Is the approach loggable?

SkyHog

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
18,431
Location
Castle Rock, CO
Display Name

Display name:
Everything Offends Me
Ok - picture this. NON Instrument rated pilot (with training on ILS procedures) flies with another NON instrument rated pilot as a safety pilot, while under the hood. Pilot1 (under the hood) requests, and get vectors to practice an ILS approach. Approach is flown to minimums and then terminates in a landing (or not.....possibly missed).

Question - can that approach be logged?
 
NickDBrennan said:
Ok - picture this. NON Instrument rated pilot (with training on ILS procedures) flies with another NON instrument rated pilot as a safety pilot, while under the hood. Pilot1 (under the hood) requests, and get vectors to practice an ILS approach. Approach is flown to minimums and then terminates in a landing (or not.....possibly missed).

Question - can that approach be logged?

Absolutely loggable. Whether you might want to log it would depend on whether the approach was flown under VFR or IFR. I think most ATC types would consider a "practice" approach to be VFR in VMC, but I doubt that's universal. To be legal with the pilot qualifications you listed, this would have to be conducted under VFR (no IFR flight plan etc) and in VMC (stay 500 ft below any clouds) to be legal, and logging illegal activity seems like a bad idea.
 
Yes, definitely loggable, Lance has it right. The only caveat I would add is that this is most useful when the pilot has enough instrument training to limit the number of bad habits he picks up when practicing instrument approaches without an instructor.


Jeff
 
My question would be, what's the point? Of what use is logging an approach under simulated instrument conditions to an non-instrument-rated pilot?
 
SCCutler said:
My question would be, what's the point? Of what use is logging an approach under simulated instrument conditions to an non-instrument-rated pilot?

It shows that they have documented a certain type of flying experiance. It is also a way for a person to documented there experiance for there own memory sake. When I go out and do stalls, steep turns, slow flight, ect I log it in the remarks block. I sure don't need to do that but it is for my sake and nothing else. If a pilot has no desire or need to add ratings or certifications they do not need to even log any time. There is a lot of pilots who never log time. The log book is more for us than any other reason. Now I agree it is good to keep one up to date for proof to insurance company, FAA in the event of something happening but it sure is not required. So with that in mind why do you maintain a log book?
 
sere said:
It shows that they have documented a certain type of flying experiance. It is also a way for a person to documented there experiance for there own memory sake. When I go out and do stalls, steep turns, slow flight, ect I log it in the remarks block. I sure don't need to do that but it is for my sake and nothing else. If a pilot has no desire or need to add ratings or certifications they do not need to even log any time. There is a lot of pilots who never log time. The log book is more for us than any other reason. Now I agree it is good to keep one up to date for proof to insurance company, FAA in the event of something happening but it sure is not required. So with that in mind why do you maintain a log book?

I think we are actually required by the FAA to log all flights that pertain to currency i.e: night currency for PAX carrying, BFRs, IFR currency hours....
Other flights need not be logged.
 
SCCutler said:
My question would be, what's the point? Of what use is logging an approach under simulated instrument conditions to an non-instrument-rated pilot?

A while back (on the old webboard?) there was a discussion about whether passing an instrument checkride reset the 6 month currency clock when less than 6 approaches were demonstrated. I'm not certain, but I think the final consensus was no. If so then approaches logged before obtaining the rating should certainly be logged for that reason alone, otherwise the sole benefit would be in documenting your training and practice while preparing for the checkride.
 
SCCutler said:
My question would be, what's the point? Of what use is logging an approach under simulated instrument conditions to an non-instrument-rated pilot?

One advantage is to accumulate the simulated instrument time required in excess of the minimum 15 hours of dual with a CFII. Using a safety pilot can be significantly less expensive, especially if you can avoid renting the airplane. In the case of two pilots working on the IR, simulated instrument time and the safety pilot time can be shared in your own airplane in between lessons with the CFII.

Of course this assumes that you won't need more than the minimum dual instruction to become proficient for the practical. I found that the reduced pressure flying with a friend as safety pilot enabled me to become more comfortable with the single-pilot CRM required on approaches. My CFII was sometimes too helpful while I was flying with him.
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
I think we are actually required by the FAA to log all flights that pertain to currency i.e: night currency for PAX carrying, BFRs, IFR currency hours....
Other flights need not be logged.

