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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere?
The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that some sort of view limiting device is required. It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated insturment conditions though. Brad |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:40:00 GMT, bsalai
wrote: Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere? The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that some sort of view limiting device is required. It wouldn't seem logical to me that "just not looking outside" would ever count for instrument time. The now unavailable part 61 FAQ said "Normally, in order to log instrument flight time under “simulated instrument conditions,” the pilot needs to be utilizing a view limiting device". Therefore, to get IMC time out of anything else it needs to meet the requirements for actual instrument time (real IMC or the classic "VMC with no useful horizon at night", like looking out over water or unlit ground with no moonlight etc. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
"bsalai" wrote in message
.. . Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere? The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that some sort of view limiting device is required. It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated insturment conditions though. This is one of the most confusing aspects of the FAA's terminology. It turns out that if you *need* to fly by reference to instruments (for example, at night with no moon over unlit terrain) then that counts as actual (not simulated) instrument conditions--although it does not count as instrument *meteorological* conditions (IMC), and hence does not require being IFR rather than VFR. But it can be logged as instrument time. But no, the FAA never actually defines the term "instrument conditions" (as opposed to "instrument meteorological conditions"). The FAA used to have an online FAQ that contained this explanation, but they recently removed it. So now it's relegated to the status of a newsgroup rumor--or you could send a letter or email to your FSDO asking about it. If enough people do that, perhaps the FAA will be prompted to define the term. --Gary |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:57:44 -0500, "Gary Drescher"
wrote: The FAA used to have an online FAQ that contained this explanation, but they recently removed it. So now it's relegated to the status of a newsgroup rumor--or you could send a letter or email to your FSDO asking about it. If enough people do that, perhaps the FAA will be prompted to define the term. Actually, FWIW the FAQ said: "There is no official FAA definition of “actual instrument time” or “simulated instrument time” in the FARs, FAA Orders, advisory circulars, FAA bulletins, etc. And probably the reason why the FAA has never officially defined “actual instrument time” or “simulated instrument time” is because in all of the aeronautical experience requirements for pilot certificate and/or ratings in Part 61 the rule does not differentiate between “actual instrument time” as opposed to “simulated instrument time.” In fact, in Part 61 it only refers to the aeronautical experience for instrument time to be “. . . instrument flight time, in actual or simulated instrument conditions . . .” So it is irrelevant whether the instrument flight time is logged as “actual instrument time” or “simulated instrument time.” Part 61 only refers to “actual instrument conditions” or “simulated instrument conditions.”" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
At night, with no horizon and no moon you have actual
instrument conditions. You can simulate instrument conditions in many ways, yellow plastic curtains and blue goggles, Foggles, a hood or just look only at the panel. There is no requirement for a hood. About 20 years ago, the FAA in Wichita came up with a device to block the pilot's view forward on the King Air 300, which required a type rating and that the pilot be able to see the entire cockpit and reach all the controls. They developed and approved the use of a sheet metal device that was held on the glare shield by a spring clamp. There were two metal pieces attached in such a manner that the pilot could not see straight ahead but allowed the examiner to see at an angle through the pilot's windshield. The co-pilot and side windows were not covered at all. Eventually, they quit using it at all. -- 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. "bsalai" wrote in message .. . | Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere? | | The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say | at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? | | I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument | conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both | that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or | simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is | required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that | some sort of view limiting device is required. | | It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated insturment | conditions though. | | Brad |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:48:41 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
wrote: At night, with no horizon and no moon you have actual instrument conditions. FWIW, according to the old FAQ, "I agree with your statement that just because a person is flying “. . .. by sole reference to instruments . . .” has nothing to do with whether the flight can be logged as “actual instrument time” or “simulated instrument time.” Only the weather conditions establish whether the flight is in “actual instrument conditions.” And that is dependent on the weather conditions where the aircraft is physically located and the pilot makes that determination as to whether the flight is in “actual instrument conditions” or he is performing instrument flight under “simulated instrument conditions.” But for a “quick and easy” answer to your question, it was always my understanding if I were flying in weather conditions that were less than the VFR weather minimums defined in § 91.155 and I was flying “solely by reference to instruments” then that was the determining factor for being able log instrument flight under “actual instrument conditions.” Otherwise, if I were flying solely by reference to instruments in VMC conditions then I would log it as instrument flight in “simulated instrument conditions.” In your example, the flight is clear of clouds and in good visibility conditions at night over the desert with an overcast above and no visible horizon. But other examples could include flight between sloping cloud layers or flight between layers of clouds at night. These could equally meet the requirement for operations that can only be accomplished solely by reference to instruments. But, the lack of sufficient visual reference to maintain aircraft control without using instruments does not eliminate the possibility of collision hazard with other aircraft or terrain." