Search
Notices
Flight Schools and Training Ratings, building hours, airmanship, CFI topics

Logging Actual Instrument Time

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-05-2020, 03:53 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Posts: 307
Default Logging Actual Instrument Time

I have a question concerning the following:

(g) Logging instrument time.

(1) 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.


Can you log “actual” instrument time if you’re flying solely by reference to the instruments in VFR conditions?

Example: Flying over the ocean at night with no moon and no horizon at all.

I would argue that any time you’re flying and encounter a situation where you would not be able to continue without instruments is loggable as actual.

does anyone disagree with me on this one?
DontLookDown is offline  
Old 02-05-2020, 04:50 AM
  #2  
In a land of unicorns
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,457
Default

Originally Posted by DontLookDown View Post
does anyone disagree with me on this one?

No, not even the FAA.
dera is offline  
Old 02-06-2020, 03:50 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: Poolside
Posts: 534
Default

Originally Posted by dera View Post
No, not even the FAA.
dera ,

Can you provide the legal interpretation stating this? I seem to recall the FAA admitting that there may be occasions such as a moonless night in which one could properly log flight solely by reference to instruments (but I can’t find it right now).
Peabody17 is offline  
Old 02-06-2020, 03:58 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: Poolside
Posts: 534
Default

Here it is:Legal Interpretation # 84-29

November 07, 1984

Mr. Joseph P. Carr

Dear Mr. Carr:

This is in response to your letter asking questions about
instrument flight time.

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.

Second, you ask for an interpretation of Section 61.57(e)(2) of
the FAR, noting that Advisory Circular 61-65A, Certification:
Pilots and Flight Instructors, seems to contain advice contrary
to your understanding of the rule.

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 (i.m.c.)) 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
judgement 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.

To answer your second question, your understanding of Section
61.57(e) is correct. Section 61.57(e) provides currency
requirements for acting as pilot in command (PIC) under
instrument flight rules (IFR) or in weather conditions less than
the minimums for visual flight rules (VFR). No pilot may act as
PIC under those conditions unless she or he has, within the last
six months, logged the number of hours of instrument flight time,
including the number of approaches, indicated in Section
61.57(e)(1)(i) or (ii). When that six-month currency period
lapses, that is, on the day the pilot no longer has the required
instrument flight time within the last six months, the pilot may
in the next six months regain her or his currency simply by
logging the required instrument flight time. Note that, during
this second six-mont period, Section 61.57(e)(1) prohibits the
pilot from acting as PIC under IFR or below VFR minimums
(i.m.c.). If that second six-month period runs without the pilot
regaining currency, she or he may only again become qualified to
act as PIC under IFR or in weather below VFR minimums (i.m.c.) by
passing an instrument competency check as described in Section
61.57(e)(2).

Advisory Circular 61-65A, paragraph 15a, explained in part that a
pilot failing to meet the recency of instrument experience
requirements for a period of 12 months must pass an instrument
competency check. This simply meant that, when a pilot becomes
qualified to act as PIC under the instrument conditions
described, he or she has at least a 12-month period in which
currency may be maintained or regained by logging the required
instrument flight time. After that 12-month period, if currency
has not been maintained or regained, the pilot must pass an
instrument competency check. Advisory Circular 61-65A was not
intended to expand the second six-month "grace" period to 12
months. As you note, the Advisory Circular has been changed, and
paragraph 15 was rewritten to more accurately reflect the
requirements of Section 61.57(e)(2).

Sincerely,

John H. Cassady
Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations & Enforcement Division
Peabody17 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ChrisPilot1
Republic Airways
10
09-15-2018 08:42 PM
Nemo786
Flight Schools and Training
17
02-21-2017 01:49 PM
Stets2
Flight Schools and Training
4
08-18-2016 10:37 AM
Time2Fly
Corporate
38
08-11-2010 09:17 PM
nciflyer
Aviation Law
11
07-04-2009 01:29 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices