Fake instrument flight time logged
 

Question: Perusal of a log book of a pilot with a N.T based turbo-prop operator revealed a fixed figure of 0.2 instrument flight time for every trip. The log book showed over 500 hours of simulated instrument flight time. The pilot claimed it was company policy (published in the operations manual) for each crew member to log 0.2 instrument time on every flight even if CAVOK in order to meet IFR currency requirements. This time was also logged in daily flight sheets for audit purposes. As CASA presumably "approve" company operations manuals, does this mean there is a tacit acceptance by CASA that instrument flight time can be logged in a two pilot crew, by both pilots at the same time regardless of weather conditions?

I recall that several years back a Virgin Blue captain told his first officer at the end of their last flight that day to "put me down for an hour's instrument flight time" in the daily times sheet so that official records would be kept up to date re currency. The whole day was flown in CAVOK.

As logging of instrument flight time is a matter of honesty, rather than an audit trail to satisfy CASA legal requirements, it doesn't say much for the companies that encourge such dishonest practices...

Tee Emm

I realise that in GA that IF time really only happens in IMC. In fact I remember being criticised for having less than 1% of my total experience logged as IF. There just isn't enough clouds when your flying C210's about the top end.

However; it is very dangerous and almost impossible to fly a jet or turboprop for that matter, professionally without flying for the majority on instruments for both departure and arrival. Metro pilot's (no auto-pilot) should be logging instrument time form wheels up to touchdown. All the simulator training teaches you is to fly Power + Attitude = Performance.

If CASA cannot realise the truth that it is irrelevant if there is cloud or moon shine outside, then they really are the bunch of amateurs that the majority of professionals in and out of Australia have suspected.

Logging instrument time is a great tool for maintaining a level of training, but once out on the line and operating to your company's SOP's it achieve's nothing more than a box ticking nuisance.

Leatherdog.

Interesting concept, however i find it very easy to fly visually in said aircraft using the actual horizon rather than artificial. As with a C152, 172 or PA28 still use the aircrafts instruments for increased accuracy. The attitude reference especially for wings level and alignment with the runway is much more relaxing looking outside. The difference between IMC and Day VMC is that you don't have the real world option to tell you when your upside down or the little ground clues that hint for navigation profile.

Leatherdog,
That's a very interesting concept. However I can quite happily fly a variety of turbo-prop aircraft by looking outside when I'm not in cloud. It is not by SOLE REFERENCE TO INSTRUMENTS when you can see the horizon because you're not in cloud.

This concept sounds like a rort.

morno

Flight under the Instrument Flight Rules is not just about flying an attitude and heading, SIDS, STARS and procedural rules require constant attention to the task at hand.

I think folk are confusing IFR flight with flight in IMC.

Straight from CASA

"All flight time during which the aircraft was controlled solely by reference to instruments may be recorded in the instrument 'Flight' column:
a) Time above overcast or at night in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) is not counted as instrument flight;
b) In actual or simulated instrument conditions, only the pilot manipulating the controls or providing input to the auto-pilot may log all flight time as instrument flight;
c) A flight conducted on an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight plan is not to be counted as instrument flight unless flying in IMC;
d) Instrument approaches are to be credited to the pilot (pilots, in the case of an airborne radar approach) manipulating the controls or providing input to the auto-pilot during the approach. "

You can't count IFR fllight unless in IMC in the instrument flight column. Simple really. If everyone follows the rules then we all know what to expect from a given amount of Instrument time in the log book. I know its not prefect but at least its a standard.

Cheers

In my day I only logged IF time when I was hand flying by instruments (VMC or IMC) or doing a coupled inst app and had just short of 10 percent of my total time.

Irrespective of the total instrument time someone has logged.... hand flying on instruments and operating an a/c at the same time is not something you can bullsh..t your way through.

Emeritus.

Completely agree with Leatherdog.

On another note, my C.P. from GA days said if your flying night VFR on a moonless night and therefore no horizon, you are flying on instruments so it can be logged as IF.

