Do you log approaches?

higney85

higney85

Property of Scheduling
Being at a regional, and being only and FO, I get one sim training/check event per year where approaches are genuinely done. Capts go every 6 months. On the line when/if ever do you log approaches? Personally- if its my leg and we are truly shooting the approach, I log it, otherwise I just put the landing. The fact that pretty much every visual is done following the ILS makes me wonder what people log. Also the fact that in the 121 world the company keeps you current I am curious if I am doing something wrong... Kinda goes along the lines of if you fly 1:40 do you log 1.6 or 1.7...
 
You log the approach if you actually shoot an instrument approach on your leg. A "Visual backed up by the ILS" is not a true log-able "Instrument Approach".

So... It sounds like you are doing it correctly right now.

Bob
 
I log approaches when I finger fly them on the ground with a student. I find its really easy to stay current that way.

;)
 
My leg, still in IMC at the FAF, I log it. If we're not in IMC, it's just a landing. Trust me, with the wx we're having lately and spring coming up combined with the amount of time we're gonna be flying, instrument currency won't be a problem.
 
I'll log it if I'm flying and I make our 500 to minimums call. Some ILS FAFs, like 22R in ORD, are more than 5000' AGL.
 
The FAA is of the opinion to log an approach for currency it has to be flown to mins in either actual or simulated conditions. Being an FO, currency isn't an issue for you, unless you fly on the side (for recreation and such).
 
Dugie8 said:
The FAA is of the opinion to log an approach for currency it has to be flown to mins in either actual or simulated conditions. Being an FO, currency isn't an issue for you, unless you fly on the side (for recreation and such).
Click to expand...

They are?

To mins?

Do you mind citing your source for that information?
 
Ian J said:
They are?

To mins?

Do you mind citing your source for that information?
Click to expand...

Sure, gimme a sec.



----------------------------
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.

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 (imc)) 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 judgment 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.


snip

----------------------
This is in response to your October 24, 1991, letter in which you asked several questions about certain Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)...

...Second, you questioned how low a pilot must descend (i.e., minimum descent altitude or decision height or full stop landing) on the six instrument approaches he must log to meet the recent IFR experience requirements specified in FAR Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) (14 CFR Sec. 61.57 (e)(1)(i)). You also asked if an instrument approach "counts" if only part of the approach is conducted in actual IFR conditions. Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) states that:

No pilot may act as pilot in command under IFR, nor in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless he has, within the past 6 calendar months - (i) In the case of an aircraft other than a glider, logged at least 6 hours of instrument time under actual or simulated IFR conditions, at least 3 of which were in flight in the category of aircraft involved, including at least six instrument approaches, or passed an instrument competency check in the category of aircraft involved.

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...
 
Ahhh... THAT letter of interpretation.

I'll have to go with Midlifeflyer's thoughts on that one.

midlifeflyer said:
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."
==============================

Uh-oh! If you take the opinion at faces value, there's that reasoning again that essentially says that if you don't go missed, you can't log it.

There is a strong school of thought out there that says that what it "looks like" the FAA Counsel said is not what they meant. Note that despite the question, although the answer says that you have to follow the =procedure= all the way (unless it's not safe), it does not say that you have to follow the procedure all the way "in actual IFR conditions."

(You can see where this is much better fodder for arguments than anything else in the logging arena.)

The camp that says that the legal counsel didn't mean all the way in IMC (call them the "Rule of Reason" school) are essentially saying that "How much" is one of those undefined terms. Not everything is susceptible to precise definition. Try to think of all of the scenarios and come out with a rule that covers every probable (let alone possible) approach scenario. How many pages did you use?
Click to expand...
 
Dugie8 said:
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...
Click to expand...
OK... my take:

1. That statement doesn't specifically say you have to be in IMC for the entire approach.

2. I believe that the statement is referring specifically to "currency" issues. For Example... If you go up to get instrument current and you plan to fly 6 approaches in one hour... you just can't intercept the FAF and start down... then break it off before mins just to expedite getting another approach in. So the FAF may be in IMC, and you come down 200 feet from mins and see the field... then you must at least continue to mins before you go around, in order to properly log it... even though mins are VMC. Or... if you are flying with a SP or a CFI and you are under the hood... then you must stay under the hood until mins. Your CFI just can't say "OK... you've intercepted, tracked, hit the FAF, descended properly... you are 300 feet from mins... that's 1 good approach... you can take the hood off and let's go around now and get another one in..."

My interpretation only...

Bob
 
Captain_Bob said:
LOL! That's exactly why I think you can log it... as long as you continue to mins before you go for the option.

You summed it up better than me... ;)

Bob
Click to expand...

No, my thought is to still be IMC at FAF, which was was not, so I didnt count them. BTW: Option, what option? I was landing at 2 different airports...I had important business today. Ribs at TZR!!! :D Figure I better do the $500 Rib run while I can still afford it!
 
Ian J said:
Ahhh... THAT letter of interpretation.

I'll have to go with Midlifeflyer's thoughts on that one.
Click to expand...


Weeell, midi, in all his wisdom, doesn't speak for the FAA, the Chief Council does and he/she says, all the way to MDA/DH, pretty clear. NOW, the catch here is, you have to be either in actual or SIMULATED IMC, find me the clear cut definition of simulated IMC.

Also, big difference between logging approaches and logging approaches for currency.

Also keep in mind, the above letter was writting in 1991 or so, in almost 16 years the FAA hasn't seen fit (and I am sure someone has written at least ONE letter to challenge this "ruling") to change the stance of going all the way to mins to log for CURRENCY.

Also, the argument that somehow going all the way to mins means you must be doing a missed approached every time is a bit in left field. I've done a lot of approaches but have never seen a non precision approach that required me to go missed upon reaching the MDA, and done a lot of ILS approaches to 200' ceilings and still able to see the lights and thus continue to 100' above the TDZ and land.

This isn't a huge point however, I don't seem to ever recall someone being violated for flying IFR while using an approach or series of approaches for currency that didn't meet the FAA's "sniff" test.
 
I follow the FAF "approach" to logging approaches as well. I'm very diligent about logging the approaches, actual, night, etc.. You only need to log the approaches required to maintain currency, but that is a bit different in the 121 world due to our biannual required proficiency checks.
 
ComplexHiAv8r said:
No, my thought is to still be IMC at FAF, which was was not, so I didnt count them. BTW: Option, what option? I was landing at 2 different airports...I had important business today. Ribs at TZR!!! :D Figure I better do the $500 Rib run while I can still afford it!
Click to expand...
Doh... my mistake... I don't know why, but I read your original post as 100' above "mins". My bad. I'll correct it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top