Incorrectly logging instrument time

[rookiepilot]

Think I’ll ask onesie or forevergrounded their views.

[digits_]

At most major airports approach isn't going to let you cancel and go visual. So answer the question, if you shoot an ILS in VMC conditions is that not instrument time?

You call field in sight and do a visual. They even do that at JFK. And you can eyeball it with the runway and PAPI. Some have a visual procedure. Lots of VFR procedures too you can plug into your GPS—is that now IFR time?


You could log it if you wanted to I guess. You could log it as anything you make a column for… wearing polka dot underwear time. Same with FL380 on autopilot (please don’t hand fly in RVSM).

But if you can’t fly a visual or keep the plane upright in clear air in the flight levels you shouldn’t be flying. IMC means your plane will stall or spiral without instruments.

If you call the field in sight and do a visual you are no longer IFR...so your point is moot.

If you are flying an instrument procedure, regardless of what the weather is outside, you are still IFR - therefore you can log it as instrument time. It's that simple, don't complicate it.

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

[thepoors]

You call field in sight and do a visual. They even do that at JFK. And you can eyeball it with the runway and PAPI. Some have a visual procedure. Lots of VFR procedures too you can plug into your GPS—is that now IFR time?


You could log it if you wanted to I guess. You could log it as anything you make a column for… wearing polka dot underwear time. Same with FL380 on autopilot (please don’t hand fly in RVSM).

But if you can’t fly a visual or keep the plane upright in clear air in the flight levels you shouldn’t be flying. IMC means your plane will stall or spiral without instruments.

If you call the field in sight and do a visual you are no longer IFR...so your point is moot.

If you are flying an instrument procedure, regardless of what the weather is outside, you are still IFR - therefore you can log it as instrument time. It's that simple, don't complicate it.

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You're right, what I meant and should have said is, if you're doing a visual you are no longer flying an instrument procedure.

[lowoleo22]

Someone told me to just log 0.2 each IFR flight. TC accepted it in his logbook for the ATPL and it's around the 10% range that someone earlier suggested for his flying. I too have heard of TC not accepting someone logging 100% of their IFR time as instrument. But using a stopwatch as you fly through clouds is not realistic. 10% seems to be a good rule.

[goldeneagle]

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You may be IFR, but 421.34(d) says 'instrument flight time' which is interpreted not as 'on an IFR flight plan' but 'flying in IMC conditions'.

[‘Bob’]

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You may be IFR, but 421.34(d) says 'instrument flight time' which is interpreted not as 'on an IFR flight plan' but 'flying in IMC conditions'.

Exactly.

[digits_]

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You may be IFR, but 421.34(d) says 'instrument flight time' which is interpreted not as 'on an IFR flight plan' but 'flying in IMC conditions'.

Exactly.

I'd like to see that written down somewhere. Any official source is fine.

[thepoors]

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You may be IFR, but 421.34(d) says 'instrument flight time' which is interpreted not as 'on an IFR flight plan' but 'flying in IMC conditions'.

You're choosing to interpret it that way. It's not actually specified.

[goldeneagle]

Say what now? You most certainly are still IFR when flying a visual approach, unless you specifically cancel IFR.

You may be IFR, but 421.34(d) says 'instrument flight time' which is interpreted not as 'on an IFR flight plan' but 'flying in IMC conditions'.

You're choosing to interpret it that way. It's not actually specified.

I'm not choosing anything, I'm just stating, that's how the TC inspectors interpret it, and that's likely from internal guidance documents on the subject.

[drumcupz]

The "IMC only" nerds are ridiculous: how are you going to determine the amount of "instrument time" if you fly through a cloud layer for 30 secs? Are you taking note of every minute you're in IMC on every flight? It doesn't matter and TC won't care. Really the only time I can see this being an issue is if you run into one of said nerds on an interview. To which I would present the explanation above and if they have a problem with it so be it.
download apk

teatv

[ruffdeezy]

The reason the requirement is only 75 hours of instrument time is because it is about having experience flying in IMC conditions. Since you can use hood time and sim time the requirement is quite low. Logging 1000 hours of instrument time is missing the point. 10-20% is a good estimate.

[rookiepilot]

The people who complain about being somewhat accurate, something rather important in aviation from my chair, I wonder if they are the ones with fake logbooks.

Thus protest too much.

[digits_]

because it is about having experience flying in IMC conditions

Says who? Reference?

TC is all about following regulations. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume they want to make sure you have experience follow the Instrument Flight Rules.

[ruffdeezy]

When you get an instrument rating you have experience flying IFR. Being a captain of a 2 crew machine is about experience, same with night xc is a different experience level then night circuits.

[Sulako]

Okay I actually know a little bit about this subject and I am happy to wade in and clarify this for one and all.

You can log Instrument Flight Time any time you are focused inside the airplane in order to fly it.
It doesn't matter if it's IMC or VMC outside, it matters if you are looking inside to get from A to B in one piece.

If you wanted to take it to the extreme and risk your licence, technically you could log solo Instrument time while on a VFR flight plan. That will obviously raise some other red flags that TC will likely want to investigate. But you can.

