![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:20:44 GMT, Judah wrote:
For currency purposes, an instrument approach under Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) may be flown in either actual or simulated IFR conditions. Further, unless the instrument approach procedure must be abandoned for safety reasons, we believe the pilot must follow the instrument approach procedure to minimum descent altitude or decision height. The poster in that thread interprets that to mean that the entire approach down to minimums must be in IFR conditions. I'm not 100% sure I agree that it must be interpreted this way. But what is interesting is that the Assistant Chief Counsel who authored this document referred specifically to "actual or simulated IFR conditions" not "actual or simulated IMC conditions"... There is frequently inconsistency in FAA documents. When these are important or questioned, they get ironed out in subsequent revisions. However, with regard to this particular opinion, there was quite a bit of discussion at the time it was issued. I don't have the documentation to prove the point, but I'm pretty certain that it is not considered binding by anyone. Most consider this to be a gray area. I generally log the approach if enough of it was conducted in instrument conditions that I felt I really got some benefit to my currency by conducting it. So a thin overcast at the FAF would not count for me. But a ceiling 100-200' above DA would count. Don't forget that the purpose of logging is for currency, and/or qualification for a rating. If you cheat on currency, you are cheating yourself and your passengers. And if you are going to be tested for a rating, the examiner WILL have you conduct the approach (perhaps in simulated conditions) down to the MDA or DA(H). Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I find it is worth it just to go out with an instructor every six months and
do an IPC. That way you can nip any bad habits you might be developing before they become ingrained, you get a no-questions-asked log book entry saying you are current, and it may help with your insurance. You can usually get your wings signoffs in the same flights, which also helps for insurance purposes. If you are worried about your performance in front of the instructor, you need the IPC anyway. -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What approaches are in a database? | Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | January 4th 04 07:57 PM |
GPS approaches with Center | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 104 | October 22nd 03 09:42 PM |
Logging instrument approaches | Slav Inger | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | July 27th 03 11:00 PM |
Suppose We Really Do Have Only GPS Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 20th 03 05:10 PM |
Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 18th 03 01:43 PM |