Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Part 61 IFR single pilot recency requirements

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Part 61 IFR single pilot recency requirements

Old 25th Aug 2014, 14:36
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14
Part 61 IFR single pilot recency requirements

Hi All

Just reading through the Part 61 regs and want to make sure I understand the changes to IFR recency requirements correctly.

- 3 approaches in last 90 days to be IFR current (per 61.870 (2))
- at least 1 hour under IFR (and not necessarily in IMC) and 1 approach for single pilot IFR in last 6 mths (per 61.875)
- if I want to carry out an NDB approach, I need to have done either an NDB/VOR/RNAV in the last 90 days (per 61.870 (4)) for 2D approach recency and an NDB per 61.870 (6) for azimuth guidance recency
- if I want to carry out a RNAV-GNSS approach, I need to have done either an NDB/VOR/RNAV approach in the last 90 days per 61.870(4) for 2D approach recency, and either VOR/RNAV per 61.870 (6) for course deviation guidance recency
- if I want to carry out a VOR approach, I need to have done either an NDB/VOR/RNAV approach in the last 90 days per 61.870(4) for 2D approach recency, and either VOR/RNAV per 61.870 (6) for course deviation guidance recency
- if I want to carry out an ILS, I need to have done one in the last 90 days per 3D approach recency at 61.870(5)

So if I understand correctly, does that mean a VOR approach would make me recent for RNAV-GNSS since both are 2D and both are based on course deviation, and vice versa?

Does that also mean all the following are now gone? I just want to make sure they're not hidden in some other obscure location across all the legislative instruments!
- 3hrs instrument time in command or 1hr dual instrument time (as in IMC time, not time under IFR) for IFR currency?
- 35 day ILS recency requirement
- 6mths recency for GPS type etc

Thanks for your help!
st777 is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2014, 21:53
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Posts: 2,865
I can't speak for the accuracy of the details there, but I vote you apply for a job writing the regs - very clear!

Come to think of it, that clear style of expression would probably rule you out ...
Arm out the window is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2014, 23:01
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Up der
Posts: 30
ILS/LLZ uses a CDI. Does that count for RNAV & VOR recency?
uncopilot is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 01:25
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,295
- 35 day ILS recency requirement
According to an ATO who I met last month, the 35 day ILS recency is now 90 days, just like all the other approaches.

As for '2D with azimuth guidance', why don't they just call it an NDB? Why the need for new terms?
training wheels is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 01:47
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14
@Arm - thanks, but I much prefer flying to writing regs!

@uncopilot - from what I can infer, the ILS would satisfy the requirements for deviation indicator recency, but haven't seen anything which says a 3D approach covers you for a 2D approach. That doesn't really seem sensible though, so I'm assuming I've missed something somewhere, but then again, who knows with aviation regulations.

@Training wheels - yep agreed, it looks like the 35 days recency for ILS is definitely out.
st777 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 02:12
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 128
As for '2D with azimuth guidance', why don't they just call it an NDB? Why the need for new terms?
Because not only NDB approaches may be flown using azimuth guidance. Consider a VOR approach using an RMI. Conducting that approach would make you recent for 2D and azimuth.

Generally, when considering azimuth/CDI recency, forget the type of approach and only consider what type of needle was used.

When considering 2D/3D recency, forget the type of needle and only consider whether the approach has vertical guidance.

So if I understand correctly, does that mean a VOR approach would make me recent for RNAV-GNSS since both are 2D and both are based on course deviation, and vice versa?
Yes, but only if the VOR was flown with a CDI, not an RMI or bearing pointer (like on a G1000).

ILS/LLZ uses a CDI. Does that count for RNAV & VOR recency?
The CDI part of the ILS covers CDI recency. The 3D part of the ILS does not cover 2D. Therefore, a 2D approach is required, using either azimuth or CDI (because CDI is already covered) to make you recent ofr a VOR/RNAV to be flown with a CDI.

Does that also mean all the following are now gone? I just want to make sure they're not hidden in some other obscure location across all the legislative instruments!
- 3hrs instrument time in command or 1hr dual instrument time (as in IMC time, not time under IFR) for IFR currency?
- 35 day ILS recency requirement
- 6mths recency for GPS type etc
Yes.

Last edited by scavenger; 26th Aug 2014 at 02:16. Reason: Added bit about 3D not covering 2D
scavenger is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 07:40
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 149
Yes, but only if the VOR was flown with a CDI, not an RMI or bearing pointer (like on a G1000).
What if you use both the CDI and bearing pointer in conjunction on the one VOR approach on the G1000? Are you then covered for both?
skkm is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 12:19
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Island
Age: 39
Posts: 511
Just thought Id point out some instruments have a CDI for NDBs also, so don't write that off entirely either.


What if you use both the CDI and bearing pointer in conjunction on the one VOR approach on the G1000? Are you then covered for both?
Excellent question!
My guess is that 50% of the pilots will interpret as yes, 50% as no, and the latter will abuse the former for being 'unprofessional'.
glekichi is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 15:22
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,295
Originally Posted by skkm View Post
What if you use both the CDI and bearing pointer in conjunction on the one VOR approach on the G1000? Are you then covered for both?
Or alternatively, during an NDB approach, use the GPS to monitor your track outbound and inbound using the CDI on your HSI. Would that cover you for both as well?

