epm0@bunny.UUCP (02/10/86)
A friend of mine just completed a (successful) IFR check ride. However, the inspector strongly corrected him on a few procedures, and I wonder if anyone has any comments on the corrections. 1) The inspector crossed out all hours that my friend had logged as PIC while receiving instrument instruction. As per the recent discussion here, I thought any time the instruction took place in VFR conditions, both the instructor and my friend could log PIC time. 2) The inspector pointed out that you should not report "procedure turn inbound" until you are established on the final approach course. This sounds correct. Can anyone cite a reference? Or any controllers care to comment on where you expect a pilot to be when he/she tells you "procedure turn inbound"? 3) The inspector vehemently asserted that when asked to "re-cycle transponder", you should move each digit of the code off one digit, and then return it to the correct value, WITHOUT setting the transponder to stand-by. I was taught to use stand-by during ANY code change, so as not to accidently select an emergency code, or a code already in use. The inspector apparently said that the controllers want to see the changes to aid in identification. Anyone know? -- Erik Mintz ARPA or CSnet : epm0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay UUCP: ...harvard!bunny!epm0
ths@lanl.ARPA (Ted Spitzmiller) (02/12/86)
> A friend of mine just completed a (successful) IFR check ride. > However, the inspector strongly corrected him on a few procedures, > and I wonder if anyone has any comments on the corrections. > > 1) The inspector crossed out all hours that my friend had logged > as PIC while receiving instrument instruction. As per the recent > discussion here, I thought any time the instruction took place > in VFR conditions, both the instructor and my friend could log PIC > time. I would strongly advise that you NEVER allow anyone to "crossout" anything in your logbook unless the issue has been settled by a thorough investigation. This issue of PIC time has been settled at least 5 times in the past few years. Fortunately for your friend, he didn't NEED the time that was being disallowed. But the instructor should ALWAYS contact the examiner to discuss any possible issues BEFORE the student arrives. The bottom line is that you can log any time during as PIC anytime you are sole > > 2) The inspector pointed out that you should not report "procedure turn > inbound" until you are established on the final approach course. > This sounds correct. Can anyone cite a reference? Or any controllers > care to comment on where you expect a pilot to be when he/she tells > you "procedure turn inbound"? You may report "PT inbound" when the CDI begins movement off the peg, indicating that you are within 10 degrees of the final approach course and intercepting. You can also start your descent to the published altitude shown on the approach plate. Ted Spitzmiller
ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig) (02/12/86)
> 2) The inspector pointed out that you should not report "procedure turn > inbound" until you are established on the final approach course. > This sounds correct. Can anyone cite a reference? Or any controllers > care to comment on where you expect a pilot to be when he/she tells > you "procedure turn inbound"? Correct. From the Jeppesen "J-Aid" ATC glossary (similar information should appear in the AIM): PROCEDURE TURN INBOUND - That point of a procedure turn maneuver where course reversal has been completed and an aircraft is established inbound on the intermediate approach segment or final approach course. A report of "procedure turn inbound" is normally used by ATC as a position report for separation purposes.
ths@lanl.ARPA (Ted Spitzmiller) (02/12/86)
Apparently a part of my response to this questions was garbled so let me
restate my comment.
"You may log as PIC time, all time during which you are sole
manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you are
rated and current."
Perhaps the bone of contention is when the aircraft is being operated
on an IFR flight plan during a training flight the "student" could not
be the PIC. Even here there are differences of opinion however.
But all other time should not be challenged.
Just because there is an instructor in the plane doesn't mean that he
or she is the PIC.
Remember that there are different deffinitons of PIC, some having to do
with "logging" flight time and some with "responsibility" for the
aircraft. These deffinitions involve FAA issues as well as insurance
company issues.
