Is an IPC a substitute for 6 approaches?

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
| ...
| Allen wrote:
|
| "Roy Smith" wrote in message
| ...
| wrote:
| Interesting. That an IPC would make a pilot current
for IFR for 6
| months, regardless of the number of approaches done,
is something
| that I've always just thought I've "known".
|
| 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.
|
|

On 2006-08-30, Jim Macklin wrote:
61.57 says an IPC makes you current, it does not say an IPC
and 6 approaches.

You're wrong.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD

http://www.ben.com/

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:08:11 -0500, Ben Jackson wrote:

On 2006-08-30, Jim Macklin wrote:
61.57 says an IPC makes you current, it does not say an IPC
and 6 approaches.

You're wrong.

Jim is right. I spent a week at the FAA examiner certification school
at Oak City. All the teachers/FAA managers concurred that the initial
instrument checkride, as well as an IPC alone, resets the clock to
zero on instrument currency. FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to
act as PIC if (c) is not met. It does not state that (c) must also be
met. (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of currency, not
(c). Paragraph (c) is the recency of experience requirements to
operate IFR. Beyond 6 months, paragraph (d) now applies, as it
contains the verbiage of what is required after the first 6 month
period (6 more months to complete (c) OR IPC only beyond that).
Paragraph (c) becomes a moot point after the time that you are allowed
to comply with it passes. (d) takes over and stands alone. This is
how it was explained to me. It was also brought up, (without need, I
feel), that one can complete an IPC at any time, and not have to be
out of currency to do so. If one can assume that 6 approches are also
needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed to mean that
you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an IPC. (Silly)

There are questions in the instrument knowledge test question pool
whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by letter of
memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to support this.
Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports this. Sure
the FAR's are vague at times, but there have been plenty of references
to policy that make the case. If you just understand that one
paragraph is for maintaining currency, and the other to get back
current, if you are not, the regulation's intent is clear.

The nice thing about the FAR, is it is like the Bible, we
all should follow it and each of us gets to decide what it
means.

FAR 91 first word is "except."

Thanks.

BTW, I'm not a Bible thumper, maybe because it is vague.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:08:11 -0500, Ben Jackson
wrote:
|
| On 2006-08-30, Jim Macklin wrote:
| 61.57 says an IPC makes you current, it does not say an
IPC
| and 6 approaches.
|
| You're wrong.
|
| Jim is right. I spent a week at the FAA examiner
certification school
| at Oak City. All the teachers/FAA managers concurred that
the initial
| instrument checkride, as well as an IPC alone, resets the
clock to
| zero on instrument currency. FAR 61.57 (d) sets the
requirements to
| act as PIC if (c) is not met. It does not state that (c)
must also be
| met. (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of
currency, not
| (c). Paragraph (c) is the recency of experience
requirements to
| operate IFR. Beyond 6 months, paragraph (d) now applies,
as it
| contains the verbiage of what is required after the first
6 month
| period (6 more months to complete (c) OR IPC only beyond
that).
| Paragraph (c) becomes a moot point after the time that you
are allowed
| to comply with it passes. (d) takes over and stands alone.
This is
| how it was explained to me. It was also brought up,
(without need, I
| feel), that one can complete an IPC at any time, and not
have to be
| out of currency to do so. If one can assume that 6
approches are also
| needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed
to mean that
| you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an
IPC. (Silly)
|
| There are questions in the instrument knowledge test
question pool
| whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by
letter of
| memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to support
this.
| Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports
this. Sure
| the FAR's are vague at times, but there have been plenty
of references
| to policy that make the case. If you just understand that
one
| paragraph is for maintaining currency, and the other to
get back
| current, if you are not, the regulation's intent is clear.
|

"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
...
FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if (c) is not met.

No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if (c) is not met (or
rather, if c has not been met for six months).

It does not state that (c) must also be met.

Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm any other FARs? The
point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still have to be met.

In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation. You can't decide
that because you're complying with one, you can ignore another one (unless
the wording explicitly says that).

(d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of currency, not (c).

There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply too.

(d) takes over and stands alone.

But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.

This is how it was explained to me.

Did the explainers say how they arrived at their interpretation that (d)
sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an additional requirement?
If so, would you tell us their explanation?

If one can assume that 6 approches are also
needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed to mean that
you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an IPC.

How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?

There are questions in the instrument knowledge test question pool
whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by letter of
memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to support this.
Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports this.

It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All I'm saying is that if
so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.

