I am not sure why you ask me to answer for sleepybuddha's comments.
I didn't. I quoted that poster, and addressed the quoted comment. Work on your comprehension.
It is a common error, although more often among pilots with little or no IFR experience.
Timmy, I'm not going to get into an anatomy measuring contest with you, but suffice it to say I probably have a fair bit more instrument experience than you...and most likely substantially more under IFR...and probably for a lot more years, as well, domestic, and international, large aircraft, and small.
The clue in the verbiage of the regulation is the header: CONDITIONS.
IFR, Instrument Flight Rules, have nothing to do with in-flight conditions. They relate only to operational conditions. IFR stands for Instrument Flight Rules, and can be flown under any meteorological conditions, and under diurnal or nocturnal conditions.
Precisely. The instrument flight rules do not require one to be in instrument conditions. When one is in IFR conditions, however, the very terminology refers to conditions less than VFR...and the big hint is the use of the word CONDITIONS. This is very different than simply specifying flight under IFR. The regulation very specifically points to IFR conditions, not simply IFR rules or regulations, but conditions. Conditions less than VFR. The regulation does not point to operations under IFR, operations in accordance with an IFR clearance, or operations in airspace requiring an IFR clearance. Only to IFR conditions, which of course, is conditions less than VFR.
There emphasis appears to be on time conducted under Instrument Flight Rule (IFR).
Appears? The emphasis appears? Is that anything like "looks like?" What, exactly is the regulatory basis for that assumption, given that the language of the regulation specifies IFR Conditions...not simply IFR.
The only definition cited beyond what's been listed, is in JAR FCL 1.001, and is for "Instrument Flight Time." Nowhere does it address operations under instrument flight rules or in accordance with an ATC clearance, but simply...
Instrument flight time:
Time during which a pilot is controlling an
aircraft in flight solely by reference to
instruments.
Where is the regulatory reference, then? Both of you cite the printing of your logbook as proof that you should be logging time on a clearance or flight plan as IFR...and your logbook isn't a regulatory document. It's a document required by the regulation, but your signature in that book doesn't make what's printed therein into regulation, nor does it codify a column marked "IFR" in the log into the JAR-FCL, does it? (It does not).
Accordingly, what's printed in your logbook, as Tim likes to say, is irrelevant.
What's printed in the JAR FCL, however, isn't...and it doesn't point to logging time under an IFR flight plan at all...only to IFR Conditions.
www.jaa.nl/publications/jars/500969.pdf
This document points to an EASA document providing a definition of "IFR conditions. Specifically, the reference from the above link states:
*‘IFR conditions’
ref. EASA CS-Definitions.
http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/g/...(14.12.07).pdf
This link provides a definition for "IFR Conditions" as follows:
‘IFR conditions’ means weather conditions below the minimum for flight under visual flight rules.
Which brings us back to the concept that when the regulation states that for conditions of flight you may list IFR conditions, or Night conditions...it's not talking about listing time spent on an IFR flight plan, or under an IFR clearance. It's talking about flight in weather conditions below the minimum for visual flight rules.