Lee D
Well-Known Member
Same here.
Do you log approaches?
- Thread starter higney85
- Start date
Same here.
Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
I'm with most, IMC inside the FAF is an instrument approach and I almost always have the autopilot off so that's a non-issue. Oh and 1:40 is a 1.7, use the handy dandy time chart:
58-02 .0
03-08 .1
09-14 .2
15-20 .3
21-26 .4
27-33 .5
34-39 .6
40-45 .7
46-51 .8
52-57 .9
58-02 .0
03-08 .1
09-14 .2
15-20 .3
21-26 .4
27-33 .5
34-39 .6
40-45 .7
46-51 .8
52-57 .9
C150J
Well-Known Member
No, I only log them with an engine on fire/TR unlocked and a jammed aileron.
Regardless of whether I'm not a man for shooting an approach to mins with the AP on after five legs, I'm still responsible to make sure the GS captures (which it sometimes doesn't or does a "Canadian dive bomb" intercept). I am just as attentive with it on as I am with it off. I am not trying to make flying a coupled approach sound harder than it is (shoot, handflying an ILS isn't rocket science either after you've done in X times), but I do believe that you still need to be keyed in and therefore have every right to technically log it. Also, my company mandates FD usage. This isn't a "world's strongest man" competition where flying an ILS on standby instruments is applauded. This is the business of providing unquestionably safe passage for paying customers on a daily basis.
J.
PILOT
Well-Known Member
No, I only log them with an engine on fire/TR unlocked and a jammed aileron.
Regardless of whether I'm not a man for shooting an approach to mins with the AP on after five legs, I'm still responsible to make sure the GS captures (which it sometimes doesn't or does a "Canadian dive bomb" intercept). I am just as attentive with it on as I am with it off. I am not trying to make flying a coupled approach sound harder than it is (shoot, handflying an ILS isn't rocket science either after you've done in X times), but I do believe that you still need to be keyed in and therefore have every right to technically log it. Also, my company mandates FD usage. This isn't a "world's strongest man" competition where flying an ILS on standby instruments is applauded. This is the business of providing unquestionably safe passage for paying customers on a daily basis.
J.
A buddy I was flying with a few months or so ago and I had this conversation & I was only wondering what everyone else's opinion on the subject was. You laid it on pretty thick in your reply so I feel the need to apologize if the idea of maybe not logging approaches flown by the auto-pilot or with the FD offended you. Those were not my intentions.
Anyway, the logic we settled on from our discussion involved this... The FAA has recency/currency regulations to ensure that pilots are up to snuff on their skills prior to employing them. No matter how closely you monitor the system while it’s executing the approach there are different skills involved in accomplishing it using only raw data & these are the skills that make you current/recent.
No, shooting an approach is not ‘rocket science’ but I think everyone will agree that flying one yourself after not having done it for an extended period of time can sometimes shed light on some interesting rustiness.
If the purpose of logging approaches is to maintain currency then I would only want to log the ones that gave me that warm fuzzy feeling about whether or not I am actually current.
Dugie8
Well-Known Member
You see, there you go inserting logic into an aviation debate. Nevermind what is prudent or "the right thing to do", even with legal interps staring you in the face. Lets find every loophole and exploit it to do less to maintain a level of proficiency and professionalism.
Oh well, big sky theory, right...?
PILOT
Well-Known Member
Dugie8
Well-Known Member
Makes me dizzy... I don't get it.
I'm agreeing with you, but being a smartass at the same time.
C150J
Well-Known Member
Hey man,
No apology necessary. After rereading it, it certainly came out harsh. I guess my original intentions were to diffuse any "my approaches are harder than your approaches" drama. There are a lot of aspiring professional on here, and I feel that sometimes the arguments that occur on this forum give them the wrong idea as outsiders.
Your "fuzzy feeling" approach shows that you're concerned about proficiency and is an excellent mentality. I try to hand fly as much as possible and do find it rewarding to shoot an approach smoother than the A/P. After thinking about your comments, I think they REALLY hit home with non-precision approaches... not too many of them in the Northeastern corridor.
PILOT
Well-Known Member
See this is what I like to hear. The legal aspects are one thing, the sense of pride, accomplishment, and confidence in your abilities is another, and the boneheads that just think they're the cat's meow are an entirely different thing. I didn't mean to sound like the bonehead one. (although I pretty much am a bonehead only of entirely different sorts)
My friend & I had discussed this exact topic just prior to me noticing the thread on here and I just wondered what everyone else's feelings were on the subject.
Here's the short version of the story, my buddy from Skywest went to a Part 141 school to get checked out on a 172 (plane we used to fly together all the time) & the last thing they did was shoot an ILS with him under the hood. He said he was all over the place and it surprised him how rusty he had gotten. On a side note, he said his landings were an whole different story. Something about a trainwreck I think he mentioned.
Thanks so much for everyone's 2 pesos.
My friend & I had discussed this exact topic just prior to me noticing the thread on here and I just wondered what everyone else's feelings were on the subject.
Here's the short version of the story, my buddy from Skywest went to a Part 141 school to get checked out on a 172 (plane we used to fly together all the time) & the last thing they did was shoot an ILS with him under the hood. He said he was all over the place and it surprised him how rusty he had gotten. On a side note, he said his landings were an whole different story. Something about a trainwreck I think he mentioned.
Thanks so much for everyone's 2 pesos.
C150J
Well-Known Member
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Dude, I used to be able to fly an ILS down the pipe in a Seminole no problem. Put me in one now, and I'll probably crash into something. As for the warm fuzzies, LEGALLY you're just as current logging approaches in the sim as you are in the real plane, but I don't get the warm fuzzies in the sim. If I'm flying/operating the plane in IMC past the FAF, I'll log it. Personally, I don't really like hand flying in IMC just in case there's a workload spike for whatever reason. Can I do it? Sure. Do I like to? Not really. VMC, I'll hand fly a lot, sometimes a LOT more than the CAs I fly with.
PILOT
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I getcha! That was part of he and I's conversation too.
We had a jumpseater once who was an ERJ driver and after the approach he admitted that his 'scan' was pretty much shot as far as a typical six-pack was concerned.
The instrument panel, aircraft response characteristics, pitch attitude/power setting, etc... all would be factors. Not to mention the fact that you jet drivers probably feel like you're gonna stall whenever you get an airplane under 150 kts.
He did say that he expected it to be ugly but that it ended up making him feel like a complete moron. Real eye-opener concerning how quickly a person's skills can deteriorate on a piece of equipment no matter the complexity. It's definitely not like riding a bike.
Another sidenote... if you're instrument current, you're technically instrument current. It's only category specific. The only things stopping a person from hopping in something they haven't been in for a while and driving it down the hill towards DH in the soup are, HOPEFULLY, the factors we just discussed.
We had a jumpseater once who was an ERJ driver and after the approach he admitted that his 'scan' was pretty much shot as far as a typical six-pack was concerned.
The instrument panel, aircraft response characteristics, pitch attitude/power setting, etc... all would be factors. Not to mention the fact that you jet drivers probably feel like you're gonna stall whenever you get an airplane under 150 kts.
He did say that he expected it to be ugly but that it ended up making him feel like a complete moron. Real eye-opener concerning how quickly a person's skills can deteriorate on a piece of equipment no matter the complexity. It's definitely not like riding a bike.
Another sidenote... if you're instrument current, you're technically instrument current. It's only category specific. The only things stopping a person from hopping in something they haven't been in for a while and driving it down the hill towards DH in the soup are, HOPEFULLY, the factors we just discussed.