--Gary

see
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...ncy%20check%22

Which say in part...
(b) an IFR currency record, a copy of

logbook endorsement for 14 CFR § 61.57 instrument

competency check, or a record of instrument currency

(6 hours and 6 approaches) obtained within the past

6 months.











"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
. ..
| "Bill Zaleski" wrote in
message
| ...
| FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if
(c) is not met.
|
| No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if (c)
is not met (or
| rather, if c has not been met for six months).
|
| It does not state that (c) must also be met.
|
| Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm
any other FARs? The
| point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still have
to be met.
|
| In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation.
You can't decide
| that because you're complying with one, you can ignore
another one (unless
| the wording explicitly says that).
|
| (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of
currency, not (c).
|
| There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply
too.
|
| (d) takes over and stands alone.
|
| But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.
|
| This is how it was explained to me.
|
| Did the explainers say how they arrived at their
interpretation that (d)
| sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an
additional requirement?
| If so, would you tell us their explanation?
|
| If one can assume that 6 approches are also
| needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed
to mean that
| you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an
IPC.
|
| How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?
|
| There are questions in the instrument knowledge test
question pool
| whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by
letter of
| memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to
support this.
| Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports
this.
|
| It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All I'm
saying is that if
| so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.
|
| --Gary
|
|

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:40:01 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
.. .
FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if (c) is not met.

No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if (c) is not met (or
rather, if c has not been met for six months).

It does not state that (c) must also be met.

Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm any other FARs? The
point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still have to be met.

In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation. You can't decide
that because you're complying with one, you can ignore another one (unless
the wording explicitly says that).

(d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of currency, not (c).

There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply too.

(d) takes over and stands alone.

But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.

This is how it was explained to me.

Did the explainers say how they arrived at their interpretation that (d)
sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an additional requirement?
If so, would you tell us their explanation?

If one can assume that 6 approches are also
needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed to mean that
you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an IPC.

How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?

There are questions in the instrument knowledge test question pool
whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by letter of
memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to support this.
Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports this.

It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All I'm saying is that if
so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.

--Gary
Yes, the FAR's are clear here, if you read the paragraph that applies
to what you are seeking.
How much simpler can it be than to read the titles of (c) and (d)

(c) Instrument experience: This is what you have to do to determine
your current state of required instrument experience. This is all it
addresses and nothing more. IF you decide that you are not current,
you are done with this paragraph and it does not apply to you any
longer (for the moment). Go to paragraph (d) for further guidance.

(d) IPC: This is what you have to look at and do to GET current,
depending on whether you are out of currency by more than 6 months,
(IPC), or less than six months, (do the damn approaches OR do an IPC
anyway). It says "a person who does not meet (c)", can't be PIC
until you do the stuff spelled out in (d), (not necessarily the
paragraph (c) stuff, unless you qualify). If you are doing an IPC,
you are not bound by the requirements of (c) or it would be included
in the verbage. This refers you back to (c), but only gives relief via
approaches if you are within 6 months of your last currency, and
provides the option of completing the 6 approaches. It is the
guideline for getting current, and the IPC does not mandate anything
outside of the task table in the Instrument PTS. Although it doesn't
state so, an IPC is ALWAYS an option, regardless of currency status,
Paragraph (d) is clearly relief from paragraph(c) via the IPC route
alone. It in no way suggests that you have to do both.

Since I am always willing to listen and learn, let me pose this to
the logic that applies to intrepretation of the FAR's.

Is it a violation of 91.126 (b) (1) when you make a right turn to join
a left downwind from a 45 degree entry? Strict interpretation says
yes, common sense says no.

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:50:07 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

see
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...ncy%20check%22

Which say in part...
(b) an IFR currency record, a copy of

logbook endorsement for 14 CFR § 61.57 instrument

competency check, or a record of instrument currency

(6 hours and 6 approaches) obtained within the past

6 months.


Good job, Jim. An FAA order is law for inspectors. Granted the order
is outdated, but the intent is clear.










