I've noticed that a lot of the guys in my squadron log Instrument time for the entire sortie when flying at night. Their justification is that they are flying solely by reference to instruments if they can't see land features. I've never heard of anyone doing that prior to this and just wondering what the pilot recruiters would say about it. Thanks!
I've noticed that a lot of the guys in my squadron log Instrument time for the entire sortie when flying at night. Their justification is that they are flying solely by reference to instruments if they can't see land features. I've never heard of anyone doing that prior to this and just wondering what the pilot recruiters would say about it. Thanks!
Since I have spent quite a bit of time with the USN - I've seen this too. Their justification rings true though - there is not much more instrument conditions than over water in the middle of night!
While it is logical and probably within the spirit of the rules, civilian aviation employers generally assume that instrument time means visible moisture (and smoke too I guess, as well as volcanic ash if you survive to log it).
You know, if you read the reg about logging instrument time, it would seem you guys are following both the letter and spirit of the law. Personally, I think that if you are over an undercast layer, you can't see the ground and it should be loggable as instrument time since your only form of navigation is using instruments. But on the Instrument Rating knowledge test, they ask this same question, and the correct answer is that you can only log instrument time in a cloud. I suppose they think that if you're not in a cloud, you have some reference to the horizon, even though it may be a false horizon. Go figure.
You know, if you read the reg about logging instrument time, it would seem you guys are following both the letter and spirit of the law. Personally, I think that if you are over an undercast layer, you can't see the ground and it should be loggable as instrument time since your only form of navigation is using instruments. But on the Instrument Rating knowledge test, they ask this same question, and the correct answer is that you can only log instrument time in a cloud. I suppose they think that if you're not in a cloud, you have some reference to the horizon, even though it may be a false horizon. Go figure.
That definition, and the sole reference to instruments, is used by my peers at a definition of insturment time. This is where they point to those dark, dark nights over the Atlantic, Pacific (or pick your ocean or sea) and they ask you to show them a horizon and tell them that they are not using ONLY instruments. I say that anyone that doesn't believe that is instrument flying should go out there themselves and check it out The milkbowl effect often experienced in Japan and Korea are anohter example.
You are correct wingnut - - they (we) are trying to live by the spirit and intent of the regulation.
Heck - I'd have to read the NTSB report again, but didn't they cite continued flight into IMC conditions as a factor in the JFK Jr mishap as he headed out over the water at dusk (e.g. non-insturment rated pilot continued into IMC conditions) or something to that effect?
That definition, and the sole reference to instruments, is used by my peers at a definition of insturment time. This is where they point to those dark, dark nights over the Atlantic, Pacific (or pick your ocean or sea) and they ask you to show them a horizon and tell them that they are not using ONLY instruments. I say that anyone that doesn't believe that is instrument flying should go out there themselves and check it out The milkbowl effect often experienced in Japan and Korea are anohter example.
You are correct wingnut - - they (we) are trying to live by the spirit and intent of the regulation.
Heck - I'd have to read the NTSB report again, but didn't they cite continued flight into IMC conditions as a factor in the JFK Jr mishap as he headed out over the water at dusk (e.g. non-insturment rated pilot continued into IMC conditions) or something to that effect?
USMCFLYR
All well and good, but my suggestion is don't show up at an interview with a bunch of flight segments logged with 95% IMC. They will ask about that, and logging night as IMC is just not really accepted in the civilian aviation world. You don't want to be in the position of having to tap-dance or have a debate with an interviewer.
It would be one thing if every mil aviator always logged it that way, the civilians would be used to it...but they are not.
At the very least have a way to differentiate "night" IMC from "cloud" IMC...most employers require a minimum of cloud time.
...Their justification is that they are flying solely by reference to instruments if they can't see land features...
There's more to the regulation than "flying solely by reference to instruments". 14 CFR part 61.51(g)(1) states "a person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions."
The AIM defines instrument (meteorological) conditions as expressed in terms of visibility, distance from clouds, and ceiling less than the minima specified for visual (meteorological) condtions. As we know these conditions are specified by part 91.155 by type of airspace, and in some cases, by day or night. 91.155 makes no reference to horizon or flying over water, day or night.
If you are flying in conditions closer to clouds (or in them) or in visibility less than specified, you can log instrument time. Otherwise it is VFR flight time, even if you have to fly solely by reference to instruments.
As Rick said, these are the definitions used by airlines and are what they are looking for. I know from experience if I see more than about 10% of logged time as "instrument time", I will start looking deeper into the logbook and asking questions.
While it is logical and probably within the spirit of the rules, civilian aviation employers generally assume that instrument time means visible moisture (and smoke too I guess, as well as volcanic ash if you survive to log it).
I was jumpseating awhile ago and flew into SAN while the fires were still uncontrolled for the most part. On a 7ish mile final, there was a lot of smoke coming into the cabin. Not sure what it looked like up front but on the ground it looked pretty close to IMC.
__________________
loving koolaid but looking for rehab help
That's a good point, WEACLRS. Even though you may not be able to discern in flight the horizon, terrain, or distant objects, you are in VMC if the visibility exsists. That is, were a lit object to be present, you would be able to see it because of Visual Meteorological Conditions, and therefore you would not be in actual.
Similar Threads
Night/Instrument Time
The milkbowl effect often experienced in Japan and Korea are anohter example.
.
Linear Mode
