Thread: logging actual
View Single Post
Old 12-04-2006, 08:56 AM
  #9  
rickair7777
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,289
Default

Originally Posted by iflyjets4food View Post
Don't try to overinflate your instrument time. Use the most conservative number that adequately represents your experience. It looks funny if you have 1200TT and 500 Actual. Nobody is going to buy it, and it will really show when you go to do the sim ride and subsequent simulator training if you get hired. If you meet the requirements that they have for the instrument time you need to be called for the interview, then you have enough. Everything else is excess. You can't go wrong here using a conservative number.
What he said.

The FAA opinion about night flight with no horizon is known by only a few folks in the industry, although the JFK Jr. thing was a good case study. I agree with the FAA in theory, but most potential employers would consider logging night flight as IMC as fraudulent...and you will probably not be given an opportunity to prove your case.

Stick with Wx less than VMC and flight by reference to instruments. Special VFR does not count as IMC!

Note: As far as logging actual approaches, the FAA once issued an opinion that in order to be logged, the entire approach (from FAF I think) down to minimums must be IMC! This opinion is widely disregarded, most folks log approaches that are predominately IMC even if it doesn't go all the way to mins. But I wouldn't admit that to a Fed (even though they all know the reality).
rickair7777 is offline