"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
| "Bill Zaleski" wrote in
message
| ...
| FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if
(c) is not met.
|
| No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if (c)
is not met (or
| rather, if c has not been met for six months).
|
| It does not state that (c) must also be met.
|
| Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm
any other FARs? The
| point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still have
to be met.
|
| In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation.
You can't decide
| that because you're complying with one, you can ignore
another one (unless
| the wording explicitly says that).
|
| (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of
currency, not (c).
|
| There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply
too.
|
| (d) takes over and stands alone.
|
| But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.
|
| This is how it was explained to me.
|
| Did the explainers say how they arrived at their
interpretation that (d)
| sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an
additional requirement?
| If so, would you tell us their explanation?
|
| If one can assume that 6 approches are also
| needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be construed
to mean that
| you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an
IPC.
|
| How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?
|
| There are questions in the instrument knowledge test
question pool
| whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by
letter of
| memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to
support this.
| Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date, supports
this.
|
| It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All I'm
saying is that if
| so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.
|
| --Gary
|
|

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

Scroll to para 8.4.1.10



"Jim Macklin" wrote
in message news:50tJg.6438$SZ3.1037@dukeread04...
| see
|
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...ncy%20check%22
|
| Which say in part...
| (b) an IFR currency record, a copy of
|
| logbook endorsement for 14 CFR § 61.57 instrument
|
| competency check, or a record of instrument currency
|
| (6 hours and 6 approaches) obtained within the past
|
| 6 months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Gary Drescher" wrote in message
| . ..
|| "Bill Zaleski" wrote in
| message
|| ...
|| FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if
| (c) is not met.
||
|| No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if (c)
| is not met (or
|| rather, if c has not been met for six months).
||
|| It does not state that (c) must also be met.
||
|| Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm
| any other FARs? The
|| point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still have
| to be met.
||
|| In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation.
| You can't decide
|| that because you're complying with one, you can ignore
| another one (unless
|| the wording explicitly says that).
||
|| (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of
| currency, not (c).
||
|| There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply
| too.
||
|| (d) takes over and stands alone.
||
|| But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.
||
|| This is how it was explained to me.
||
|| Did the explainers say how they arrived at their
| interpretation that (d)
|| sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an
| additional requirement?
|| If so, would you tell us their explanation?
||
|| If one can assume that 6 approches are also
|| needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be
construed
| to mean that
|| you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do an
| IPC.
||
|| How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?
||
|| There are questions in the instrument knowledge test
| question pool
|| whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that by
| letter of
|| memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to
| support this.
|| Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date,
supports
| this.
||
|| It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All I'm
| saying is that if
|| so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.
||
|| --Gary
||
||
|
|

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.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Bill Zaleski" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:50:07 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| wrote:
|
| see
|
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...ncy%20check%22
|
| Which say in part...
| (b) an IFR currency record, a copy of
|
| logbook endorsement for 14 CFR § 61.57 instrument
|
| competency check, or a record of instrument currency
|
| (6 hours and 6 approaches) obtained within the past
|
| 6 months.
|
|
| Good job, Jim. An FAA order is law for inspectors.
Granted the order
| is outdated, but the intent is clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Gary Drescher" wrote in message
| ...
| | "Bill Zaleski" wrote in
| message
| | ...
| | FAR 61.57 (d) sets the requirements to act as PIC if
| (c) is not met.
| |
| | No, it asserts *a* requirement that has to be met if
(c)
| is not met (or
| | rather, if c has not been met for six months).
| |
| | It does not state that (c) must also be met.
| |
| | Of course not. Why should (d) reaffirm (c)? Or reaffirm
| any other FARs? The
| | point is that nothing says that (c) *doesn't* still
have
| to be met.
| |
| | In general, you're required to obey *every* regulation.
| You can't decide
| | that because you're complying with one, you can ignore
| another one (unless
| | the wording explicitly says that).
| |
| | (d) is the controlling paragraph for one out of
| currency, not (c).
| |
| | There's nothing in the FARs that says (c) doesn't apply
| too.
| |
| | (d) takes over and stands alone.
| |
| | But it doesn't say that anywhere in the FARs.
| |
| | This is how it was explained to me.
| |
| | Did the explainers say how they arrived at their
| interpretation that (d)
| | sets forth a substitute requirement rather than an
| additional requirement?
| | If so, would you tell us their explanation?
| |
| | If one can assume that 6 approches are also
| | needed, then the verbiage of (d) could also be
construed
| to mean that
| | you must be 6 months out of currency in order to do
an
| IPC.
| |
| | How would that follow? Where does (d) say that?
| |
| | There are questions in the instrument knowledge test
| question pool
| | whose correct answers support this. The faq's, that
by
| letter of
| | memorandum were once stated as FAA policy, used to
| support this.
| | Advisory Circular 61-98A, although out of date,
supports
| this.
| |
| | It may well be that the FAA takes that position. All
I'm
| saying is that if
| | so, they're contradicting what the FARs clearly state.
| |
| | --Gary
| |
| |
|
|