Originally Posted by scavenger
Because not only NDB approaches may be flown using azimuth guidance. Consider a VOR approach using an RMI. Conducting that approach would make you recent for 2D and azimuth.
Oh yes, point taken.
training wheels is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2014, 22:59
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South of the Equator
Posts: 147
Talk about making things hard! Why couldn't you have followed little ol' NZ?

Three hours every 90 days. Three approaches every 90 days.

One hour must be in the air and one approach can be in a sim.

Shoot a non-precision approach and you're current to fly any non-precision approach you're endorsed on (LLZ, VOR, NDB, GNSS). Shoot a precision approach and it's the same (ILS, PAR).

Or forget all the above and demonstrate competency to a Flight Examiner. Also ticks the currency box.

Now how simple is that!
Water Wings is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2014, 02:44
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 128
I think it's better than NZ as stated. Under Part 61, everything can be done in a simulator/synthetic trainer and there are no IF requirements at all.

If you do an NDB and an ILS plus 1 other in 90 days (to get to 3 total) you are covered.

If you want single pilot you need a 1 hour IFR flight (not necessarily IF time) in the last 6 months.

How much simpler can it be?
scavenger is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 01:29
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 149
I'd say you need to do 1 hour IFR incl. one approach in a trainer, as a single pilot op.
skkm is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 01:46
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 149
I'm obviously not a lawyer, but I'm about to do my first Part 61 "proficiency check" so I've spent a while trying to get my head around the rules and that's how I interpret 61.875.

Although then, 61.880 4B states:
If the holder is taken to have a valid instrument proficiency check for the relevant aircraft only because of the holderís participation in an operatorís training and checking system, the check is taken to be valid only for operations conducted by the operator.
So if you haven't done a proper "proficiency check" in the past year as opposed to your company C&T you'll need to do that too if you want to fly privately, cheers CASA.

As far as I can tell, the requirement for equipment-specific experience for GNSS approaches has finally been killed off though.
skkm is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 11:04
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: OZ
Posts: 949
Perhaps PIFR is the answer.
mustafagander is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2014, 09:53
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Perth
Posts: 18
Well that's major balls. Shooting multiple approaches, go arounds, engine failures, all in night IMC every 6 months for 4 hours (not to mention operating on a daily basis under IFR) isn't enough to let one fly a 110kt putput single engine machine IFR?
That 1 hour every 6 months isn't for single engine ops, but single pilot ops. So in the above case, you are allowed to fly that 110kt single IFR. But, a pilot who flies with a co-pilot (and thus might share IFR duties) cannot go alone without that recency.
alb92 is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2014, 11:24
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Somewhere new.....
Posts: 239
Got nothing to do with CDI's, RMI's or any type of pointer guys. It's dimensional.

2D = 2 Dimensions
3D = 3 Dimensions

2D Approaches only gives you guidance with direction
3D Approaches gives you guidance in direction and altitude (G/S)

Note, altitude steps on a 2D approach is not altitude guidance.

Yes, NDB app renews VOR and RNAV and vice versa. They all renew each other regardless of the pointer/CDI used. They are all 2D approaches.
Stiff Under Carriage is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2014, 11:56
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
From the definitions and abbreviation section of Jepps.

INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURE (IAP) ó A series of predetermined maneuvers 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
enroute obstacle clearance criteria apply. Instrument approach procedures are classified as follows:
a. Non-precision approach (NPA) procedure. An instrument approach procedure designed for
2D instrument approach operations Type A.
NOTE: Non-precision approach procedures may be flown using a continuous descent final
approach technique (CDFA). CDFA with advisory VNAV guidance calculated by on-board
equipment are considered 3D instrument approach operations. CDFA with manual calculation
of the required rate of descent are considered 2D instrument approach operations.
b. Approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV). A performance-based navigation (PBN)
instrument approach procedure designed for 3D instrument approach operations Type A.
c. Precision approach (PA) procedure. An instrument approach procedure based on navigation
systems (ILS, MLS, GLS and SBAS Cat I) designed for 3D instrument approach operations
Type A or B.
manymak is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2014, 12:38
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Perth, WA
Age: 34
Posts: 4
With the new rules in effect: can or can't you still fly the approach in VMC after recency has lapsed?

Previously in the CAO it was specifically stated the 90 and 28 days applied to being allowed to conduct a specific approach in IMC, hence implying that no approach recency is required when operating in VMC.
This part about IMC has been pulled in the new regs; so does this imply not being allowed to conduct the approach at all, regardless of meteorological conditions??
eight10man is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2014, 23:43
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,391
Anyone know what the US recency requirements are? They have a much better safety record than us, maybe we should copy theirs?
thorn bird is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2014, 03:51
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 1,246
Nothing stopping you just flying the ILS after asking for a straight in approach.
pilotchute is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.