I know that we are required to make those flights to maintain currency but where does it say we have to log them. An example is that I know several ATP's who have not logged there time in years.
 
sere said:
I know that we are required to make those flights to maintain currency but where does it say we have to log them. An example is that I know several ATP's who have not logged there time in years.

The FAA pilot log has to be "provable" (some permanent record) which will ultimately be in writing. Someone who likes to look up FARs will hopefully copy & paste...
 
sere said:
I know that we are required to make those flights to maintain currency but where does it say we have to log them.

61.51(a)(2)

An example is that I know several ATP's who have not logged there time in years.

Well, the excuse I have heard some of them use is that that is all in the company records. While that may be true, (depending on if the company actually keeps those records) I wouldn't want to bet that the FAA would accept that. I log all my time in my personal logbook.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
61.51(a)(2)



Well, the excuse I have heard some of them use is that that is all in the company records. While that may be true, (depending on if the company actually keeps those records) I wouldn't want to bet that the FAA would accept that. I log all my time in my personal logbook.

I would think that to be a very wise move for a professional pilot. I'm a private pilot and will never be any more than that and I log every flight. It's called "Cover your butt".
 
sere said:
I know that we are required to make those flights to maintain currency but where does it say we have to log them. An example is that I know several ATP's who have not logged there time in years.

"IF IT'S NOT WRITTEN DOWN, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN."
 
lancefisher said:
A while back (on the old webboard?) there was a discussion about whether passing an instrument checkride reset the 6 month currency clock when less than 6 approaches were demonstrated. I'm not certain, but I think the final consensus was no.
Not sure about the "final consensus," but I have no question that a pilot Instrument Rating practical test is equally as acceptable to the FAA as an IPC for meeting the requirements for instrument currency because that practical test contains all the tasks of an IPC and then some, and is administered by an examiner. This question is answered implicitly in Part 61 FAQ File Q&A #528, in which the question is how long is one instrument current after passing the IR practical test.

OTOH, because a CFI Instrument Rating practical test does not include all the tasks of an IPC, it does not meet the requirements for instrument proficiency. See Part 61 FAQ Q&A #549. However, by adding those missing tasks to the flight, the examiner can still sign off an IPC, but will have to make an IPC endorsement in the applicant's log in addition to the CFI-I PTS approval sign-off.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well, the excuse I have heard some of them use is that that is all in the company records. While that may be true, (depending on if the company actually keeps those records) I wouldn't want to bet that the FAA would accept that. I log all my time in my personal logbook.
If those company records are readily accessible and portable so you can "present" them "upon reasonable request" by any of those listed in 14 CFR 61.51(i)(1), and they contain all the information required by 14 CFR 61.51(b), then yes, I suppose those will do. However, I don't think this will work in practice, so I think Greg's got the right idea for those operating under 121 or 135, especially if they do any flying outside the company, e.g., unless United has some highly modified 777's in its fleet, Greg's not going to have documentation of any tailwheel or ASEL landings in United's records, so he'd have trouble showing currency to fly his Cessna 195.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
61.51(a)(2)



Well, the excuse I have heard some of them use is that that is all in the company records. While that may be true, (depending on if the company actually keeps those records) I wouldn't want to bet that the FAA would accept that. I log all my time in my personal logbook.

Unless I am all wet here 61.51(a)(2) is centered around training for a certificate, rating or flight review. In fact Part 61 as a whole is centered around all of this from what I see.

Now in my case let me state I do log all of my flights but still would like to see where it is written in the FAR/Aim that all flights must be logged reguardless of Certification and Rating.
 
SCCutler said:
My question would be, what's the point? Of what use is logging an approach under simulated instrument conditions to an non-instrument-rated pilot?

IIRC, a certain amount of the 40 training required for the 8710 can be flown with a saftey pilot. That said I did my 40 all with my II and had a really good ride.
 
sere said:
It shows that they have documented a certain type of flying experiance. It is also a way for a person to documented there experiance for there own memory sake. When I go out and do stalls, steep turns, slow flight, ect I log it in the remarks block. I sure don't need to do that but it is for my sake and nothing else. If a pilot has no desire or need to add ratings or certifications they do not need to even log any time. There is a lot of pilots who never log time. The log book is more for us than any other reason. Now I agree it is good to keep one up to date for proof to insurance company, FAA in the event of something happening but it sure is not required. So with that in mind why do you maintain a log book?