This has been done to death every year, and unless you are in cloud you cannot log IF no matter how dark it is outside.

I would argue that IMC, is when you are in anything less than VMC, that would include being less than the specified distance (vertical/horizontal) from cloud! You don't actually have to be in cloud, just in IMC (ie: less than VMC).:ok:

Seriously though I would expect most pilots to have more IFR time than what is shown in their log books, not less...

Surely you don't have to be in IMC to count instrument time?

What about all those lowly PPL's out there who logged 2 hours instrument time in their 172 in VMC under the hood?

Is being under the hood in a Metro for example instrument time in VMC?

Yes if you want to get technically correct, but there is one word CASA are not interested in and that is the word practical. So because you spend hours up north going left and right due weather and fly through the odd puff you shouldn't log that 10 sec as 0.2 IF, in order to keep that 3.0 IF in last 90 days so as to enjoy the safety of Instrument Flight Rules (other traffic reporting, you own reporting for SAR, SPECI's, etc.)

Are you serious, dude???

If you are under the hood in VMC you require a safety pilot who keeps a lookout for you. How did you think a GFPT gets their 2 hours?

In addition to the above comments...how about a clear night with little to no ambient light out in the middle of nowhere. I know in such conditions I am flying by sole reference to instruments! Not instrument flight....come on!

Turkey

My enquiry was for an aircraft operating with 2 flight crew.

Yes this gets done to death every year.

YH XXX my understanding is you can log simulated time for two crew operations using an IF hood.

I disagree that this is box ticking exercise. If you don't flying in cloud for months at a time you still need to meet the recency requirements in CAO 40.2.1 PARA 11. If you're flying SID'S STARS etc in an FMS equiped airliner you should be covered under the cyclic training and proficiency program of your airline. If you're in GA and don't have access to a simulator your company should provide you with dual or ICUS under the hood every 90 days. This is an overhead but anything less constitutes a dodgy operation that CASA should investigate.

Agree that pitch black nights and sole reference to instruments are a possible exception but it's the approach phase that really counts and even on a pitch black night you have visual references in the circling area.

Ahhhhhh, The old class 4 instrument rating!

Leatherdog, from this statement, I would say you don't quite understand what instrument time is.

neville_nobody, that is not quite correct. You need to be in IMC to log IF - which does not necessarily mean you must be in cloud. Howard Hughes said basically this - but with better wording than I can manage at the moment.

Yes, indeed you are - and you may also be, technically, in VMC at the time. My feeling on this one, however, is that you are not in VMC unless you can see that you are in VMC. Therefore, you should log this as IF.

Lets see departing Tindal, Alice Springs or Groote Eylandt at night time in a Dash8, Metro, B200 or a B58 and you rotate go onto instruments, do you really look out the window and see if you are in cloud? On a dark night with no visual horizon you would be pretty brave to be looking outside, i would rather have the head in the cockpit making sure that that the aeroplane was on track and at the right attitude.

Where do you guys come up with this crapp about so many I/F hours as a portion of your total time? Flying around the NT in the dry season probably wont log you much real I/F time, so experts how do we get the 3 hours instrument time in 90 days?

Perhaps the PPrune experts could conduct a poll and tell us many instrument hours we should have in our log books? Any pilot with an extra I/F time could be asked why they have logged extra? Likewise what them big bad/legendary GA Chief Pilots will accept as proper instrument time?

"how do we get the 3 hours instrument time in 90 days?"

You don't need to if you complete one hour dual simulated, or one hour ICUS simulated, or an hour in an approved simulator. Not hard really, all in the CAO.

No one is saying that you should look outside for attitude reference at night, just that this does not count as instrument time. Deal with it or lobby CASA to get the rule changed.

I think FGD135 might be on a reasonable track in that if you can't see that you are VMC then your not.

I am sure most companies will let you go up in a Baron/Cessna 310 for a jolly to log that 1 hour of I/F for currency purposes!!!

So if one flies between cloud layers does that get logged as instrument time?

