Garmin 530 question

On 4/24/06 5:32 PM, in article , "Matt
Whiting" wrote:

Chuck wrote:
Talking with a friend yesterday re currency. He said that you can
count approaches made in VMC with out hood. I said no, you need hood
and safety pilot. He said recent change made it ok in VMC without
hood.

Anyone heard of this?

No. Without some evidence of this, I think your friend is
hallucinating. :-)

Matt

....And probably not safe to fly with.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

"Chuck" wrote in message ups.com...

Talking with a friend yesterday re currency. He said that you can
count approaches made in VMC with out hood. I said no, you need hood
and safety pilot. He said recent change made it ok in VMC without
hood.

Anyone heard of this?

Chuck


The FAA actually proposed that change, perhaps a decade or so ago,
but it was scorned by pilots, and the proposal was withdrawn.
I believe the FAA thinking was that practicing the procedures per se
was the important thing, more so than simply demonstrating
the elemental ability to fly an airplane by reference only to instruments.

The FAA actually proposed that change, perhaps a decade or so ago,
but it was scorned by pilots, and the proposal was withdrawn.
I believe the FAA thinking was that practicing the procedures per se
was the important thing, more so than simply demonstrating
the elemental ability to fly an airplane by reference only to instruments.

Got a link to the proposal? I cannot imagine that the FAA, despite what
I think of them, would ever entertain this.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message om...
The FAA actually proposed that change, perhaps a decade or so ago,
but it was scorned by pilots, and the proposal was withdrawn.
I believe the FAA thinking was that practicing the procedures per se
was the important thing, more so than simply demonstrating
the elemental ability to fly an airplane by reference only to instruments.

Got a link to the proposal? I cannot imagine that the FAA, despite what
I think of them, would ever entertain this.

Jose

No, I have no link, and yes, your response is similar to many others.

Jose wrote:
The FAA actually proposed that change, perhaps a decade or so ago,
but it was scorned by pilots, and the proposal was withdrawn.
I believe the FAA thinking was that practicing the procedures per se
was the important thing, more so than simply demonstrating
the elemental ability to fly an airplane by reference only to instruments.

Got a link to the proposal? I cannot imagine that the FAA, despite what
I think of them, would ever entertain this.

I'd have to dig out a bunch of old AVSIG archives. Basically it
started when someone asked the definition of "approach in actual" -
i.e. at what point can you break out and still count it as an approach
for currency purposes. Went to the chief counsel for a ruling. They
came back and said that the ONLY approaches you could count was those
in which you went all the way to minimums in IMC.

Well, everyone yelled -- what do you mean I can't count the approach if
I break out at 201 feet AGL!!! So back it went. The *new*
interpretation that came out was "Any instrument approach on an IFR
flight plan counts for currency, no clouds required." That one was
also laughed off the table - You could fly for 20 years, never see
either a hood or a cloud or a simulator, and still be instrument
current. But officially that interpretation did exist for several
years, until the latest re-write (which would seem to clarify the
requirement for clouds or hood or simulator).

Ironically, it STILL doesn't tell you how much "clouds" you have to
have to count the approach. G

So back it went. The *new*
interpretation that came out was "Any instrument approach on an IFR
flight plan counts for currency, no clouds required." That one was
also laughed off the table

That's what I'd like to see - I could use a good laugh every now and then.

Ironically, it STILL doesn't tell you how much "clouds" you have to
have to count the approach. G

Well, each cloud is different - the "what if I break out for ten seconds
halfway down the approach and then go back in the clag?" questions can
go on forever and still not cover everything.

I figure if I have to depend on the instruments to keep the greasy side
down for most of the way, especially near the end, then I'm counting it.
If I don't break out until the DH for SOME class of aircraft, I'm
counting it. If I can use outside references to keep upright, then even
though I'm using instrument navigation and below VMC, I'm not counting
it as an instrument approach for currency.

I wish that the FAA wouldn't feel the need to answer the question like a
lawyer, but instead, give us their guidelines for how they think, so
that we can make our own decisions utilizing their criteria, and be
reasonably certain we'll reach the same conclusion.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.