Ted Spitzmillerted@bcsaic.UUCP (ted jardine) (02/17/86)
In a recent article Erik Mintz wrote: > A friend of mine just completed a (successful) IFR check ride. > However, the inspector strongly corrected him on a few procedures, > and I wonder if anyone has any comments on the corrections. > > 1) The inspector crossed out all hours that my friend had logged > as PIC while receiving instrument instruction. As per the recent > discussion here, I thought any time the instruction took place > in VFR conditions, both the instructor and my friend could log PIC > time. Strictly speaking the inspector was incorrect, but there is a legitimate difference of opinion in this area. If the airplane is being flown solely by reference to instruments in VFR weather conditions and not in accordance with an ATC clearance, then a Private or Commercial pilot may log such time as PIC. However, if an ATC clearance is involved then PIC is not permitted since the pilot is not rated for instrument operations. The argument used by (apparently) this inspector would be that without an instrument rating the pilot is not rated for the operation being conducted. Since log books seldom distinguish between ATC cleared procedures and non-ATC cleared, the inspector had some basis for his action. Legitimately, he should have asked which periods of flight instruction were conducted per an ATC clearance or in IMC and deleted only the PIC hours for those. > 2) The inspector pointed out that you should not report "procedure turn > inbound" until you are established on the final approach course. > This sounds correct. Can anyone cite a reference? Or any controllers > care to comment on where you expect a pilot to be when he/she tells > you "procedure turn inbound"? The only reference I know of is the Air Traffic Control Manual. Substantial portions of this manual are published in the AIM. When I report procedure turn inbound, I make sure that I have completed the turn from the inbound portion of the procedure turn to the final approach course, and that I am tracking according to the latter course. In the interval from the procedure turn inbound report to the Final Approach Fix, the controller will usually issue instructions such as "report the final approach fix to the tower on ..." > 3) The inspector vehemently asserted that when asked to "re-cycle > transponder", you should move each digit of the code off one digit, > and then return it to the correct value, WITHOUT setting the > transponder to stand-by. I was taught to use stand-by during > ANY code change, so as not to accidently select an emergency code, > or a code already in use. The inspector apparently said that the > controllers want to see the changes to aid in identification. > Anyone know? This convinces me that the inspector was a bit overzealous. I suspect perhaps a recent graduate of the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City. If a controller has time to watch the transponder code change digit by digit it is either the wee hours of the morning or he or she is about to get their tail chewed by their supervisor for slacking off. I'm truly amazed at this comment TJ {With Amazing Grace} The Piper (aka Ted Jardine) CFI-ASME/I Boeing Artificial Intelligence Center ...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!ted
ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (02/26/86)
> However, if an ATC clearance is involved then PIC is not permitted > since the pilot is not rated for instrument operations. This is slightly confusing. People frequently operate under ATC clearance without an intstrument rating as long as you don't go into instrument conditions. It's even required at some airports. -Ron
epm0@bunny.UUCP (Erik P. Mintz) (03/02/86)
> > However, if an ATC clearance is involved then PIC is not permitted > > since the pilot is not rated for instrument operations. > > This is slightly confusing. People frequently operate under ATC clearance > without an intstrument rating as long as you don't go into instrument > conditions. It's even required at some airports. > > -Ron FAR 61.3(e): Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under instrument flight rules, or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR flight unless- (1) In the case of an airplane, he holds an instrument rating or an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane category rating on it. This means that without an IFR rating, you may not operate under an IFR clearance, regardless of the weather conditions. Some airports will issue VFR instructions that sound similar to an IFR clearance, perhaps including altitude and course assignment, and often including a transponder code if there is a radar departure control. I guess that would be a VFR clearance. If the original poster had said "IFR clearance" instead of ATC clearance, there would be no ambiguity. -- Erik Mintz ARPA or CSnet : epm0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay UUCP: ...harvard!bunny!epm0
ted@bcsaic.UUCP (ted jardine) (03/03/86)
In article <1329@brl-smoke.ARPA> ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes: >> However, if an ATC clearance is involved then PIC is not permitted >> since the pilot is not rated for instrument operations. > >This is slightly confusing. People frequently operate under ATC clearance >without an intstrument rating as long as you don't go into instrument >conditions. It's even required at some airports. > >-Ron As I believe I am the one 'quoted' above, let me agree with Ron. What I should have said was "an ATC IFR clearance" as the key question is whether the flight is operating under the part of FAR 91 that governs instrument operations. It may be a moot point, however, since the FAA has issued an opinion that as long as an appropriately rated instrument pilot is along the time in actual IMC can be logged as PIC. ATC clearances for operating in TCA's, ARSA's, and ATA's don't affect logging PIC as far as I know. TJ {With Amazing Grace} The Piper (aka Ted Jardine) CFI-ASME/I Boeing Artificial Intelligence Center ...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!ted
jabusch@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (03/04/86)
There is no good reasoning for cycling the transponder in any mode outside of standby. As was pointed out in an earlier response, the ATC is hardly going to have time to watch for quick changes of individual digits, especially in a busy location. That's the reason the 'ident' is found on transponders. It sends along one extra pulse during replies in all of the civilian reply modes that can be used for easy location on the ATC's screen. The ident functions as a timer, usually maintaining its state for 20 to 25 seconds, plenty of time to locate it visually on the radar. John Jabusch