I just log enough for currency when I need it. If I'm overdue when I take a job, I just do what I need for currency and check out for the insurance (usually 3 TO/L with a light plane, load a 1/4 tank of water and spray it out on runs on the airfield, then go back up with as much as it'll carry and do a midfield dump) on the first day and log it. Outside of what legally needs to be in the book, I can't hardly be bothered, I have enough paperwork in my life.
 
sere said:
Unless I am all wet here 61.51(a)(2) is centered around training for a certificate, rating or flight review.
That's 14 CFR 61.51(a)(1). Subparagraph (a)(2) covers "aeronautical experience required for meeting recent flight experience requirements of this part," which would include 14 CFR 61.55 and 14 CFR 61.57 landing and instrument currencies. So if you want to be able to carry passengers or fly IFR or act as a required SIC (other than a safety pilot under 14 CFR 91.109(b)), you have to log the necessary recent landings, approaches, holding, etc., even if you aren't using it to meet requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review.

Now in my case let me state I do log all of my flights
Me, too.

but still would like to see where it is written in the FAR/Aim that all flights must be logged reguardless of Certification and Rating.
Sorry, you're out of luck -- it isn't written in either document. For FAA purposes, you need only log what's needed for certificates, ratings, flight reviews, and recent flight experience requirements. If you cover those requirements, you've done as much as the FAA requires.

However, insurance companies may require documentation of more flight experience than the FAA. Some require some minimum number of hours per year, or in type, or complex, or multi, or whatever, or give reduced premiums for higher levels of experience. If it isn't in your logbook (or you can't produce your logbook -- see the discussion about "company records" above), the insurance company will take the position that if it isn't logged, it doesn't exist. Further, if you claim experience that isn't documented in a form acceptable to the insurance company (or a jury, if it comes to that), you could find your insurance policy based on that undocumented time being null and void -- after you have your accident.

Choose wisely.
 
Henning said:
IIRC, a certain amount of the 40 training required for the 8710 can be flown with a saftey pilot.
True -- up to 25 hours of that minimum 40, but there's nothing in the 8710 or 14 CFR 61.65 about the number of approaches, so logging approaches flown with a safety pilot before you get your IR has no significance to the FAA.

That said I did my 40 all with my II and had a really good ride.
I did the minimum with my instrument instructor and the maximum with my "study buddy" (partner taking training from the same instructor, swapping left/rear seats during each training flight with the instructor, and then swapping hood time practicing what we'd learned between training flights), and I also had a really good ride. I firmly believe that quality of training is more important than quantity in deciding how well the ride goes (assuming the legal mins are met, because if they aren't, the ride is very short and very unhappy no matter how good the training was).

BTW, on my Instrument practical test, by 10 minutes after takeoff, I was down to one nav/com and no vacuum instruments, doing a partial panel hold at a VOR intersection on one VOR (which, while scary if dropped on you by surprise, is easier than it sounds once you get the pacing right, to which my instructor had seen during training -- thanks again, Dave Domke, wherever you are). After negotiating that successfully, the rest of the ride was easy.
 
Ron Levy said:
That's 14 CFR 61.51(a)(1). Subparagraph (a)(2) covers "aeronautical experience required for meeting recent flight experience requirements of this part," which would include 14 CFR 61.55 and 14 CFR 61.57 landing and instrument currencies. So if you want to be able to carry passengers or fly IFR or act as a required SIC (other than a safety pilot under 14 CFR 91.109(b)), you have to log the necessary recent landings, approaches, holding, etc., even if you aren't using it to meet requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review.

Me, too.

Sorry, you're out of luck -- it isn't written in either document. For FAA purposes, you need only log what's needed for certificates, ratings, flight reviews, and recent flight experience requirements. If you cover those requirements, you've done as much as the FAA requires.

However, insurance companies may require documentation of more flight experience than the FAA. Some require some minimum number of hours per year, or in type, or complex, or multi, or whatever, or give reduced premiums for higher levels of experience. If it isn't in your logbook (or you can't produce your logbook -- see the discussion about "company records" above), the insurance company will take the position that if it isn't logged, it doesn't exist. Further, if you claim experience that isn't documented in a form acceptable to the insurance company (or a jury, if it comes to that), you could find your insurance policy based on that undocumented time being null and void -- after you have your accident.

Choose wisely.

I agree that the insurance companys drive a lot of this time stuff. My insurance company required any pilot who flys my plane to have a minimum time of 300 hours and 25 in type.

