Hey, why don't we say that "operating" the aircraft in IMC should be defined as actually operating it yourself, ie no AP allowed?
As a previous poster said, sitting eating a 3-course meal at FL450 hardly counts as instrument time, and I would agree. On the other hand, sitting at FL450, only watching the AP fly the aircraft, would hardly make you a more proficient pilot than doing so while consuming your meal.
So now - how much "real" IFR experience do you have based on that criterion?
TBH, IFR time expresses the total experience of the pilot operating according to IFR rules, at least in Part-OPS-land. It's a measure of how well versed he'll be expected to be in instrument flight procedures, how likely he is to get lost in a reversal procedure, how well he must be expected to be able to handle an RNP-arrival etc. etc. It relates to proficiency in the operating environment.
As for the time spent in IMC - well... If you're spending your time inside clouds watching the AFCS handle the aircraft for you... How does that make IMC-time any measure of your proficiency?? Yes, you can't see out - but you don't need to, as you have the crutch of automatics. Remove that crutch, and let's see what happens, should we?
Don't get me wrong - I am a strong proponent of using an appropriate automation level at all times. But the entire debate smacks of w1lly-waving, "my IFR time is better than yours, because I only count the
real time I can't see out"
Look at your license - see who's issued it - consult their regs - record IAW same - end of.