Indeed, the US system is far superior because
But the one test does count for revalidation on MEP MEIR SEP and SEIR without having to do any further controls.
Only if you also carry out the SEP-specific etc exercises. A European IR revalidation does not test any of that. You could land gear up and you will still get both the initial IR and any IR revalidation (according to a CAA staff examiner). The only thing which a straight Euro IR reval gives you alone is a reval of the UK IMCR. This is of course off topic for the 6/6.
NCYankee wrote:
gallois wrote: I do not understand why this is not possible under FAA rules for currency, unless you can only record IFR time when in actual IMC which would seem a bit crazy to me as you are still flying to IFR regs.Under FAA regulation, one does not log IFR time per se, one logs “instrument time”. There are two cases where one may log instrument time. Note that logging instrument time does not require that the flight be conducted under IFR. The main case is “actual instrument time” if using the flight instruments is necessary to control the aircraft because visual means is not an option, IOW this is normally you are inside the clouds. The other way one can log instrument time is when conducting simulated instrument flight conditions, typically when wearing a view limiting device such as a hood or foggles, and requires a safety pilot in the other pilot station.
Logging instrument time only applies in the two cases above. IMC are conditions that are not VMC, but in many cases they may be visual conditions, such as at the end of an approach when you land or when the cloud separation or visibility is below VMC limits. For example in class E airspace, one is in IMC less than 1000 feet above an overcast, but may very well have visibility of 100 NM. These are IMC, but are not actual instrument conditions. On the other hand, under an overcast on a dark night over the ocean or desert without any lights on the ground, the conditions may be 100 NM, well clear of any clouds and VMC, but because one can’t determine the horizon, it would be considered actual instrument conditions.
A US log book does not have columns for IMC or IFR. rather it has Instrument: actual, simulated columns.
Just as a reminder, there is no instrument time requirement for FAA IR currency (the subject of this thread). As such, the discussion about instrument time is not really relevant to this thread. Logged time of any sort is required when obtaining an initial FAA certificate or adding a rating, but not for currency.
chflyer wrote:
Just as a reminder, there is no instrument time requirement for FAA IR currency (the subject of this thread).
Unless I misunderstand you, this is 100% wrong. You need your six approaches and one hold to maintain the six-month rolling currency. These approaches have to be flown either in actual IMC or with a sight-limiting device in VMC. In the latter case, you need a safety pilot in the other seat. One side note: an approach counts as flown in ‘actual’ if any portion of the approach is flown in IMC.
The 6/6 rolling currency does not mandate the logging of x hours of “instrument time”, but if you don’t log any then self evidently you did not comply with the 6/6 requirements because the FAA requires IMC at the FAF, at least.
172driver writes:
You need your six approaches and one hold to maintain the six-month rolling currency.
FAR 61.57 actually says: “Holding procedureS and taskS.” – so one hold is not enough.
Peter_G wrote:
FAR 61.57 actually says: “Holding procedureS and taskS.” – so one hold is not enough.
It is not interpreted that way, one will satisfy the requirement.
Peter wrote:
The 6/6 rolling currency does not mandate the logging of x hours of “instrument time”, but if you don’t log any then self evidently you did not comply with the 6/6 requirements because the FAA requires IMC at the FAF, at least.
Logging the approaches doesn’t mandate that the instrument time needs to be logged too.
chflyer wrote:
Logging the approaches doesn’t mandate that the instrument time needs to be logged too.
I would not agree. The performing and logging of instrument approaches for the purposes of maintaining currency is required. If one does not also log instrument time on the flight, then the log entry is incomplete. This is from 61.57(c) in part:
’that person performed and logged at least the following tasks and iterations in an airplane, powered-lift, helicopter, or airship, as appropriate, for the instrument rating privileges to be maintained in actual weather conditions, or under simulated conditions using a view-limiting device
From 61.51 Pilot logbooks.
(a) Training time and aeronautical experience. Each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:
(1) Training and aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.
(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent flight experience requirements of this part.
172driver wrote:
Unless I misunderstand you, this is 100% wrong.
I think chflyer meant that the FAA does not require any specific instrument time.
You can (unless i misunderstand the regs) be in actual instrument conditions for 10 seconds after the FAF and the rest of the approach in visual conditions and it will count towards currency. If you make exactly six such approaches per six months and that is all the actual instrument conditions have, you will have one minute of actual instrument time per half year, but that will still be enough.
Airborne_Again wrote:
You can (unless i misunderstand the regs) be in actual instrument conditions for 10 seconds after the FAF and the rest of the approach in visual conditions and it will count towards currency.
Sort of correct. The FAF doesn’t come into the equation here. You can log it as ‘actual’ if ANY part of the approach is in IMC.
