12watttim,
Whereas the regulation does state conditions of flight, specifically IFR conditions, and we've seen clearly that the regulation defines "IFR Conditions" as conditions less than VFR...your repeated assertion that the regulation refers to flight under an IFR flight plan or clearance is clearly wrong, and has been thoroughly dismissed.
That you keep arguing to the contrary doesn't change that, and neither does the formatting of your commercial logbook.
If you'll show a regulatory reference to support your claims...that would be worth something. However, you cannot.
There is no such thing as "IFR conditions" or "VFR conditions", they are things my PPL students would talk about.
I know...you've already said this before. We've proven it patently false, however, by quoting the regulation, and the defintion thereof, verbatim.
As you'll recall from reading the thread, if you have done so..."IFR Conditions" is clearly defined in official documentation, as "‘
IFR conditions’ means weather conditions below the minimum for flight under visual flight rules."
Given that you've been provided the documentation, links, and references to see this for yourself...there's really no room for discussion there.
What I was after was a specific regulation pointing to any need or use of logging IFR, and this was provided by Chinchilla6.12 when he or she cited LASORS H2.1.
It should go without saying (but apparently does not), once again, that the specific regulation applicable to logging of flight time (JAR-FCL 1.080 was provided) does not in any way, shape, or form, point to the logging of IFR...but to instrument conditions...which are then clearly defined as previously shown.
If you can't read and understand this, there's little point having further discourse with you. Repeating the same tired arguments without documentation does nothing to further your case, which may thus safely be discounted for lack of evidence.
Thanks again, Chinchilla6.12.