I also concur with you post on quality of practice with flight buddy or instructor is a lot more important than hours. However everyone seems to be more interested in hours flown than quality of training and/or flight experiance. An example is someone who does lots of XC in class e space only and never in wx other than sever clear vs someone who flys in all types of conditions and makes lots of x-wind landings. Then there is the ones who never get far out of the pattern. There is no good answer that I know of.
 
Ron Levy said:
Not sure about the "final consensus," but I have no question that a pilot Instrument Rating practical test is equally as acceptable to the FAA as an IPC for meeting the requirements for instrument currency because that practical test contains all the tasks of an IPC and then some, and is administered by an examiner. This question is answered implicitly in Part 61 FAQ File Q&A #528, in which the question is how long is one instrument current after passing the IR practical test.

OTOH, because a CFI Instrument Rating practical test does not include all the tasks of an IPC, it does not meet the requirements for instrument proficiency. See Part 61 FAQ Q&A #549. However, by adding those missing tasks to the flight, the examiner can still sign off an IPC, but will have to make an IPC endorsement in the applicant's log in addition to the CFI-I PTS approval sign-off.

Ah, that makes much more sense, and is no doubt what I mis-remembered.
 
Ron Levy said:
especially if they do any flying outside the company, e.g., unless United has some highly modified 777's in its fleet, Greg's not going to have documentation of any tailwheel or ASEL landings in United's records, so he'd have trouble showing currency to fly his Cessna 195.

LOL. Bingo, Ron!
 
Ron Levy said:
I firmly believe that quality of training is more important than quantity in deciding how well the ride goes (assuming the legal mins are met, because if they aren't, the ride is very short and very unhappy no matter how good the training was).

Can't agree more, but then my instructor was a 50,000+hr Corparorate ATP invarious jets. That combined that he came at $30 hr WITH a 172...wet . That made him the best value on anything I have ever had.
 
I log all my flights, just to make sure I don't forget to log something I should. That way I make sure that what I need to maintain IFR and insurance currency is there. The rest is all about "souveniers" If you read my logbook you would ROTFLYAO. For example, a flight I flew from FCM (Flying Cloud, MN) to RGK (Red Wing, MN) in a Skyhawk on 4/16, which is about 45 minutes with a headwind: "Flew to RGK with Cheryl to get dessert. Bought motorcycle boots at Red Wing Shoe outlet. Awesome flight" No approaches, not complex, not high performance but just darn good fun. My logbook is full of souveniers. I'm not going to fly an Airbus when I grow up, so after documenting what I need to be legal, its all about fun.

Laura
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
BTW, on my Instrument practical test, by 10 minutes after takeoff, I was down to one nav/com and no vacuum instruments, doing a partial panel hold at a VOR intersection on one VOR (which, while scary if dropped on you by surprise, is easier than it sounds once you get the pacing right, to which my instructor had seen during training -- thanks again, Dave Domke, wherever you are). After negotiating that successfully, the rest of the ride was easy.
Ron,
Could this be the same Dave Domke who was my principal CFI when I was getting my private pilot's license at the University of Michigan back in the early 70's?
 
I have a related question.

I'm still working on my VFR, but I have done some work under the hood. We log this as simulated instrument time.

It's not a lot, but when i go on to IFR, will those simulated hours count toward the 40?
 
mmthomas said:
Could this be the same Dave Domke who was my principal CFI when I was getting my private pilot's license at the University of Michigan back in the early 70's?
No doubt, as I flew with Dave in the U of M Flyers back in the 1970-72 time frame.
 
mmilano said:
I'm still working on my VFR, but I have done some work under the hood. We log this as simulated instrument time.
Rightly so.

It's not a lot, but when i go on to IFR, will those simulated hours count toward the 40?
Yes, flight time under the hood done towards your Private counts towards the 40 hours of total instrument time required by 14 CFR 61.65(d)(2).

Note, however, that those three hours do not count towards the 15 hours of "instrument flight training" required by 14 CFR 61.65(d)(2)(i). That's because the hood time required for Private by 14 CFR 61.109(a)(3) is not "instrument flight training" (which requires that the instructor have an instrument rating on his CFI) but rather "flight training in a single-engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments" (which may be given by an instructor with only the ASE rating on his CFI). It's a fine distinction, but it allows non-IA instructors to give all the training for Private without having to find a CFI-IA to give those three hours.
 
Ron Levy said:
No doubt, as I flew with Dave in the U of M Flyers back in the 1970-72 time frame.

Then you and I must have been flying out of ARB or YIP at the same time!
 
Back
Top