sealandair

Can you legally fly (and log) a practice instrument approach without a safety pilot in VMC, so long as you ARE NOT wearing a hood and of course do not accept an actual clearance?

This would require a lone pilot to both monitor his approach progress AND to see and avoid other traffic. Part of the idea of practicing approaches is presumably to fly them on instruments all the way down to MDA or DH, but nowhere do I find this is REQUIRED. So let's say I make a practice VOR approach into XYZ, it's VMC, I'm VFR, and I log no simulated instrument time... just the approach.

Does this legally fly or not?

Yoda2

Yikes! Whether it is legal or not it doesn't pass the common sense test. You would likely have your head buried in the cockpit and not be properly employing see and avoid techniques. And no, if you don't use a view limiting device and a proper safety pilot you cannot log it as a practice instrument approach.

Hawker Driver

Deleated.................

sealandair

I agree, there isn't a lot of common sense to the idea. I guess it was more of an academic question. It's true that under 61.57(c), in order to make the approach count for PIC RECENT EXPERIENCE, it would need to be flown under actual or simulated IMC. If the later is the case, then you need the view limiter and the safety pilot, no contest.

I guess I was just wondering if you could log an approach if you flew it according to published route and altitude, yet not solely by reference to instruments (thus dividing your time to see and avoid), and not using it to count as 61.57(c). Why would someone want to do this? I don't know, other than the possibility of getting SOME beneficial practice if you were up flying solo one day without a safety pilot. How much of an approach you need to fly to make it count (start at the IAF? complete to DH? As published or via vectors?) has been an area of scrutiny and confusion among pilots AND the FAA...several AOPA articles are written on the subject, and several rule changes have occurred.

I compare it a bit to logging cross country time. Can you depart Point A, fly due east for 10nm along a river that takes you straight to Point B as X/C time? Sure... as long as you land at Point B, and using the river qualifies as "pilotage". But the flight doesn't count as required X/C time towards any license or rating. So why would you log it as X/C in the first place? Maybe it's a poor analogy. And maybe I just need a freaking life, instead of thinking up "what if" scenarios.

sealandair

Well, that took a lot of brain power. Oh and BTW, it's spelled "DELETED".

Yoda2

It is usually good to play "What if" and ask questions. That was a significant component of learning for many of us, and still is at times. However, and more to your original question; with stuff like that, it is usually best to keep it simple and just learn and abide by the Regs., especially their spirit and intent, as unfortunately most of them are written in blood. Personally I would not log a practice instrument approach unless you fly it right down to published Mins or an instructor approves otherwise; preferably the former as a lot can happen between a VFR MAP commonly a landmark such as a prominent structure, and the published/real MAP... Using the real missed can make all the difference, especially when initially learning or even during recurrent. Additionally it is fine to fly the airways and such for practice but be sure to clearly operate under the appropriate regulations and it's also a good idea to stay in touch with ATC when using routing that is normally intended for instrument traffic. Also note ATC is not real fond of "hot shot" VFR pilots, those pretending to have instrument skills or ratings, Etc.

sealandair

Well I agree that it is best to stick by the regs. It's just that some regs, while they may be written in blood, are not necessarily written in stone. And some, such as pertaining to VFR practice approaches, aren't really written at all. There's still some grey area out there, and I thought my post might have touched on one of them. I readily agree with you that it is best to fly the entire approach, to get any real practice benefit out of it.

As an instrument rated pilot for the last 11 years, I myself would be wary of a "hot shot" VFR only pilot buzzing around my airfield, doing a "sort of" instrument approach. I should have clarified and asked from the point of view of an experienced, rated instrument pilot.

Anyway, thank you for your input. That's what my question was about.

USMCFLYR

Guess so - - - ATC informs me that I am 'cleared for the practice instrument approach' all the time and I am VFR :-)
(though I do have another pilot with me)

Yoda2

"Roger that" Had I known this initially I would have responded differently...

rickair7777

To log an approach requires IMC, or a view limiting device. The former requires an IFR clearance; the latter a safety pilot or CFII.

Also there is an FAA legal interpretation out there requiring that you fly an approach to minimums in order to log it for currency/rating purposes. For this reason I rarely log approaches except in blizzards, or with a thick marine layer at LAX.