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:4o6Df.69914$QW2.8391@dukeread08... About 20 years ago, the FAA in Wichita came up with a device to block the pilot's view forward on the King Air 300, which required a type rating and that the pilot be able to see the entire cockpit and reach all the controls. They developed and approved the use of a sheet metal device that was held on the glare shield by a spring clamp. There were two metal pieces attached in such a manner that the pilot could not see straight ahead but allowed the examiner to see at an angle through the pilot's windshield. The co-pilot and side windows were not covered at all. We have something similar in our club's PA-28 - except we have a louvred side-window cover as well, so that if you're right next to it, you can't see out, but if you're in the other seat you can. Works very well, and is much better than those lousy foggles. Of course, there's nothing on the right-hand window; all you need there, though, is a decent-sized instructor/colleague and the view through the window can be amply blocked :-) D. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:40:00 GMT, bsalai wrote:
Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere? The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that some sort of view limiting device is required. It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated insturment conditions though. Brad It is not defined in the regulations. But it was "defined" in a published FAA Chief Counsel legal interpretation some twenty or so years ago: ============================================== --quoted text-- First, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.51(c)(4) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) regarding the logging of instrument flight time. You ask whether, for instance, a flight over the ocean on a moonless night without a discernible horizon could be logged as actual instrument flight time. *** As you know, Section 61.51(c)(4) provides rules for the logging of instrument flight time which may be used to meet the requirements of a certificate or rating, or to meet the recent flight experience requirements of Part 61. That section provides in part, that a pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he or she operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual (instrument meteorological conditions (imc)) or simulated instrument flight conditions. "Simulated" instrument conditions occur when the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally restricted, such as by a hood or goggles. "Actual" instrument flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these conditions involve adverse weather conditions. 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. ======================================== Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:09:13 -0500, Ron Rosenfeld
wrote: On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:40:00 GMT, bsalai wrote: Does anyone know if Simulated Instrument Conditions is defined anywhere? The reason for the question is whether one can log instrument time, say at night, when you don't look outside, but don't wear foggles or a hood? I can't find anything in the rules that defines simulated instrument conditions, but since the rule for logging instrument time says both that flight has to be solely by referenct to instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions, that would suggest that more is required than "solely by reference to instruments" and therefore that some sort of view limiting device is required. It would certainly be easier if they defined simulated insturment conditions though. Brad It is not defined in the regulations. But it was "defined" in a published FAA Chief Counsel legal interpretation some twenty or so years ago: ============================================== --quoted text-- First, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.51(c)(4) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) regarding the logging of instrument flight time. You ask whether, for instance, a flight over the ocean on a moonless night without a discernible horizon could be logged as actual instrument flight time. *** As you know, Section 61.51(c)(4) provides rules for the logging of instrument flight time which may be used to meet the requirements of a certificate or rating, or to meet the recent flight experience requirements of Part 61. That section provides in part, that a pilot may log as instrument flight time only that time during which he or she operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments, under actual (instrument meteorological conditions (imc)) or simulated instrument flight conditions. "Simulated" instrument conditions occur when the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally restricted, such as by a hood or goggles. "Actual" instrument flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these conditions involve adverse weather conditions. 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. ======================================== Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) Way for the FAQ from 7/05 and the Chief Council to say different things on the exact same question! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Definition of simulated instrument conditions
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 13:20:29 -0500, Peter Clark
wrote: Way for the FAQ from 7/05 and the Chief Council to say different things on the exact same question! Chief Counsel trumps FAQ's. But the Chief Counsel opinion seems to advise a complete description as to the nature of the conditions, rather than just logging "actual" "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." Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 03:55 AM |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
Instrument Checkride passed (Long) | Paul Folbrecht | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | February 11th 05 02:41 AM |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |