A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tips on Getting Your Instrument Rating Sooner and at Lower Cost



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 6th 04, 05:17 PM
Fred
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Tips on Getting Your Instrument Rating Sooner and at Lower Cost

Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE
regarding the
various experience requirements for an instrument rating?

The XC requirement in particular, is one that oftentimes unnecessarily adds
to the cost
of an instrument rating and delays getting it.

According to the FAA, a pilot who already has a private pilot certificate
and is
RATED in the airplane, can log PIC time, even while receiving dual
instruction.

This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an
instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't
file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot,
can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty.

Much instrument training is done this way, with the instructor acting as
ATC.
Most of your instrument training will be hood time. Do it on a XC using
instrument
navigation procedures and you can save as much as 20-30 hours or more of the
additional cost of having to do it over twice. (The rules do not say SOLO
XC
the rules say PIC XC )

This means that most of your instrument time training can also be XC PIC IF
you
arrange your flights carefully in regard to what the regulations require and
make
your training part of an XC trip.

(As a side note, this is a good way to get your training because you get to
plan all aspects of the flight from the standpoint of FLYING an instrument
trip. Take-off, climb, enroute, approach and landing are all included.
Just do them to instrument standards under the hood and for all practical
purposes you are conducting an instrument flight.....and getting
double duty out of your flight dollar.).

There are a number of other rules that require certain amounts of flight
time
under varying conditions that usually are done one at a time, rather than
meeting several requirements on one flight.

If you look at your logbook, and study the regulations, you will see many
instances
of this.

If you are just getting started flying, this might be a good time to
CAREFULLY
STUDY the rules and ask your flight instructor about how to combine as many
requirements on a flight as possible to make your learning experience more
cost effective.

If you are like most pilots, flying is expensive. Getting the most for
your dolllar
is important. KNOWING what the regulations REALLY require can save
you a lot of money and get you on your way faster, without shortchanging
your
knowledge.

Being organized and having knowledge of what the rules really say can save
you a lot of money.

Remember. If you have questions about the way the regulations are
interpreted
you can call your local FAA Flight Standards District Office and ask an
Inspector.

They are there to help you.

P.S. You might like to read
HOW TO TRAIN YOUR FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR
http://webplus.locators.estates.co.uk/hint6.html#train




Ads
  #2  
Old October 6th 04, 05:51 PM
C Kingsbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In my experience the #1 time-delay comes from getting the written test done.
If/when I decide to go for my commercial I'm not going to even start taking
lessons until after I've done the written. Doing the same with my private &
instrument would have saved me 3 calendar months on each. And in general,
the fewer calendar months you spend training, the fewer hours you spend in
the airplane fixing things you forgot from previous lessons.

-cwk.

"Fred" wrote in message
ink.net...
Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE
regarding the
various experience requirements for an instrument rating?




  #3  
Old October 6th 04, 06:03 PM
gatt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
ink.net...
In my experience the #1 time-delay comes from getting the written test

done.
If/when I decide to go for my commercial I'm not going to even start

taking
lessons until after I've done the written. Doing the same with my private

&
instrument would have saved me 3 calendar months on each. And in general,
the fewer calendar months you spend training, the fewer hours you spend in
the airplane fixing things you forgot from previous lessons.


INDEED!

-c


  #4  
Old October 6th 04, 06:04 PM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Fred" wrote in message
ink.net...
This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an
instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you
can't
file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot,
can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double
duty.


A private pilot can log PIC XC time for an instrument training XC trip even
if the flight is IFR (or even in IMC). FAR 61.51e1i requires only that the
pilot be rated for the aircraft in order to log PIC time as
sole-manipulator. There is no requirement that the pilot be rated for the
conditions of flight, or that the pilot actually be PIC.

--Gary


  #5  
Old October 6th 04, 06:13 PM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an
instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't
file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot,
can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty.


Well, sort of. You need to make this arrangement beforehand, because LOGGING
PIC time and BEING PIC are two different animals, kind of like dolphin (the
kind you eat) and dolphin (as in Flipper) are two different animals.

You can =log= PIC time as a non-instrument-rated private pilot, even under an
IFR flight plan that your instructor files, even though the instructor must
=be= PIC(*). However, you can =not= use this time as the time required under
61.65(d)(1). Though it's in your logbook as PIC (sole manipulator, or "Hands On
Time"), you were not PIC (Top Dog) on that flight. I know you didn't claim
this to be true; I state it for completeness.

