Logging IFR Time and Approaches - BATD

[VWGhiaBob]

Per new FAA regs, I can use my home FAA-approved Basic Aviation Training Device (BATD - www.flythissim.com) to log and maintain IFR currency without an instructor.

I want to make sure I get this right in my log book though. Is it the case that I would only log time as "simulated instrument"? I am assuming sim time would not be included in Total Time...or would it?

I am currently logging only simulated instrument and leaving everything else blank, except the approach I flew (I use Foreflight log).

Thank you.

 

[Palmpilot]

61.51(b)(1)(ii) says "Total flight time or lesson time." It doesn't look to me like solo ATD time would fit in either of those categories.

 

[midlifeflyer]

There are two separate logging considerations when it comes to logging device time. One is the rules. The other simple bookkeeping.

Under the rules, the device time you are describing counts as "simulated instrument time," but not as "simulated instrument flight time. Same for totaling. "Total pilot time," yes. "Total flight time," no. The reason is the FAR definition of flight time - flight takes place in an aircraft, not in a ground trainer. The distinction shows up in a number of places, including the 8710/IACRA application.

The bookkeeping consideration follows. Not universal, but most pilots seem to reserve their instrument (total and most other) columns for "flight" time, and dedicate a single column or two for devices.

 

[Wheels]

https://support.flyelite.com/knowledgebase/recommendations-on-how-to-log-atd-time/

 

[VWGhiaBob]

https://support.flyelite.com/knowledgebase/recommendations-on-how-to-log-atd-time/

Thanks! That answers it. Sounds like I am doing it correctly. I am ONLY entering From, To, Simulated Instrument, and Simulated Flight, and the simulated approaches flown. I am also attaching a screen capture from Foreflight to each log entry (yesterday's flight attached...note Pilotedge vectored me through the final approach course....guy was too busy).

 

[James331]

Just a thought, but might be worth spending a few bucks to get a CFII or working IMC pilot to sit with you for this, even if in a unlogged and unofficial capacity. Just because you can doesn’t always mean you should, even if you don’t have to, getting more or less a IPC every 6 months ain’t a bad idea if you’re actually going to be using that IFR for IMC flying.

 

[KA550]

Just a thought, but might be worth spending a few bucks to get a CFII or working IMC pilot to sit with you for this, even if in a unlogged and unofficial capacity. Just because you can doesn’t always mean you should, even if you don’t have to, getting more or less a IPC every 6 months ain’t a bad idea if you’re actually going to be using that IFR for IMC flying.

But, that would be doing more than the minimum, and we sure wouldn't want to do that. Might increase knowledge and proficiency more that necessary.

 

[SbestCFII]

Log the date, the type of sim, and the hours, # of approaches and holds. The time would then be placed in a sim or FTD column and would not count as flight time. The caveat here is that while you can maintain currency, you're not making any progress in the realm of IFR proficiency flying an aircraft is actual IFR.

 

[coma24]

But, that would be doing more than the minimum, and we sure wouldn't want to do that. Might increase knowledge and proficiency more that necessary.

That's harsh. Just because a pilot is doing the approaches solo in the sim doesn't mean that they're doing just the bare minimum. He may well be shooting 10x the number of required approaches.

I maintain my currency solo in the airplane in IMC and then back it up with a metric ton of uncertified, non-loggable sim flying at home. It works just fine. It's really not hard to tell based on simple review of the flight track (vertical and horizontal) whether the approaches were flown correctly and safely. In fact, I am able to debrief my sim sessions through replay mode with considerably more fidelity than my real world flights.

CFII's need to be present during portions of the initial training...they're not required for on-going proficiency. If someone specifically wants t fly with a CFII....have at it, but pilots who elect to maintain their proficiency on their own shouldn't get any grief for doing it.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That's harsh. Just because a pilot is doing the approaches solo in the sim doesn't mean that they're doing just the bare minimum. He may well be shooting 10x the number of required approaches.

Not harsh. Just cynical.

 

[Palmpilot]

That's harsh. Just because a pilot is doing the approaches solo in the sim doesn't mean that they're doing just the bare minimum. He may well be shooting 10x the number of required approaches....

True, but more important than the number of approaches, IMO, is throwing in challenging conditions and unfamiliar approaches. I became acutely aware of this while flying an ILS in actual on the Oregon coast last summer, with a significant crosswind and an overoptimistic ceiling report on the ATIS.

 

[midlifeflyer]

True, but more important than the number of approaches, IMO, is throwing in challenging conditions and unfamiliar approaches. I became acutely aware of this while flying an ILS in actual on the Oregon coast last summer, with a significant crosswind and an overoptimistic ceiling report on the ATIS.

That's one of the downsides of keeping current with a safety pilot. One tends to stay in the local area (like on a checkride or IPC). It takes extra effort to find approaches you don't have more or less memorized and actually have to brief. Even without adding system failures, a device allows us to get away from the familiar and is an aid to proficiency just for that.