'Sully's been into the Skydrol again!' you say. While that may or may not be true, here's how we get to the conclusion, and this is supported by TC in the field.

Here's the official TC defiinition of Instrument Flight Time, from TP15419E Transport Canada Authorized Person Policy Manual:
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/ ... 19-eng.pdf

INSTRUMENT FLIGHT TIME: any flight time in an aircraft while piloting the aircraft by sole reference
to the flight instruments. This flight time can be accumulated while operating under instrument flight
rules (IFR), in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), or in visual meteorological conditions
(VMC) during flight training by means which limit a pilot’s ability to see outside the cockpit
environment such as while under a hood or wearing limited vision goggles.

A whole lot of the confusion we are reading about is a result of a single comma heh. The comma here "under instrument flight rules (IFR)," is the offender! Let me show you what I mean.

The definition is actually really clear as to intent in the first sentence. "Any flight time in an aircraft while piloting the aircraft by sole reference to the flight instruments". That's it. That's the definition. The next text doesn't add or restrict the definition, it just provides illustrations of how that might be accomplished.

Here's what skimming the regs might tell a person "This can be accomplished while operating under IFR in IMC, or in VMC while training under the hood etc."

Almost! The comma splits up the definition rather than joining it together.

The reg could say "This can be accomplished while operating under IFR in IMC, or in VMC while flight training" but it doesn't. It adds the comma after IFR which makes it an and/or statement. Punctuation is fun!

Here's what the regs actually say "This can be accomplished while operating under IFR, and/OR in IMC, and/OR in VMC while training under the hood etc."

We can start with the easy ones; let's all agree that time under the hood and time while in IMC counts as instrument time. Let's also agree that flying in VMC while looking outside to get from A to B does NOT count as instrument time.

The only one that people have a hard time with is logging instrument time while in VMC. The definition of instrument time doesn't care about actual weather conditions at all, it just cares about how you are getting from A to B safely. If you are looking outside, then you are not accumulating instrument time. If you are looking inside the plane to get from A to B safely, then you are accumulating instrument time.

If you are flying at FL510, you aren't keeping the plane upright and on course by looking outside even if the weather is clear and sunny. That's instrument time. The outside picture might match up with the instruments - hopefully it does - but it doesn't detract from it being instrument time.

We have previously agreed that if a plane is hopping over from Hamilton to Kitchener on a VFR itinerary and joining the circuit for landing on a clear day and just eyeballing it, that's not valid instrument time.

But! If you are the aircraft behind them and you have the ILS dialed in and you are using the pointers and the autopilot is on and you have done your approach briefing and you have the minimums set in and you are doing all the approach callouts, that is valid instrument time. Because you are flying the plane with sole reference to the flight instruments. It doesn't matter if you can see outside until you hit your DH/MDA.

Now here's the extreme case. A pilot can be on a VFR flight plan and shoot a bullshit ILS into an airport where the weather is lousy and log the instrument time. It's loggable because they were flying the plane with sole reference to the instruments. They would likely face enforcement action for flying below VFR weather limits and being a general doorknob, but the actual instrument time would be loggable. That's obviously just a troll-like situation that no smart person would put themselves in, but the definition allows it. The sustainable and smart practice would be to file IFR

TLDR: Instrument Time is loggable if you are flying with sole reference to your instruments, it is not defined by weather conditions or type of flight plan.

It's also pretty much an academic question. I haven't kept track of my instrument time since I got my ATPL 25 years ago, and it has never come up.

[Adam Oke]

We have previously agreed that if a plane is hopping over from Hamilton to Kitchener on a VFR itinerary and joining the circuit for landing on a clear day and just eyeballing it, that's not valid instrument time.

But! If you are the aircraft behind them and you have the ILS dialed in and you are using the pointers and the autopilot is on and you have done your approach briefing and you have the minimums set in and you are doing all the approach callouts, that is valid instrument time. Because you are flying the plane with sole reference to the flight instruments. It doesn't matter if you can see outside until you hit your DH/MDA.

Now here's the extreme case. A pilot can be on a VFR flight plan and shoot a bullshit ILS into an airport where the weather is lousy and log the instrument time. It's loggable because they were flying the plane with sole reference to the instruments. They would likely face enforcement action for flying below VFR weather limits and being a general doorknob, but the actual instrument time would be loggable. That's obviously just a troll-like situation that no smart person would put themselves in, but the definition allows it. The sustainable and smart practice would be to file IFR

What about descending through 12 500 into VMC, on an IFR flight plan, into Class E airspace inbound to Kitchener.

With respect to Class E, services shall provide separation between IFR aircraft, but you must maintain visual separation from VFR aircraft. As an IFR aircraft you must have visual reference outside to provide visual separation from VFR aircraft and can not be solely focused inside.

Now what?

My logbook had a 10% default for actual. I log instrument time on all IFR filed flights. Good enough. I have yet to have a license or job turned down over actual vs instrument.

[Sulako]

What about descending through 12 500 into VMC, on an IFR flight plan, into Class E airspace inbound to Kitchener.

With respect to Class E, services shall provide separation between IFR aircraft, but you must maintain visual separation from VFR aircraft. As an IFR aircraft you must have visual reference outside to provide visual separation from VFR aircraft and can not be solely focused inside.