You can also log PIC time if you are flying under VFR, under the hood, with the
instructor also acting as safety pilot, irrespective of who =is= PIC. This is
the case I believe you were referring to, and yes, if you and your instructor
agree that =you= (the student) are to be Top Dog on that flight, then the time
counts towards the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might be the case that
you need to do this (for example, if the instructor's medical has lapsed, I
believe she can still give you required instruction, she just can't be Top Dog,
though this would require another current pilot in the back to act as safety
pilot, which is a required crewmember under the circumstances, which brings us
back to the pathological case referred to earlier). On the other hand, it is
also possible that the (current) instructor elects to act as Top Dog (and =be=
PIC), in which case though you could log HOT time (PIC time) you could not use
it as the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might even be necessary (for
example, if your own medical has lapsed, though I think that in that case you
might not be able to log the time at all; 61.23 does not list "receiving flight
instruction" as an exception)

So, yes, you can make the time do double duty, but you need to read the regs
carefully. Remember, HOT time doesn't make you Top Dog, and being Top Dog
doesn't make you HOT.

Jose
==
(*) OK, there are pathological cases where a third person sitting in the back
could BE PIC, for now let's not go there.. oh, never mind, we already did.

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
  #6  
Old October 6th 04, 07:04 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm not sure I buy that argument. Of course the regulation doesn't help
because it is not precise. The logging of instrument time make the distinction very
clear for "acting" PIC and "logging" PIC. FAR 61.65d1 says:

(d) Aeronautical experience. A person who applies for an instrument rating must have
logged the following:
(1) At least 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command, of which at
least 10 hours must be in airplanes for an instrumentairplane rating; and

There is no separate column in my logbook for time I acted as PIC (assumed to
be the same as your definition of "being PIC", "top-dog", "head-honcho", "the-big
fazootti", etc), vs. time that I logged PIC. In other words, the act of acting PIC
isn't logged... I'm sure this can be argued ad-nauseum both ways, but it just ****es
me off that the regulation-perverse FAA is so flippin' vaugue about the important
stuff.

I say if you're driving the plane that you're rated for (and can thus log PIC
time), it counts. Even in the spirit of the notion of logging time.... if it's
acceptable to log PIC time under the hood in VMC solely because you're driving, you're
still driving if it's clouds out.

Here we go.....

-Cory

Teacherjh
wrote:
:
: This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an
: instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't
: file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot,
: can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty.
:

: Well, sort of. You need to make this arrangement beforehand, because LOGGING
: PIC time and BEING PIC are two different animals, kind of like dolphin (the
: kind you eat) and dolphin (as in Flipper) are two different animals.

: You can =log= PIC time as a non-instrument-rated private pilot, even under an
: IFR flight plan that your instructor files, even though the instructor must
: =be= PIC(*). However, you can =not= use this time as the time required under
: 61.65(d)(1). Though it's in your logbook as PIC (sole manipulator, or "Hands On
: Time"), you were not PIC (Top Dog) on that flight. I know you didn't claim
: this to be true; I state it for completeness.

: You can also log PIC time if you are flying under VFR, under the hood, with the
: instructor also acting as safety pilot, irrespective of who =is= PIC. This is
: the case I believe you were referring to, and yes, if you and your instructor
: agree that =you= (the student) are to be Top Dog on that flight, then the time
: counts towards the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might be the case that
: you need to do this (for example, if the instructor's medical has lapsed, I
: believe she can still give you required instruction, she just can't be Top Dog,
: though this would require another current pilot in the back to act as safety
: pilot, which is a required crewmember under the circumstances, which brings us
: back to the pathological case referred to earlier). On the other hand, it is
: also possible that the (current) instructor elects to act as Top Dog (and =be=
: PIC), in which case though you could log HOT time (PIC time) you could not use
: it as the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might even be necessary (for
: example, if your own medical has lapsed, though I think that in that case you
: might not be able to log the time at all; 61.23 does not list "receiving flight
: instruction" as an exception)

: So, yes, you can make the time do double duty, but you need to read the regs
: carefully. Remember, HOT time doesn't make you Top Dog, and being Top Dog
: doesn't make you HOT.

: Jose
: ==
: (*) OK, there are pathological cases where a third person sitting in the back
: could BE PIC, for now let's not go there.. oh, never mind, we already did.

: --
: (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

  #7  
Old October 6th 04, 07:23 PM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...
You can =log= PIC time as a non-instrument-rated private pilot, even under
an
IFR flight plan that your instructor files, even though the instructor
must
=be= PIC(*). However, you can =not= use this time as the time required
under
61.65(d)(1). Though it's in your logbook as PIC (sole manipulator, or
"Hands On
Time"), you were not PIC (Top Dog) on that flight.


But you don't have to have been PIC on the flight in order to use your
properly logged PIC time to meet the flight-experience requirements for a
certificate or rating (such as the PIC-time requirement set form in
61.65d1). As the sole-manipulator rated for the aircraft, a private pilot
who is not PIC can log IFR/IMC flight time as PIC time, according to
61.51e1i. And then, according to 61.51c1, the time so logged can be used to
meet the requirements to apply for a certificate or rating. (If 61.51c
didn't let you count the logged PIC time when the regs call for PIC time,
then what would be the point of being able to log it as such?)

