Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:29:53 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

Years ago, before the USGPO decided that the pages were
printed on solid gold, I subscribed to the FARs. It took 4
4 inch ring binders for parts 61 and 91, there were at least
a dozen pages of comments for each regulation...why it was
needed, what it meant and what the NPRM comments had said
and any revision made in response. Just reading a two or
three sentence regulation is only a small part of the law.


Yup, the preamble usually tells more about the intent than the
finished product ever could. I have all of them via ATP IA software.

Here is more from the FAA
http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_i...dia/PART08.doc

Scroll to para 8.4.1.10

It says...

8.4.1.10 PILOT CURRENCY: IFR OPERATIONS
(a) No person may act as PIC under IFR, nor in IMC, unless he or she has, within the past 6 calendar months—
(1) Logged at least 6 hours of instrument flight time including at least 3 hours in flight in the category of aircraft; and
(2) Completed at least 6 instrument approaches.
(b) A pilot who has completed an instrument competency check with an authorised representative of the Authority retains currency for IFR operations for 6 calendar months following that check.

14 CFR: 61.57(c)

I note that it says "retains" and not "regains". If instrument currency
is lost prior to an ICC (now called IPC, no?), "retains" would not be
sufficient. "Regains" would be necessary.

I also note they refer to 61.57(c), and not (d), which involves the IPC.

Years ago, before the USGPO decided that the pages were
printed on solid gold, I subscribed to the FARs. It took 4
4 inch ring binders for parts 61 and 91, there were at least
a dozen pages of comments for each regulation...why it was
needed, what it meant and what the NPRM comments had said
and any revision made in response. Just reading a two or
three sentence regulation is only a small part of the law.

Alas, it's the part we're supposed to follow. Is this "full FAR" thing
available online?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Somewhere on-line, the FAA has them all, just haven't found
it yet. I think I need to go to the Library of Congress
ands the Congressional Record, that's where it is all
published. I'll find it and post a link before 2012.



"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:29:53 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| wrote:
|
| Years ago, before the USGPO decided that the pages were
| printed on solid gold, I subscribed to the FARs. It took
4
| 4 inch ring binders for parts 61 and 91, there were at
least
| a dozen pages of comments for each regulation...why it
was
| needed, what it meant and what the NPRM comments had said
| and any revision made in response. Just reading a two or
| three sentence regulation is only a small part of the
law.
|
|
| Yup, the preamble usually tells more about the intent than
the
| finished product ever could. I have all of them via ATP
IA software.

Follow what we say. An IPC [the name change did not change
the application, just the required content, the ICC could be
one approach]. Look in the Congressional Record or in the
FAA sites archives.
"Jose" wrote in message
et...
| Here is more from the FAA
|
http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_i...dia/PART08.doc
|
| Scroll to para 8.4.1.10
|
| It says...
|
| 8.4.1.10 PILOT CURRENCY: IFR OPERATIONS
| (a) No person may act as PIC under IFR, nor in IMC,
unless he or she has, within the past 6 calendar months—
| (1) Logged at least 6 hours of instrument flight time
including at least 3 hours in flight in the category of
aircraft; and
| (2) Completed at least 6 instrument approaches.
| (b) A pilot who has completed an instrument competency
check with an authorised representative of the Authority
retains currency for IFR operations for 6 calendar months
following that check.
|
| 14 CFR: 61.57(c)
|
| I note that it says "retains" and not "regains". If
instrument currency
| is lost prior to an ICC (now called IPC, no?), "retains"
would not be
| sufficient. "Regains" would be necessary.
|
| I also note they refer to 61.57(c), and not (d), which
involves the IPC.
|
| Years ago, before the USGPO decided that the pages were
| printed on solid gold, I subscribed to the FARs. It
took 4
| 4 inch ring binders for parts 61 and 91, there were at
least
| a dozen pages of comments for each regulation...why it
was
| needed, what it meant and what the NPRM comments had
said
| and any revision made in response. Just reading a two
or
| three sentence regulation is only a small part of the
law.
|
| Alas, it's the part we're supposed to follow. Is this
"full FAR" thing
| available online?
|
| Jose
| --
| The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the
music.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:m8vJg.6450$SZ3.2460@dukeread04...

Somewhere on-line, the FAA has them all, just haven't found
it yet. I think I need to go to the Library of Congress
ands the Congressional Record, that's where it is all
published. I'll find it and post a link before 2012.


http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...l=%2Findex.tpl

That link just leads back to the FAA website, it does not
include the annotated or NPRM discussion.



"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote
in message
k.net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:m8vJg.6450$SZ3.2460@dukeread04...
|
| Somewhere on-line, the FAA has them all, just haven't
found
| it yet. I think I need to go to the Library of Congress
| ands the Congressional Record, that's where it is all
| published. I'll find it and post a link before 2012.
|
|
|
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...l=%2Findex.tpl
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:SQAJg.6465$SZ3.3563@dukeread04...

That link just leads back to the FAA website, it does not
include the annotated or NPRM discussion.


It's a link to the Code of Federal Regulations.

Yep, select chapter 14 and it goes to the FAA site
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote
in message
k.net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:SQAJg.6465$SZ3.3563@dukeread04...
|
| That link just leads back to the FAA website, it does
not
| include the annotated or NPRM discussion.
|
|
| It's a link to the Code of Federal Regulations.
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:FlBJg.6466$SZ3.736@dukeread04...

Yep, select chapter 14 and it goes to the FAA site


When I select "Title 14 - Aeronautics and Space" it just brings up the
various Parts of Title 14 on the GPO site.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:OCoJg.6409$SZ3.3181@dukeread04...
All that is required is for the pilot to record the name of
the safety pilot, no endorsement is required, not even the
certificate number.

But after 12 months from the first day you were current [six
months after currency lapsed] you must have an IPC.
So, after 12 months, with no approaches in the mean time, an
IPC makes you current.

61.57 says an IPC makes you current, it does not say an IPC
and 6 approaches.



"Allen" wrote in message
...
|
| "Roy Smith" wrote in message
| It works the other way too. Let's say you've only got
3 approaches
| logged in the last 6 months and come to me for an IPC.
We fly 3 more
| approaches, I decide that you suck at instruments and
decline to sign
| you off for an IPC.
|
| You're now legally current anyway, by virtue of having
flown 6
| approaches.
|
| Not if the approaches were flown in VMC and you do not
sign as safety
| pilot.
|
| There's no such thing as "sign as safety pilot".
|
| Whether you write or he writes it your name will be in his
logbook.

I know that Jim, it was a poor choice of words on my part. I was just
trying to point out that if the pilot who was declined the IPC logged the
three approaches to return to currency and then craters in the instructors
name will be in the logbook and will be sought out for questioning.

Allen