Real-world IFR currency

The last thing I saw published by tthe FAA was that the approach had merely
to be "initiated" in IMC to be loggable.

The last thing I saw (the FAQ) indicated that it had to be to minimus
(though I suppose any class of minimums would do). Where did you read
from the FAA that initiating an approach in IMC, and continuing
visually, is sufficient for legal purposes?

Jose

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:24:13 GMT, Jose
wrote:

The last thing I saw published by tthe FAA was that the approach had merely
to be "initiated" in IMC to be loggable.

The last thing I saw (the FAQ) indicated that it had to be to minimus
(though I suppose any class of minimums would do). Where did you read
from the FAA that initiating an approach in IMC, and continuing
visually, is sufficient for legal purposes?

Jose


What exactly is "the FAQ"?

I read it in a response to a question in the FAANews, a FAA
publication which may or may not still be in existence.

It was a while ago, but I have never read anything in the interim to
contradict that statement.

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:38:41 GMT, wrote:

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:24:13 GMT, Jose
wrote:

The last thing I saw published by tthe FAA was that the approach had merely
to be "initiated" in IMC to be loggable.

The last thing I saw (the FAQ) indicated that it had to be to minimus
(though I suppose any class of minimums would do). Where did you read
from the FAA that initiating an approach in IMC, and continuing
visually, is sufficient for legal purposes?

Jose


What exactly is "the FAQ"?

I read it in a response to a question in the FAANews, a FAA
publication which may or may not still be in existence.

It was a while ago, but I have never read anything in the interim to
contradict that statement.


That would be the FAAviation News, still around, apparently.

That would be the FAAviation News, still around, apparently.

Do you recall what issue it is? Online it only goes back to 2000 or so.

What exactly is "the FAQ"?

The FAA part 61 Faqs are located here (as a Word document):

http://www.firstgov.gov/fgsearch/res...cs/pt61FAQ.doc

The question about logging instrument approaches is answered on page
123, or you can search for the string:

QUESTION: As far as logging an approach in actual

Jose

In article ,
wrote:

It's definitely there, but I want to research this further. It was
exactly this interpretation that was initially given, and the
FAAviation News Q&A response contradicted this interpretation, as it
would mean that the only approaches that could be logged would be
those where the pilot went missed. (If you are in hard actual at DA
or MDA, after all, you probably aren't going to land.) However, thes
FAQ is later than the issue if the FAAviation News that I read, I am
almost certain.

Yet, if my memory serves me correctly (it's been a while) this FAQ
was issued right after a major revision to Part 61, and there were so
many misinterpretations and errors in the FAQ that the FAQ was pretty
much discredited as an authoritative source.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong about this.

Well, at the top of the FAQ it gives this URL:

http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/afs800/docs/pt61FAQ.doc

where there is a copy of what appears to be the same document with
actual revision data on it: REVISION #21, DATE: October 12, 2004.

Given that this document comes from the FAA web site and has a recent
date that seems to make it reasonably authoritative. Here's what it
says:

---

QUESTION: As far as logging an approach in actual, is there any
requirement (i.e. must it be in actual conditions beyond the final
approach fix)? Assume that the pilot was flying single-pilot IFR so he
couldn't simply put on the hood if he broke out?

ANSWER: 61.51(g)(1) and 61.57(c)(1)(i); Again the only place where it
defines logging "instrument flight time" means ". . . a person may log
instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the
aircraft solely by reference to instruments . . . ." As for logging an
"actual" approach, it would presume the approach to be to the conclusion
of the approach which would mean the pilot go down to the decision
height or to the minimum decent altitude, as appropriate. If what
you're asking is whether it is okay to fly to the FAF and break it off
and then log it as accomplishing an approach, the answer is no.

----

This sure sounds to me like you have to fly to minimums and still be in
IMC (and therefore fly the missed as well) before it's loggable.

Geez. If this is really true then I suspect there are an awful lot of
pilots out there who think they're current but really aren't.

rg

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
Well, at the top of the FAQ it gives this URL:

http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/afs800/docs/pt61FAQ.doc

where there is a copy of what appears to be the same document with
actual revision data on it: REVISION #21, DATE: October 12, 2004.

Given that this document comes from the FAA web site and has a recent
date that seems to make it reasonably authoritative. Here's what it
says:

---

QUESTION: As far as logging an approach in actual, is there any
requirement (i.e. must it be in actual conditions beyond the final
approach fix)? Assume that the pilot was flying single-pilot IFR so he
couldn't simply put on the hood if he broke out?

ANSWER: 61.51(g)(1) and 61.57(c)(1)(i); Again the only place where it
defines logging "instrument flight time" means ". . . a person may log
instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the
aircraft solely by reference to instruments . . . ." As for logging an
"actual" approach, it would presume the approach to be to the conclusion
of the approach which would mean the pilot go down to the decision
height or to the minimum decent altitude, as appropriate. If what
you're asking is whether it is okay to fly to the FAF and break it off
and then log it as accomplishing an approach, the answer is no.

----

This sure sounds to me like you have to fly to minimums and still be in
IMC (and therefore fly the missed as well) before it's loggable.

Geez. If this is really true then I suspect there are an awful lot of
pilots out there who think they're current but really aren't.

Except notice that the answer doesn't actually address the question. The
answer says that a logged approach has to be flown to the DA or MDA. It does
not say whether the approach has to be in instrument conditions past the
FAF, which is what the question asked.

--Gary

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
That would be the FAAviation News, still around, apparently.

Do you recall what issue it is? Online it only goes back to 2000 or so.


I haven't followed this entire thread, so pardon me if this is redundant:

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"

Someone posted that a few years ago. I don't have the original document.

Stan

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:09:26 -0500, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

Except notice that the answer doesn't actually address the question. The
answer says that a logged approach has to be flown to the DA or MDA. It
does
not say whether the approach has to be in instrument conditions past the
FAF, which is what the question asked.

--Gary

Except we are talking "actual" approaches, so the implication is
that's it's actual all the way.

Hm, I don't see how that can be the implication when the question explicitly
*asks* if it has to be actual all the way ("must it be in actual conditions
beyond the final approach fix?"), and the FAA's response is "If what you're
asking is whether it is okay to fly to the FAF and break it off...", which
is not at all what was asked.

--Gary

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...

The original question was: under what circumstances can an approach be
logged for the purposes of maintaining IFR currency? Obviously if
you're under the hood with a safety pilot or in hard IMC to minimums you
can log it, and if you're in VMC without a hood you can't. But where is
the line?


I'd log the approaches that were necessary to complete the flight. If
there's solid cloud at or below the MIA/MVA an approach is necessary to
reach the destination, even if the field is VMC.

I'd agree. This pretty much follows the "FAAviation News" rule.

If you initiate an approach in IMC, it's loggable.

Once I pass the IAF, or receive the first approach vector, if I am
IMC, it gets logged.


On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:08:10 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...

The original question was: under what circumstances can an approach be
logged for the purposes of maintaining IFR currency? Obviously if
you're under the hood with a safety pilot or in hard IMC to minimums you
can log it, and if you're in VMC without a hood you can't. But where is
the line?


I'd log the approaches that were necessary to complete the flight. If
there's solid cloud at or below the MIA/MVA an approach is necessary to
reach the destination, even if the field is VMC.