Logging the Missed Approach Course?

Trogdor

Trogdor

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
409
Location
NJ
Display Name
Display name:
Trogdor
I ran into an issue with my log book regarding my CFII logging the missed approach course vs. going missed with a DPE.

What I would do in some training exercises is perform a touch and go (mainly to log XC time) and then ask tower to fly the missed approach course as a way to at least practice for instance getting into the hold the same way (or very close) to if I went missed. This is obviously different than going missed since once I went below DA/MDA I was no longer protected. However, this was in VFR with the hood off after reaching minimums with my CFII.

I also realize I can do whatever I like with my logbook. However, in the interest of being on the up-and-up with respect to logging approaches - can you fly the missed approach course without actually going missed or is that just totally bogus?

Note: The Tower didn't seem to be confused on what I wanted.
 
I don't log misses, just the approach. Why are you wanting to document whether you did the missed or not?
 
Trogdor said:
I ran into an issue with my log book regarding my CFII logging the missed approach course vs. going missed with a DPE.

What I would do in some training exercises is perform a touch and go (mainly to log XC time) and then ask tower to fly the missed approach course as a way to at least practice for instance getting into the hold the same way (or very close) to if I went missed. This is obviously different than going missed since once I went below DA/MDA I was no longer protected. However, this was in VFR with the hood off after reaching minimums with my CFII.

I also realize I can do whatever I like with my logbook. However, in the interest of being on the up-and-up with respect to logging approaches - can you fly the missed approach course without actually going missed or is that just totally bogus?

Note: The Tower didn't seem to be confused on what I wanted.
Click to expand...
I don't see what a Missed Approach, or any ad hoc version of one has to do with "...with respect to logging approaches..."
 
Trogdor said:
I ran into an issue with my log book regarding my CFII logging the missed approach course vs. going missed with a DPE.

What I would do in some training exercises is perform a touch and go (mainly to log XC time) and then ask tower to fly the missed approach course as a way to at least practice for instance getting into the hold the same way (or very close) to if I went missed. This is obviously different than going missed since once I went below DA/MDA I was no longer protected. However, this was in VFR with the hood off after reaching minimums with my CFII.

I also realize I can do whatever I like with my logbook. However, in the interest of being on the up-and-up with respect to logging approaches - can you fly the missed approach course without actually going missed or is that just totally bogus?

Note: The Tower didn't seem to be confused on what I wanted.
Click to expand...

Sure. In real life, what would you do if you flew an ILS at a non-towered field to 200 & 1/2 and gunned it as soon as you saw a car drive onto the runway just as you were touching down? You would fly the missed approach. Logged missed approaches is not required for currency, so you can log it however you wish.
 
Put me in with those who don't understand the question. Heck, I don't even understand the premise of the question. Log missed approaches? Why? Even if you did, why does that change whether you went around from DA or touched the runway? You still flew the same ground track (presumably).

And to your other question, of course you can fly the missed approach without actually going missed (assuming VFR). You could fly it immediately after takeoff if you want. You could change your mind while flying the VFR pattern and decide to fly the missed off a random approach. You can make up your own missed approach if you want (coordinated with ATC if necessary, of course). VFR, you can do any of these you like. I'm not sure how that's related to logging, though.
 
I think the more common question (and perhaps this is being muddled in the original question) is when can you log an approach (for currency). The FAA has consistently hed (and this is backed up by the Murphy legal counsel letter) that you can log an approach if either while under actual or simulated instrument conditions:

1. You follow the final approach to where you make a visual transition to a landing, or
2. You continue the approach to the MAP or DA and go missed.

If you go missed before the MAP/DA, you can't count it.
 
flyingron said:
If you go missed before the MAP/DA, you can't count it.
Click to expand...
Isn’t there an exception if continuing to MAP/DA disrupts traffic? As long as you are past the FAF?
 
@RussR The question really was, “Why was the DPE so miffed by the entry?” I don’t see anything illegal about it?

I would say something like “RNAV 24. Flew missed approach course.” <—— not sure why this is so contentious? I don’t even understand why under VFR w/CFII does it even make a difference frankly. But apparently this was a big topic of discussion.