My point was that if they don't give you the required ICUS, Dual, or Sim time and you haven't met recency requirements you can't fly as captain of an IFR flight. If you dodgy the numbers you'll be hung out to dry if there is an accident, or preferably if CASA pick you up before an accident. It is not a jolly it is a requirement that it appears many GA companies pay lip service too if the comments on this thread are anything to go by.

Yes I have seen it done in GA by a reputable firm.

FDG135

You assume it's lack of knowledge, but rather lack of understanding and respect, on your behalf. The point was that the Metro is quite a good example of an aircraft that needs good IF skills to operate correctly. I believe, anyone who is current on a Metro, is MORE than IF current.

I do not see your motive to quote this point, other than demonstrating your skill to quote people on a forum, and attack people who wont/cant snot you back for lack of respect. I don't and wont qualify myself here, and nor should anybody else.

Back on topic...The point is line drivers need to 'create' enough IF time to remain current, rather than the fuss of a day offline in the sim. It has no effect on one's ability to fly safely.

L/dog.

Whoa, those last two comments leave me speachless.

Leatherdog you might want to have a look at a few court cases involving accidents before you start sprouting off 'practical' interpretations of aviation law. If you fly a metro around the NT in the dry and are logging IF time without a hood that is faking your logbook; noone is going to care about 'respect' they will just look at the CAO and say well this guy has been faking IF time.

Yeah and neither is the prosecution when you stand trial!! If you Parker pen your logbook, then prang an aeroplane and they get a whiff of fake logbook you will be taken to the cleaners.

It is just some BS that some operators make up. Never heard of line pilots talk about it but I have heard a Chief Pilot bring it up during interviews or when looking at resumes. But remember like every requirement in aviation that are all subject to change and are inversely proportional to the total time of the candidates on offer. These type of requirements go out the window if they are struggling to crew aeroplanes. It's all kinda amusing really listening to people berate you one year for having not enough of this or that only to see them hire a guy with 150 hours straight out of flight school a year later!!

There are some dead people who thought that a dark night departure from a remote location could easily be done visually.
At Alice Springs many years ago two pilots were taking off at night and there was a power cut shortly after they lifted off. The runway lights and all the town lights instantly went out. They crashed and died.
When that last runway light is behind you on a dark night with no other lights in the area, conditions are definitely IMC.
It has been proven the hard way many times.

Yes, this gets done every year - but I STILL admit I haven't got my head around it all. The questions I still hear equally convincing and opposing answers to:

- Is time in IMC always loggable as IF (as has been stated)? I go with no, as, for example, flying in 2km visibility 10ft below overcast is IMC, but is not flying by *sole* reference to instruments, and I don't log this. And I consider IMC to be less-than-VMC, NOT necessarily zero-vis.

- Conversely, is flying into the "black hole" under the NVFR on a CAVOK night considered IF? It's the reverse of the above - clearly not IMC, but does seem to satisfy the "sole reference to instruments" bit. I never log any IF under the NVFR, just to be on the safe side (and cause I rarely fly NVFR). I know people will yell "NO YOU CAN'T, I ALREADY SAID THAT!!!!" - but what's the legal basis for this? We can obviously log IF time under the VFR under the hood (with safety pilot obviously) - so what's different legally about NVFR with absolutely no visual reference?

I know this has been discussed to death over many threads, but I still haven't seen a massively conclusive argument either way.

Although anybody who's said "I generally fly my departures with reference to instruments, not the horizon, so I always log some IF" on a CAVOK day should really go and look up the definition of IF - and it kind of amazes me they actually justify it to themselves to log this.

At the risk of a flaming on here I tend to agree with you. The only time you are really looking out the window in a Metro is on Final and during the takeoff/Landing roll. The rest of the time is on the instruments. That being said, you still have some outside reference i.e blue up, brown down out of the minute side windows and a few other clues here and there. You realize how much you do get visual reference from these sources when you fly a black hole approach in a Metro. IMO at night in a Metro without a moon it may as well be IF time as you would not know if you were in cloud until the strobes and beacons reflected off it.