Now what?

Heh no worries, the definition is still clear Are you piloting the aircraft with sole reference to the instruments? In this case, the answer is no, because in Class E you presumably are looking outside the plane to pilot it. That being said, if a pilot did not look ouside while on the descent, they could log the time as instrument time but they'd be opening themselves up to be violated for not following proper procedure in Class E airspace. Heh I'm taking nitpicking to the next level with this and as we both have said, it matters zero in real life after a person gets their ATPL signed off - but that's the definition. In real life I also used the 10% figure in my logbook and it was never questioned

[brain_u/s]

Thanks everyone for the input, made me a little less anxious haha. To everyone saying log 10% as IFR though my main issue is that I have all these flights written in my logbook and I feel having 3 years worth of IFR times crossed out and rewritten would wave red flags in the sense of how could I justify claiming to remember 3 years worth of weather? I guess only filing IFR when it was necessary to (vfr otherwise) could be some sort of justification for at least a .1 every flight

[Big Pistons Forever]

If you have a spare blank column in your log book just label it IMC and put 10% of every flight you already logged as IFR. Use that total for the actual IMC declaration.

[mantogasrsrwy]

Different road I guess. By the time I went for my ATP I was tired of flying in cloud.

[airway]

This is from a recent TSB Accident report I just read. Got me thinking about this thread.

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... c0027.html

Night visual flight
Flying VFR at night involves numerous risks owing to poor visual cues. The fact that there are few or no visual references at night can lead to various illusions causing spatial disorientation due to the lack of discernible horizon. A night VFR flight that is conducted beneath an overcast ceiling, without moonlight, over areas with featureless terrain, such as bodies of water or forest, and away from cultural lighting provides inadequate ambient illumination for visual reference to the surface. These areas are referred to as black holes; flying over them is difficult.

In addition, estimating distance from cloud and adverse weather at night or in darkness is difficult for pilots and increases the risk of inadvertent VFR flight into IMC, which can quickly result in spatial disorientation and a loss of control.

Simply put, night VFR flight inherently offers the pilot limited visual cues to be able to see and avoid worsening weather conditions. Flight planning is especially important for night flights, specifically: a review of weather conditions and their corresponding impact on the intended aircraft track, the available moonlight, the estimated flight time over large bodies of water or areas with little or no cultural lighting, and the intended flight track’s proximity to rising terrain and significant obstacles.

The principle behind VFR flight is that the pilot uses visual cues (e.g., visual horizon, ground references) outside the aircraft to determine the aircraft’s attitude. Therefore, some basic requirements must be met when conducting VFR flight—day or night.

According to sections 602.114 and 602.115 of the CARs, the aircraft must be “operated with visual reference to the surface,”Footnote6 regardless of whether it is operated in controlled or uncontrolled airspace. The CARs define surface as “any ground or water, including the frozen surface thereof.”Footnote7 However, the term “visual reference to the surface” is open to interpretation, because it is not defined in the regulations. Industry has widely interpreted it to mean visual meteorological conditions (VMC).Footnote8,Footnote9 Following a TSB investigationFootnote10 into a helicopter accident in May 2013, the Board recommended that

[t]he Department of Transport amend the regulations to clearly define the visual references (including lighting considerations and/or alternate means) required to reduce the risks associated with night visual flight rules flight.
TSB Recommendation A16-08Footnote11

The conditions experienced during the occurrence flight were such that visual reference to the surface likely was difficult to maintain, and therefore the flight would not have met the requirements for operation under night VFR. Instead, such a flight would require pilots to rely on their flight instruments to ensure safe operation of the aircraft. Neither the pilot nor the passenger seated in the front right seat, who both held a commercial pilot licence, was certified for IFR flight.


So,if you are on a IFR flight plan flying over an area where you can see little or no lighting on the ground and/or can't see the horizon, you can log instrument time.

Or how about any time you are flying above an undercast layer, day or night, because you can't rely on that undercast layer being parallel with the real horizon.



.

[digits_]

Hehe that would mean you can log instrument time VFR (OTT), VMC and without a hood or instrument rating or safety pilot.

[CaptDukeNukem]

I think the point of this entire topic is that no one actually knows exactly how much instrument time they have. Log whatever instrument time you need. Tc doesn’t know, you don’t know, and the minute you get an ATPL you stop logging it.

[OneYonge]

The reason for this confusion is those hardcopy logbooks.

Some logbooks have a column for "actual IMC" under your Instrument time.

While others have a column for "actual IFR" under the Instrument time.

While TC may not care which one it is... Obviously, you are not supposed to be in "actual IMC "on VFR flights.


If you log too many of these on your VFR flights... this should really raise a lot of eyebrows.

[OneYonge]

Being a bit of a keener I estimated the actual IMC time for every IFR flight and logged that. Over 30 years it is almost exactly 10 %.

I have as well.

Counting all IFR filed flight time as “Instrument time” is only fooling oneself.

IMC is IMC. Everything else is VFR

Requirements don't care if your instrument time was done during IMC or VMC.

All IFR flights are instrument time.