--Gary


  #8  
Old October 6th 04, 09:36 PM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


But you don't have to have been PIC on the flight [...]
As the sole-manipulator [...] a private pilot [...] can log IFR/IMC flight time
as PIC time, [...]. And then, according to 61.51c1, the time so logged
can be used to meet the requirements


Hmmm... looking further back, 61.65(d) starts out "must have logged the
following: (1) at least 50 hours...

So, maybe you're right. In fact, I now think you are right. I learn something
new every day. I guess I'm done for today.

(a different post)

I'm sure this can be argued ad-nauseum both ways, but it just ****es
me off that the regulation-perverse FAA is so flippin' vaugue about the
important
stuff.


I'm with you there!

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
  #9  
Old October 6th 04, 10:29 PM
Richard Hertz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Fred" wrote in message
ink.net...
Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE
regarding the
various experience requirements for an instrument rating?

The XC requirement in particular, is one that oftentimes unnecessarily

adds
to the cost
of an instrument rating and delays getting it.

According to the FAA, a pilot who already has a private pilot certificate
and is
RATED in the airplane, can log PIC time, even while receiving dual
instruction.

This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an
instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you

can't
file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot,
can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double

duty.

Much instrument training is done this way, with the instructor acting as
ATC.
Most of your instrument training will be hood time. Do it on a XC using
instrument
navigation procedures and you can save as much as 20-30 hours or more of

the
additional cost of having to do it over twice. (The rules do not say

SOLO
XC
the rules say PIC XC )




How do you come up with 20 to 30 hours?

Doing cross countries is no place to start learning IFR procedures. You
should spend time in a sim beforehand, then make your way to a plane. Your
proposal I think is something that most people are aware of. Thanks for the
"help."




This means that most of your instrument time training can also be XC PIC

IF
you
arrange your flights carefully in regard to what the regulations require

and
make
your training part of an XC trip.

(As a side note, this is a good way to get your training because you get

to
plan all aspects of the flight from the standpoint of FLYING an instrument
trip. Take-off, climb, enroute, approach and landing are all included.
Just do them to instrument standards under the hood and for all practical
purposes you are conducting an instrument flight.....and getting
double duty out of your flight dollar.).

There are a number of other rules that require certain amounts of flight
time
under varying conditions that usually are done one at a time, rather than
meeting several requirements on one flight.

If you look at your logbook, and study the regulations, you will see many
instances
of this.

If you are just getting started flying, this might be a good time to
CAREFULLY
STUDY the rules and ask your flight instructor about how to combine as

many
requirements on a flight as possible to make your learning experience more
cost effective.

If you are like most pilots, flying is expensive. Getting the most for
your dolllar
is important. KNOWING what the regulations REALLY require can save
you a lot of money and get you on your way faster, without shortchanging
your
knowledge.

Being organized and having knowledge of what the rules really say can save
you a lot of money.

Remember. If you have questions about the way the regulations are
interpreted
you can call your local FAA Flight Standards District Office and ask an
Inspector.

They are there to help you.

P.S. You might like to read
HOW TO TRAIN YOUR FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR
http://webplus.locators.estates.co.uk/hint6.html#train






  #10  
Old October 7th 04, 12:06 AM
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
...
I'm not sure I buy that argument. Of course the regulation doesn't
help
because it is not precise. The logging of instrument time make the
distinction very
clear for "acting" PIC and "logging" PIC. FAR 61.65d1 says:

(d) Aeronautical experience. A person who applies for an instrument rating
must have
logged the following:
(1) At least 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command, of
which at
least 10 hours must be in airplanes for an instrumentairplane rating; and

There is no separate column in my logbook for time I acted as PIC
(assumed to
be the same as your definition of "being PIC", "top-dog", "head-honcho",
"the-big
fazootti", etc), vs. time that I logged PIC. In other words, the act of
acting PIC
isn't logged... I'm sure this can be argued ad-nauseum both ways, but it
just ****es
me off that the regulation-perverse FAA is so flippin' vaugue about the
important
stuff.


In my logbook, there are columns for Captain, logbook holders operating
capacity and for PIC time.

Head honcho instructor goes down as captain, me goes in operating capacity
as P1/s ie supervised PIC and the time goes in PIC. It is an English logbook
and neatly sets out the various responsibilities.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The new Instrument Rating PTS C J Campbell Instrument Flight Rules 7 May 27th 04 12:35 AM
Logging approaches Ron Garrison Instrument Flight Rules 109 March 2nd 04 06:54 PM
Instrument Rating Ground School at Central Jersey Regional (47N) john price Instrument Flight Rules 0 October 29th 03 01:56 PM
Instrument Rating Ground School at Central Jersey Regional (47N) john price Instrument Flight Rules 0 October 12th 03 12:25 PM
Got my Instrument Rating! Jazzy_Pilot Instrument Flight Rules 4 August 21st 03 02:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.