Potential IPC changes?

Discussion in 'Cleared for the Approach' started by smv, Feb 21, 2020.

  1. smv

    smv Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2019
    Messages:
    581
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    smv
  2. PaulS

    PaulS Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,258
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    PaulS
    Nope, I like being able to log approaches from an aatd to maintain currency, but there is nothing like the real thing. IPCs should be done in an actual aircraft at the private pilot level.
     
  3. RussR

    RussR Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,446
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Russ
    Although I value sim time, I do also feel that nothing replaces the real thing - the realization that "I can't just pause this" causes a whole different set of pressures which are important to practice responding to. Plus, although a CFI can try to simulate ATC when in the sim, it isn't the same as the real thing, complete with garbled transmissions, blocked calls, last-minute changes, etc.

    If an AATD can be used for an IPC, it is possible that someone could maintain their IFR currency for _years_ without even getting in an actual airplane. That seems like a problem.

    However, now having written that, I realize that as it is currently, as long as you don't go more than 6 months (and therefore require an IPC), you could do exactly the same thing - fly a few AATD approaches every few months and maintain currency without ever getting in an airplane.
     
  4. RussR

    RussR Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,446
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Russ
    I also note they're lumping in there an elimination of the requirement to log 30-day VOR checks - not to remove the requirement to DO them, just the requirement to LOG them.

    Huh? Is this really that onerous of a task?

    "AOPA noted that the logging requirement “is an unnecessary burden on pilots and serves no practical safety purpose.”"

    Yes, it is such a burden scribbling a VOR check on a random piece of paper I find in the cockpit... I don't understand why they're putting any effort into this at all. Who's pushing for it?
     
    smv likes this.
  5. smv

    smv Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2019
    Messages:
    581
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    smv

    Does not even need to be an AATD. Can be a BATD.
     
  6. smv

    smv Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2019
    Messages:
    581
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    smv
    If the trend toward a "paperless" cockpit continues, Apple will develop a "Sick Sack" app and the only paper you are going to find is the registration and air worthiness documents.

    ;)
     
  7. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    6,680
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    But paperless cockpit implies electronic paperwork...this request by AOPA is NO paperwork.

    documentation is the only “proof” we have that something actually happened. Is AOPA trying to get rid of the logging requirement so that pilots don’t falsify documentation, or are they telling the FAA that these checks don’t happen anyway in the real world, so why log them?
     
  8. RingLaserGyroSandwich

    RingLaserGyroSandwich Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2019
    Messages:
    154
    Location:
    Annapolis
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    RingLaserGyroSandwich
    Yes, there does seem to be an inconsistency on maintaining instruments currency. Why does an IPC after 7 noncurrent months need to be in an airplane, but BATD time every 5 months for 20 years is acceptable? I don’t know if allowing the IPC in the ATD is the right answer or not.
     
  9. asicer

    asicer En-Route

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,975
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    asicer
    How would you feel about requiring RAIM checks be logged for non-WAAS flights?
     
    N1120A likes this.
  10. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,865
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    One of the things which annoys me about AOPA is that they never seem to give us a link to what they are talking about. If they filed a Petition for Rulemaking with the FAA, the article should link to a copy of it so we can talk about what they did rather than what they say they did.
     
    denverpilot likes this.
  11. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    6,680
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    RAIM isn’t a “system” check of your aircraft...it’s ensuring that the GPS constellation is up to the task. It would be the equivalent of logging the fact that the ILS or VOR identifier was the correct sequence of Morse code characters.

    So no, I don’t think it’s necessary (or even comparable.) Pilots don’t log inspections of VOR/ILS transmitters or satellites.
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2020
  12. smv

    smv Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2019
    Messages:
    581
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    smv
    There is a link in the article to the document they submitted to the FAA:

    http://download.aopa.org/advocacy/2020/0306_IFR_Fix.pdf
     
  13. hindsight2020

    hindsight2020 En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Messages:
    4,589
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    hindsight2020
    You know the answer already, you just want somebody else to speak the quiet parts out loud on here. Nice try FAA! I see you! :D ;)
    #snitches#end#up#in#ditches
     
  14. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    6,680
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    I don’t know the answer...I just believe it to be one of those two choices. ;)

    and I think AOPA should be expending their effort in more appropriate places...but I’m not a member anymore, so my opinion doesn’t count. Not that it counted when I was a member.
     
  15. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,865
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    As the article says, that one is the one "AOPA first proposed ATD-related IPC reforms in 2018", not the current petition. I'm sure there are similarities, but there might be an extended discussion this time in light of the FAA's continued support of ATDs as evidenced by the regulatory changes published later that year.