FAA proposed change regarding instrument currency

They propose to change the rules. Do you bit and comment on the NPRM.

Bob Gardner

"Roger" wrote in message
...
On 8 Feb 2007 11:53:22 -0800, "Guy Elden Jr"
wrote:

Among other things included in the massive list of changes the FAA is
proposing to Part 61 is a new allowance for utilizing PCATD, FS, and
FTDs in order to accomplish the recency of experience requirements for
IFR flight:


"Under proposed § 61.57(c)(2), a person could use an FS or FTD
exclusively by performing and logging at least 3 hours of instrument
recent flight experience within the 6 calendar months before the date
of the flight.

Under proposed § 61.57(c)(3), a person could use a PCATD exclusively
by having performed and logged at least 3 hours of instrument recent
experience within the 2 calendar months before the date of the flight.
We have deliberately proposed differences between the use of a PCATD
and an FS or FTD because use of a PCATD to maintain instrument recent
experience is a relatively new concept, and the FAA wants to further
evaluate its use before we allow use of PCATDs equal to that of FSs
and FTDs."


I didn't notice at first glance any additional requirements, such as
an instructor needing to be present when using these devices. This to
me certainly would make staying instrument current much easier, as you
could accomplish the requirements at home on a personal computer using
an approved software app. I think Elite is one such approved
application (at least when used in conjunction with an instructor)
right now.

Anybody have any thoughts on this change?

I believe both Elite and On-Top are approved, but only for student
training with an instructor present. Unless they changed the rules
neither is of any *official* help once you have the rating.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Feb 8, 11:53 am, "Guy Elden Jr" wrote:
Among other things included in the massive list of changes the FAA is
proposing to Part 61 is a new allowance for utilizing PCATD, FS, and
FTDs in order to accomplish the recency of experience requirements for
IFR flight:

"Under proposed § 61.57(c)(2), a person could use an FS or FTD
exclusively by performing and logging at least 3 hours of instrument
recent flight experience within the 6 calendar months before the date
of the flight.

Under proposed § 61.57(c)(3), a person could use a PCATD exclusively
by having performed and logged at least 3 hours of instrument recent
experience within the 2 calendar months before the date of the flight.
We have deliberately proposed differences between the use of a PCATD
and an FS or FTD because use of a PCATD to maintain instrument recent
experience is a relatively new concept, and the FAA wants to further
evaluate its use before we allow use of PCATDs equal to that of FSs
and FTDs."

I didn't notice at first glance any additional requirements, such as
an instructor needing to be present when using these devices. This to
me certainly would make staying instrument current much easier, as you
could accomplish the requirements at home on a personal computer using
an approved software app. I think Elite is one such approved
application (at least when used in conjunction with an instructor)
right now.

Its about time for the student pilot extention. Its just plain silly
to limit student pilot certificates to 24 months when they are issued
on the bases of asking for them. I had to send a student down to the
FSDO a few months ago to get a new student pilot certificate. He had
fill out an 8710 and make an appointment, just to receive a
certificate that the FAA has no bases to deny.

-Robert, CFII

They propose to change the rules. Do you bit and comment on the NPRM.

Anybody got a pointer to it? I came up with several studies dating as
far back as 2003 with those reccomendations, but no NPRM.

Whatever happened to the DC ADIZ NPRM?

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Anybody got a pointer to it? I came up with several studies dating as far
back as 2003 with those reccomendations, but no NPRM.

http://dms.dot.gov/search/document.c...docketid=26661

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 20:29:38 -0800, "Bob Gardner"
wrote:

They propose to change the rules. Do you bit and comment on the NPRM.

Thanks Bob,

That'd sure save me a bunch and I wouldn't have to get out in this
*cold* weather. :-))

..


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com