IPC Logbook Entries

[TAMPACFIMEI]

Quick question for you CFIIs, when you're filling out your customer's logbook after conducting an IPC do you fill in dual time like on a Flight Review even if you're just evaluating the pilot's performance?


Thanks!

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

According to AC61-98A, Chapter 3, it says

a.Unsatisfactory Performance. The CFI should not endorse the pilot's logbook to reflect an unsatisfactory competency check, but should sign the logbook to record the instruction given.

b.Satisfactory Performance. The endorsement for a satisfactory competency check should be in accordance with the current issue of AC 61-65. If the sample plan and checklist in Appendix 3 is used, the CFI may wish to retain the plan as a record of the scope and content of the competency check, even though not required by FAR Section 61.189.

I am assuming if they "fail" the IPC, you sign it as dual, and if they "pass" it you still log it as dual and give them the endorsement. I may be wrong...

 

[deadstick]

Here's another spin:

If the evaluatee is not IFR current and the IPC is conducted in IMC, the CFII is the PIC. So is the dual column filled-in? I just think about DPE who (ie, on a PPL checkride) only log PIC for the candidate.

Discuss...

 

[jrh]

If the evaluatee is not IFR current and the IPC is conducted in IMC, the CFII is the PIC. So is the dual column filled-in?

Yes. Who is PIC for a flight has nothing to do with if instruction is being given or not.

I just think about DPE who (ie, on a PPL checkride) only log PIC for the candidate.

I think that's comparing apples to oranges. A DPE is not even allowed to give instruction, whereas a CFI is there for the sake of instruction. Although the same goal might be accomplished in either case (a satisfactory signoff), the means to getting there is entirely different (DPE vs. CFI).

 

[deadstick]

Both the BFR and IPC are evaluations, not lessons. Ok, what about a BFR with a pilot who does not have a current BFR?

 

[Malko]

Both the BFR and IPC are evaluations, not lessons. Ok, what about a BFR with a pilot who does not have a current BFR?

O.K., here's a dumb question, but if the pilot had a current BFR why would they need your services for a BFR?

 

[JimmyDean]

O.K., here's a dumb question, but if the pilot had a current BFR why would they need your services for a BFR?

Maybe they're in the last month - kind of like a medical, and don't want to fly with an "expired" flight review?

Or just a glutton for punishment!

 

[JimmyDean]

Both the BFR and IPC are evaluations, not lessons.

I disagree. A flight review is just that - a review. That's why you do it with a CFI, not a DPE. A flight review is dual instruction.

As for an IPC... I agree with mojo6911. If you're acting as a CFI, it's dual given and dual received.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Maybe they're in the last month - kind of like a medical, and don't want to fly with an "expired" flight review?

Or just a glutton for punishment!

Or, insurance requires as annual flight review - not that uncommon for higher performance airplanes or older pilots.

 

[TAMPACFIMEI]

The pilot is current on instruments and the IPC is for insurance purposes only.

For a Flight Review, you're giving a minimum of one hour of flight training and one hour of ground training (with exceptions) as per 61.56(a) so in this case the flight is logged as dual.

For an IPC, there isn't any requrement for flight training, just a proficency check based on the requirements table in the Instrument PTS per 61.57(d).

I just wondered if any CFIIs logged the flight as dual.


Thanks!

 

[flyguy]

I met an instructor a few weeks ago who had a student come in to the FBO (an older doctor type) who owned his own plane and wanted to finish his private certificate. This guy not only did not have a current flight review, but had flown over 5000 hours on a student pilot certificate that expired in the 80s. Aparently the FAA were doing some ramp checks at his home airport so he thought it was about time he got legal. [/hijack]

 

[bLizZuE]

wow.

 

[nosehair]

This guy not only did not have a current flight review, but had flown over 5000 hours on a student pilot certificate that expired in the 80s.

Well, hey, give him a break. Back in the 80's (or was it the 70's) you didn't need no stinkin' flight review. And students didn't need no stinkin' x/c sign-off for each x/c. A student pilot back then could come and go anytime and anywhere just like a private. He just couldn't take pax.

...course the student pilot certificate was a bit expired...but, hey, he's a doctor...

 

[Grabo172]

The pilot is current on instruments and the IPC is for insurance purposes only.

For a Flight Review, you're giving a minimum of one hour of flight training and one hour of ground training (with exceptions) as per 61.56(a) so in this case the flight is logged as dual.

For an IPC, there isn't any requrement for flight training, just a proficency check based on the requirements table in the Instrument PTS per 61.57(d).

I just wondered if any CFIIs logged the flight as dual.


Thanks!

I just gave an IPC over the last 2 weekends (it took us two flights to get everything in per the PTS) and I logged it all as dual given for me and dual recieved for the "student".