The dispute was if I flew the missed approach course I couldn’t have done a touch and go ….. I had to either have officially gone missed OR land (T&G) but not both from a logging perspective.
 
Last edited:
Brad Z said:
Sure. In real life, what would you do if you flew an ILS at a non-towered field to 200 & 1/2 and gunned it as soon as you saw a car drive onto the runway just as you were touching down? You would fly the missed approach. Logged missed approaches is not required for currency, so you can log it however you wish.
Click to expand...

Well, technically speaking, that could be very dangerous since you are below DA and as such the missed approach course may not provide you with the necessary protection, right? A safer option would probably be some DP at that point.
 
Actually nothing prohibits you from doing a missed approach after going below the DA or even touching the ground. The DA is the point where you need to initiate the go around if you don't have the runway. Jets that take time to spool up may indeed hit the ground on the go.
 
Trogdor said:
@RussR The question really was, “Why was the DPE so miffed by the entry?” I don’t see anything illegal about it?

I would say something like “RNAV 24. Flew missed approach course.” <—— not sure why this is so contentious? I don’t even understand why under VFR w/CFII does it even make a difference frankly. But apparently this was a big topic of discussion.

The dispute was if I flew the missed approach course I couldn’t have done a touch and go ….. I had to either have officially gone missed OR land (T&G) but not both from a logging perspective.
Click to expand...
I'm still trying to understand, so forgive me if I get this wrong.

The only reason to log a missed is syllabus-related record keeping. It's included in the broader "instrument approach procedures" regulatory category and like it's cousin the "full procedure" is an ACS task. So it's technically not required to be separately logged (except for an IPC) although a good idea for training. I continue to log mine, but mostly as a way of self-analysis - have I done one recently?

the "logging" itself is just a comment, not a column.

Sounds like the DPE was irked because you logged a touch and go and a missed approach for the same approach. I doubt it was because you were VFR. Perhaps he wanted to be sure you understood that a missed approach - and its protections - begin at the MAP at either MDA or DA and not on the ground halfway down the runway. On the "go" you only had the protection afforded by takeoff minimums and any applicable ODP. Technically, having touched down, what you then did was take off and not fly the missed. No big deal, but my best guess about the DPE's remarks.
 
You know, I can probably think of 5 situations where you would initiate a missed below the DA. The first is if you see the certain runway lighting systems at the DA, you can go to 100 AGL, if you don't see or lose the runway, then go missed. Another could be that the winds are not as advertised, you touch down, but can't hold center line, go missed. Thinking you have to land after the DA can get you killed, you can go missed after the DA.

As far as the DPE, as long as he didn't fail you, who cares? Actual misses are pretty rare for me. Misses on practice approaches happen at least once a session. I log the approach, then sometimes note that I went missed.
 
Trogdor said:
Well, technically speaking, that could be very dangerous since you are below DA and as such the missed approach course may not provide you with the necessary protection, right? A safer option would probably be some DP at that point.
Click to expand...
Flying an ODP and a missed approach are not mutually exclusive.
 
Trogdor said:
Well, technically speaking, that could be very dangerous since you are below DA and as such the missed approach course may not provide you with the necessary protection, right? A safer option would probably be some DP at that point.
Click to expand...
That's exactly why they should be practiced (in good weather) from touchdown, or almost touchdown. To simulate a vehicle or perhaps a deer entering the runway at an uncontrolled airport. This practice is particularly useful on an approach with a high MDA and/or missed approach point well prior to the airport. If I were instructing in the Reno/Truckee area O02 (Beckwourth) would be my favorite, RNAV Z Rwy 26. At 100 feet, "You've entered a heavy snow shower!" The published missed approach may not be the best option in such circumstances.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Sounds like the DPE was irked because you logged a touch and go and a missed approach for the same approach. I doubt it was because you were VFR. Perhaps he wanted to be sure you understood that a missed approach - and its protections - begin at the MAP at either MDA or DA and not on the ground halfway down the runway. On the "go" you only had the protection afforded by takeoff minimums and any applicable ODP. Technically, having touched down, what you then did was take off and not fly the missed. No big deal, but my best guess about the DPE's remarks.
Click to expand...
…and the DPE didn’t communicate his issue clearly enough, apparently.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I'm still trying to understand, so forgive me if I get this wrong.

