Another Part 61 query

[pudknocker]

Hi guys, long time reader, first time poster.
I am currently studying for the IREX and have been reading up on the new recency requirements for IFR flight.
My question is probably a simple one; If I fall out of recency i.e. haven't flown any ifr for more than 90 days, how do I become recent again? If I have an approved flight simulator at hand it might not be so difficult.
But if I don't and have to do the three approaches in flight, do I have to do it with a flight instructor? A testing officer? Or just someone else who is instrument rated to act as a safety pilot? Or what about ICUS?

[Nomde plume]

No requirement to do it under IFR or in real or simulated IMC.
So blast out VFR and fly the procedure.

Only SPIFR recency requirement must be conducted IFR (1 hr every 6 months)

Again no requirement for actual or simulated IMC

[QFF]

For GA private ops, how do you log IFR (non IMC) time for the purposes of complying with the 1hr every 6 mths rule?

Or would a copy of the IFR flight plan submitted on NAIPS suffice?

[Nomde plume]

Simply remark that the flight was conducted under the IFR would suffice I suppose. Same way you show you meet the 500hr ME IFR PIC FOR THE LCRPT requirement!

[Nomde plume]

Additionally it would appear that 'instrument flight time' is now all but useless except for initial issue of IR, CPL, ATPL, etc. so why would anyone bother logging it anymore?!

[FO Cokebottle]

Pilot log books have a section at the back for logging instrument time.

In fact the CASA Pilot's Log Book titles this section:

FLIGHT SIMULATOR, SYNTHETIC TRAINER AND IN-FLIGHT INSTRUMENT EXPERIENCE

and is used to show your IFR recency both in flight time and navigation aids.

Pretty well sums it up for providing the required crossed "I's" and dotted "T's".

As an aside, irregardless of what the rules state verbatim, if you want to really keep your instrument skills, if actually flying, you should do it under the hood and take a safety pilot with you if not in actual IMC and flying under the IFR. :ok:

[sillograph]

below 5700 ICUS by the chief pilot is pretty much finished, unless CP is an instructor and blah blah blah.

If not, pilot in LHS logs command and CP log nothing only duty time and performs a safety pilot role???

Surely this can't be correct, how does said pilot get exp on say 402 for charter if he is only rated on a duchess, just because he has 10hrs in a duchy doesn't mean he OK to blast of into bad weather in 402?

Is CASA going to issue a separate approval of CP's to continue doing ICUS as before, probably not. Safer to keep those pesky toy planes on the ground.

[Arm out the window]

Surely it must say somewhere in the new regs that a safety pilot is needed for VFR approaches and upper air work? I'm not flying IFR these days so haven't looked into it, but you'd think there would be some provision to that end.

[The name is Porter]

I reckon that if you did your initial multi in a Duchess:

Nobody operating a 402 would allow you to do a charter (or a private flight) unless you did some differences training in it and a few hours ICUS under your belt. If they did they should have all of their assets in a trust (and not placed there for 'asset protection') because their insurance certainly won't protect them.

If the intent of Part 61 is to allow operators to come up with their own differences training rather than you having to do an endorsement then some how get 10 hours prior to commanding it this is a good thing right?? Problem is, it will be abused by dickheads and ruined for everyone.

[outnabout]

Sillograph:


Not true, my friend.


The CPL comes into the business with a MECIR, covering most multi engine aircraft under 5700kgs. So he / she has the CPL licence, and the ME IFR rating.


So any training done by the CP is done to bring CPL up to the company standard on a particular aircraft eg from the Duchess or Baron to a 402 - all ME. This training doesn't relate to the issue of a licence or rating.


As such, for this, the CP does not require an instructor's rating.

[no_one]

Interesting that in the USA the safety pilot can log in command as well as the the guy getting instrument practice. I guess that they have decided that extra instrument practice leads to safety....

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/sdl/local_more/avsafety_program/media/LOGGING%20PILOT-IN-COMMAND%20TIME.pdf

[Adsie]

Thread drift ???

Has CAO 40.2.1 been deleted from CAO's and has the ILS recency been swamped up by Part 61 ???

Thanks in advance

[uncopilot]

You must not fly a 3D approach unless you have flown a 3D approach in the last 90 days – either in flight or in an approved flight simulation training device.
61.870 (5).

Yes. Here's some of Bob Taits IREX (Part 61) update notes with the reference to make it easy for you to find!

[Seiran]

If you do conduct the approach in VMC then I don't imagine it would count as technically being an instrument approach operation unless you had the hood on but then again in real life you would rarely have hard IMC right down to minima anyway. Could it perhaps have to be an IFR flight to count as instrument approach operation?

If only part 61 listed a definition for instrument approach operation. I imagine if there were it would be listed as something like: Instrument approach operation: an approach conducted by an aircraft flying under the IFR with reference to instruments. (Since VFR flights are limited to visual approaches only?)

[Nomde plume]

Seiran,

There is no requirement for instrument time whether actually in cloud, or simulated under the hood.
There is also no requirement for it to be conducted under the IFR.
Nor is there a requirement for a safety pilot.
Legally speaking you can hire a VFR C150 and fly an NDB or ILS approach in day VFR conditions on your own looking out the window and satisfy the requirement. The intent is to orientate yourself with flying an approach of similar procedures. Procedure being the key word. Imagine trying to fly an approach holding tracks and altitudes within tolerance without looking at your instruments!

This is how it was both before and after Part 61 for instrument approach recency so it hasn't actually changed.

What has changed is the impossible to meet 3 hours 'instrument flight time' in 90 days that was previously required under the old rules. Unless you had access to a simulator, or a buddy to take with you to be safety pilot under the hood, 99% of GA pilots, or even airline pilots for that matter had a chance of meeting this requirement!

The onus is now on you to maintain your instrument flying abilities as the regs only really cover approaches.

[outlandishoutlanding]

instrument approach operation means an approach and landing:
(a) conducted using instruments for navigation guidance; and
(b) based on an authorised instrument approach procedure.

instrument approach procedure means a series of predetermined manoeuvres by reference to flight instruments with specified protection from obstacles from the initial approach fix or, where applicable, from the beginning of a defined arrival route to a point from which a landing can be completed and thereafter, if a landing is not completed, to a position at which holding or en‑route obstacle clearance criteria apply.