Unfortunately while most agree that if you don't have a horizon at night to establish a visual reference it should be IF time, someone can fly VFR legally in the same conditions without an instrument rating.

In two crew just call I'm eyes in and the PNF can be a safety Pilot while you legally don the foggles and clock up some IF time for currency purposes.

Food for thought.

Bushy, as always spot on with your answer.

Perhaps you may like to refresh the PPrune experts about the C210 that crashed at Alice in 1989.

err no.:rolleyes: One would have to have viz <5000m and/or cloud.

I will have a go at explaining the 210 prang at Alice. I was there, I heard certain things and for many years I have had a fixed understanding in my mind.

It was a 210, Nack and Jack and Air, Coon Air to the rest of us. Kept themselves to themselves mostly. Had a hangar next to the AeroClub.

Circumstances were that a new pilot needed the three take-offs and landings, the senior pilot was to conduct this.

The tower was operating and a clearance for take-off Left circuit was given.

(left circuit off 12 at Alice at night is possible, and safe but not what was generally expected)

The 210 started a right turn, then was asked to confirm left circuit. At that moment the lights went out, as Bushy says Strip and Town.

A Lear was on short final fo 12 and the Tower person was looking for that while pulling a handle for the emergency lighting. Looked for the 210 and it was gone!

anyone got the adsb link to that event?

Bombsgone.....good on you mate, you're spot on! guys and gals please read the regs.

When there are insufficient visual indications to safely control the aeroplane visually,then it is necessary to fly by reference to the instruments. That is IFR flight and should be logged as such, because it is. Whether the cause is cloud, haze, fog or just a lack of any lights,
definition or contrast, the effect is the same. (kennedy?)
I remember being told that jet airliers had such a high nose attitude on takeoff and climb that they always logged IFR due to the lack of a visual horizon.
On the other hand I remember an instructor in England telling me that you don't need a horizon for visual flight if you could see the ground below you. (they did a lot of that in the sixties). Interpretations are many, and our regulation is too often vague on these matters. Despite the legal hairsplitting and skullduggery that sometimes occurs, if you do not have sufficient visual idications you fly by reference to icstruments, and it's IFR.

Bushy, I completely agree that at certain attitudes/flight conditions in many different aircraft (not just big jets), the aircraft is best flown by reference to instruments, regardless of weather conditions. When visual traffic avoidance is not an issue, I fly all my IFR departures this way, IMC or not, and I'm only flying piston twins.

I cannot possibly agree though, that any of this type of flight, flown in VMC, can be logged as IF. A specific question about the logging of *IF* (not "IFR" or "IMC") frequently turns into a discussion of the merits of flying certain types primarily on instruments - and while this may be true, and a valid discussion, it's got nothing to do with the legal logging of Instrument Time.

I'm no airline pilot - but anybody logging IF on departure due to a "high nose attitude" is REALLY pushing it.

Bushy you are entirely right to bring up the catastrophic results of using visual reference to set attitudes at night. I met a pilot a few years ago who had been taught to use the lights of Sydney as an attitude reference at night! If I set an attitude at night without looking at the AI my instructor would jump down my throat. The only exception as someone pointed out earlier is short finals.

Night flight where you navigate by visual references or use them for orientation does not count as Instrument flight in accordance with the rules.

Edit: What Zapp said.

So what do you want the pilots to do.....start a stopwatch every time they go into cloud and stop it when they exit. Over a 8 hour flight I can tell you that s*#t is not going to happen. I think 0.2 every sector is fair.

as the Goblin said....
 

Moonless night in a metro, if you are looking at anything other than the primary instruments, you will be wondering all over the place. No matter how well you think you have the bastard trimmed up, it'll always gently roll or pitch or if shes really bent...do both!! We still never logged it as IF time but it was always a hot topic. Personally and many freight doggies agree, it should be IF time...all you who disagree need to actually try it sometime.

Is NVMC legal for RPT ops?