The only reason to log a missed is syllabus-related record keeping. It's included in the broader "instrument approach procedures" regulatory category and like it's cousin the "full procedure" is an ACS task. So it's technically not required to be separately logged (except for an IPC) although a good idea for training. I continue to log mine, but mostly as a way of self-analysis - have I done one recently?

the "logging" itself is just a comment, not a column.

Sounds like the DPE was irked because you logged a touch and go and a missed approach for the same approach. I doubt it was because you were VFR. Perhaps he wanted to be sure you understood that a missed approach - and its protections - begin at the MAP at either MDA or DA and not on the ground halfway down the runway. On the "go" you only had the protection afforded by takeoff minimums and any applicable ODP. Technically, having touched down, what you then did was take off and not fly the missed. No big deal, but my best guess about the DPE's remarks.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking that was the DPE's logic. @Trogdor , can you get a hold of him and ask? Here's what the Controllers rules have to say on the subject:

4−8−12. LOW APPROACH AND TOUCHAND-GO
Consider an aircraft cleared for a touch-and-go, low approach, or practice approach as an arriving aircraft until that aircraft touches down or crosses the landing threshold; thereafter, consider the aircraft as a departing aircraft. Before the aircraft begins its final descent, issue the appropriate departure instructions the pilot is to follow upon completion of the approach (in accordance with Para 4−3−2, Departure Clearances). Climb-out instructions must include a specific heading or a route of flight and altitude, except when the aircraft will maintain VFR and contact the tower.
EXAMPLE−
“After completing low approach, climb and maintain six thousand. Turn right, heading three six zero.”
“Maintain VFR, contact tower.”
(Issue other instructions as appropriate.)
NOTE−
Climb-out instructions may be omitted after the first approach if instructions remain the same.
Approach
 
Brad Z said:
Flying an ODP and a missed approach are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

But they often are. Again, since I am VFR w/CFII acting as safety pilot I think in the end it is OK.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I'm still trying to understand, so forgive me if I get this wrong.

The only reason to log a missed is syllabus-related record keeping. It's included in the broader "instrument approach procedures" regulatory category and like it's cousin the "full procedure" is an ACS task. So it's technically not required to be separately logged (except for an IPC) although a good idea for training. I continue to log mine, but mostly as a way of self-analysis - have I done one recently?

the "logging" itself is just a comment, not a column.

Sounds like the DPE was irked because you logged a touch and go and a missed approach for the same approach. I doubt it was because you were VFR. Perhaps he wanted to be sure you understood that a missed approach - and its protections - begin at the MAP at either MDA or DA and not on the ground halfway down the runway. On the "go" you only had the protection afforded by takeoff minimums and any applicable ODP. Technically, having touched down, what you then did was take off and not fly the missed. No big deal, but my best guess about the DPE's remarks.
Click to expand...
It sounds like there might also have been some skepticism regarding whether the cross-country training requirements were met. DPE might have suspected that someone went back and added a landing where there wasn't one if it had been logged as missed.
 
Trogdor said:
The dispute was if I flew the missed approach course I couldn’t have done a touch and go ….. I had to either have officially gone missed OR land (T&G) but not both from a logging perspective.
Click to expand...
Thass why you shouldn't put more stuff in writing than needed w/r/t anything FAA. Just gives 'em a reason to go fishing. Everybody likes to get paid for fishing. Just log the XC, skip the missed.
 
RussR said:
Regarding the issue of going missed below DA/MDA, we discussed that in some detail on episode 287 of the Stuck Mic AvCast:

https://stuckmicavcast.com/ifr/smac287-beyond-the-ifr-checkride-part-2/

It’s the first topic.
Click to expand...
That was good, thanks. Wish I'd of seen it a little earlier. Just spent about a half hour surfing TERPS to see if any consideration was given to 'late' misses and the Missed Approach Surface. @Trogdor and @Brad Z , this will answer a lot about your exchange of replies above. starts around 8:00
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top