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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Teacherjh" wrote in message ... It can be legal VFR and be bad enough to have to fly by instruments. The FAA allows this to count. Where does the FAA say that this counts? It is what the regs literally say. All they say is you have to be in instrument conditions. Doesn't say anything about flight rules. This was affirmed in the following opinion by FAA counsel. To answer your first question, actual instrument conditions may occur in the case you described a moonless night over the ocean with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. The determination as to whether flight by reference to instruments is necessary is somewhat subjective and based in part on the sound judgment of the pilot. Note that, under Section 61.51(b)(3), the pilot must log the conditions of the flight. The log should include the reasons for determining that the flight was under actual instrument conditions in case the pilot later would be called on to prove that the actual instrument flight time logged was legitimate |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in
: Yes, but immaterial. The weather can still be legal VFR, but bad enough to cause yout to fly solely by instruments. The FAA has affirmed this is legally logable as instrument time. Where'd they do that? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Hilton wrote: The FARs do not specify 'must be on an IFR flight plan', nor do they specify that you need to be instrument rated to log actual. But they do specify that it must be actual or simulated instrument flight conditions. That was exactly my point. Hilton |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
But they do specify that it must be actual or simulated instrument flight conditions. So what qualifies the approach as being in actual? Santa Monica (KSMO), California, has more often than not a deck of clouds over it right on the Pacific Coast. the circling minimum for the VOR or GPS-A approach is 1120 and the MAP is 6.7 NM from the FAF. Minimum altitude at the FAF is 2600. (1) If on the descent course you enter the cloud deck at 3,500 feet and drop out of it at 2700 one mile before the FAF, does the approach count? (2) ....drop out of it at 2500 feet one mile past the FAF......? Discussing this in another forum, one camp says yes to both, another no to (1) and yes to (2), and still another says you have to go down to minimums. It seems to me the third group will never have an "actual" approach in their logbook. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"John R Weiss" wrote in message news:NTxTb.164149$5V2.843814@attbi_s53... If you can't maintain level flight without reference to instruments, because there is no discernible horizon for outside reference, you are in actual instrument flight conditions. How can that be? IFR conditions are weather conditions below the minimum for flight under visual flight rules. You can easily have weather conditions well above the minimum for flight under visual flight rules above an undercast. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message . .. It's what the rules literally say. Affirmed by FAA legal counsel: The rule does not say that. The rule says, ""A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions." So, literally, it must be below VFR minimums or you must wear a hood. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Casey Wilson"
writes: So what qualifies the approach as being in actual? This whole thread is missing the real point. i think that the 90% reason to log approaches is for your own information. You can look back a few months and "evaluate" your readyness to fly IFR. Yea, I know that there laws that are to be met but.... If you do 12 approaches(real or other) in the 6 months you will be better prepared and if one didn't quite count, so what. You are not satisfying a law, you are remaining capable of a skill once learned. Chuck |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "Ron Natalie" wrote in message . .. It's what the rules literally say. Affirmed by FAA legal counsel: The rule does not say that. The rule says, ""A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions." So, literally, it must be below VFR minimums or you must wear a hood. It doesn't say anything about VFR minimums. The FAA affirms that there are times when you can be technically above VFR minimums (not in the clouds and sufficient visibility), but the horizon and the ground is obscured and those qualify for actual instrument conditions, even though it's not bad enough to require IFR. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"Casey Wilson" wrote in message ... So what qualifies the approach as being in actual? Santa Monica (KSMO), California, has more often than not a deck of clouds over it right on the Pacific Coast. the circling minimum for the VOR or GPS-A approach is 1120 and the MAP is 6.7 NM from the FAF. Minimum altitude at the FAF is 2600. (1) If on the descent course you enter the cloud deck at 3,500 feet and drop out of it at 2700 one mile before the FAF, does the approach count? (2) ....drop out of it at 2500 feet one mile past the FAF......? Discussing this in another forum, one camp says yes to both, another no to (1) and yes to (2), and still another says you have to go down to minimums. It seems to me the third group will never have an "actual" approach in their logbook. What's the local MIA/MVA? If a descent to the minimum enroute altitude leaves you in the clouds, then an IAP is required, even if the field is reporting VFR conditions. If an approach is required how can it not be logable? |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message . .. "Teacherjh" wrote in message ... It can be legal VFR and be bad enough to have to fly by instruments. The FAA allows this to count. Where does the FAA say that this counts? It is what the regs literally say. All they say is you have to be in instrument conditions. Doesn't say anything about flight rules. If you're in instrument conditions it's not legal VFR. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What approaches are in a database? | Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | January 4th 04 07:57 PM |
GPS approaches with Center | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 104 | October 22nd 03 09:42 PM |
Logging instrument approaches | Slav Inger | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | July 27th 03 11:00 PM |
Suppose We Really Do Have Only GPS Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 20th 03 05:10 PM |
Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 18th 03 01:43 PM |