 6 approaches.

Why do you feel it's not kosher otherwise?


This is the only "FAA" reference to what they consider an appropriate
amount of IMC constitutes for logging for currency that I have ever
been able to find.


FAAviation News , July-Aug 1990.

"Once you have been cleared for and have initiated an approach in IMC,
you may log that approach for instrument currency, regardless of the
altitude at which you break out of the clouds"

I understand that, but my personal requirement and that's all it is, is
that if I begin an approach in IMC and break out before the FAF then I
won't log it as an approach since I'm then doing see-and-avoid and will
be looking for the runway anyway. I just hold myself to a higher
standard than FAA minimums that's all. To each their own I guess.

Bill Zaleski wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:18:09 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
. net...

No not at all, that's my personal decision to count an approach as legit.
I figure if I get to the FAF and I'm not IMC then I'd need a hood and a
safety pilot to make it count as one of the 6 approaches.

Why do you feel it's not kosher otherwise?



This is the only "FAA" reference to what they consider an appropriate
amount of IMC constitutes for logging for currency that I have ever
been able to find.


FAAviation News , July-Aug 1990.

"Once you have been cleared for and have initiated an approach in IMC,
you may log that approach for instrument currency, regardless of the
altitude at which you break out of the clouds"

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:hqBHg.5978$SZ3.5107@dukeread04...
A IPC is valid for 6 months. You need to read legal documents using formal
rules.

Nothing in the FARs says anything about a validity period (6 months or
otherwise) for an IPC. There is a 6-month validity period for the 6
approaches (and holds and tracking).

The IPC rule says that a pilot who does not meet the 6-6 rule may take an
IPC,

Yes.

the IPC becomes mandatory 12 months after the date currency was
established.

That's a confusing way to put it, since currency may have been established
years ago, and maintained ever since. The IPC becomes mandatory six months
after currency has expired.

But that's not the question at issue. We all agree when the IPC is required.
We all agree that an IPC might include only 3 approaches. The question is
whether, *in addition* to the IPC (when the IPC is required), you have to
satisfy the 6-in-6 requirement of 61.57c in order to be instrument current.
My point is that nothing in 61.57c (or in 61.57d) asserts that the 6-in-6
requirement is waived by the completion of an IPC. As the regs are written
(though perhaps not as they're interpreted in practice), the 6-in-6
requirement has to be met even if you've just had an IPC.

You carefully snipped the quoted regulation so it couldn't be seen by
anyone else.

Uh, sure Jim. No one here is familiar with 61.57d, or knows how to find it
unless we keep repeating it in each of our posts.

The check is available at any time

Yes.

and fully meets the requirements of legal currency...

No. That's exactly what the regs *don't* say. If you disagree, please
explain what part of 61.57c or 61.57d (or any other FAR) supports your claim
that an IPC by itself suffices to reestablish currency.

What 61.57d says is that if your instrument currency expired six months ago,
then you're *not* instrument-current again *unless* you pass an IPC. Nowhere
does it say that you *are* current if you *do* pass an IPC but *do not* meet
the *other* instrument-currency requirements (such as the 6-in-6 rule in
61.57c).

You need to read legal documents using formal rules.
If you don't "see" the meaning of the words, suggest you find a
qualified high school English teacher

Good advice. Please heed it yourself. In the meantime, the relevant formal
principle is that "not-P unless Q" is equivalent to "not-Q implies not-P",
but is *not* equivalent to "Q implies P". But the latter is how you're
(incorrectly) interpreting it. (Here, P is "instrument-current again after
currency lapsed for at least six months" and Q is "passed an IPC".)

--Gary

On 24 Aug 2006 13:22:36 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

Yea, the IPC can be done in less time than doing 6 in 6 for currency
assuming a current pilot. I almost always do IPCs myself just because
it takes so damn long to get in 6 approachs at busy airports. The
requirements of the IPC are very strickly called out in the IFR PTS. It
is not open to the latitude that a BFR is.

-Robert, CFII

I also like to think that an occasional IPC may help to uncover any
bad habits I might have developed. A pilot can rely on 6 in 6 to stay
continuously current for years without ever seeing a CFII. A Flight
Review administered by a CF-single-I may not give the same scrutiny to
instrument skills as an IPC while also working on stalls and short
landings. Just flying 6 approaches doesn't teach much if it's always
the same approach. An IPC offers a chance to review all those skills.

Now another question: Can the IPC be used as part of a Wings phase?

RK Henry

RK Henry wrote:
On 24 Aug 2006 13:22:36 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:
Now another question: Can the IPC be used as part of a Wings phase?

For Land Wings it would certainly count as the 1 hour required for
instrument training. It wouldn't do you any good for Sea Wings.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
ups.com:

For Land Wings it would certainly count as the 1 hour required for
instrument training. It wouldn't do you any good for Sea Wings.

AC61-91H(7)(b) shows a one hour requirement of instrument instruction
under certain circumstances, see "Note".

--

RK Henry wrote:

Now another question: Can the IPC be used as part of a Wings phase?

RK Henry

Absoluely, and mine usually do. It's just a pretty intense wings flight
for that portion of wings.