Hey guys, question for ya. When flying IFR, I only log 'actual' when I'm in cloud and stop logging it when I break out over the top of a layer.
This right?
Logging Instrument Time
Moderators: Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, I WAS Birddog
Logging Instrument Time
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
talkinghead
- Rank 4
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:14 am
-
TopperHarley
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1870
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:56 pm
-
Right Seat Captain
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 1237
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
- Location: Various/based CYOW
Instrument time is instrument time regardless if it is actual or simulated (NOT simulator). Logging actual is pretty much for yourself, and maybe employers might care, but it is not a requirement for any licence or rating...only instrument time in the plane and in the simulator.
That being said, I know some folks that log actual anytime they file IFR, even if they are flying in VFR conditions. Myself, I log actual, when I'm in actual IMC, otherwise, if I'm filed IFR, and using the instruments, I'll log simulated, even if I'm PIC since I can fly with reference to the instruments since I'm filed.
That being said, I know some folks that log actual anytime they file IFR, even if they are flying in VFR conditions. Myself, I log actual, when I'm in actual IMC, otherwise, if I'm filed IFR, and using the instruments, I'll log simulated, even if I'm PIC since I can fly with reference to the instruments since I'm filed.
-
Tin Kicker
- Rank 0
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 7:41 am
I used to be a TC Licencing Inspector, and while there is no official definition of instrument time, it was universally agreed that "instrument" time was cloud time. This was because control of the aircraft was dependent on the pilot using the primary instruments. On-Top or VMC does have the same task loading. For what its worth, that's how we used to do it. PS. It was always a good practice to annotate PPC/PCC training in your log book and the submit a copy of the OP Spec requirment for two pilot operations (when logging co-pilot time) when you apply for your ATPL.
Cheers
Cheers
Some people might log instrument time when they're driving to the airport and they have less than 3 miles ground visibility, too 
I have no idea what those crazy bastards at Transport think instrument time is - nor do I care - but any time I have to get on the attitude indicator, I log actual.
Some people may think this is not right.
For example, you can be technically VFR at night over bush or water, but if you don't get onto the attitude indicator, you're going to do a JFK, jr.
Maybe some people here think JFK, jr shouldn't have logged actual during his last night VFR trip over water, either. Who cares.
I have no idea what those crazy bastards at Transport think instrument time is - nor do I care - but any time I have to get on the attitude indicator, I log actual.
Some people may think this is not right.
For example, you can be technically VFR at night over bush or water, but if you don't get onto the attitude indicator, you're going to do a JFK, jr.
Maybe some people here think JFK, jr shouldn't have logged actual during his last night VFR trip over water, either. Who cares.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
This is really a fuzzy question and usually gets fuzzy answers.
Lets have a quick look at what exactly an instrument rating is used for.
To file IFR one should be the holder of the qualifications to legally do so for many reasons the most important being that if you have an accident and you walk away from it the insurance will be valid.
When flying under an IFR flight plan you are flying in protected airspace ( usually ) and your navigation will be done by using radio aids and radar vectors from ATC. Once airborne it is far more simple to use the instrument panel to accurately fly the path that you were approved to fly by ATC, looking outside only interupts the picture that you should be using to maintain the path that you want to stay on.
Flying by reference to instruments is easier than flying visual looking outside because there is less to distract you from the job of " flying the thing " and once safely inside clouds it becomes even easier to pay attention and accurately maintain your desired flight path......
Also flying under an IFR flight plan entails far more than just maintaining a desired attitude and flight path , it involves being constantly aware of where you are and more important where you are going.
Therefore when filed IFR you " ARE IFR " ...remember the "R "stands for rules and you are following them by the very fact that you filed, accepted and started the flight IFR.
Don't get all excited about whether you are in or out of cloud because it really does not make much difference except to make it easier to concentrate on flying the thing accurately when you are in cloud. Like most things in aviation instrument flying is highly over rated as far as being difficult to do.
Once you get out of the world of make believe and actually get experience flying IFR being in cloud will only mean that you better know a few important things, such as will I be able to get out of the clouds before I hit the runway? Will I start picking up more ice than the airplane will safely handle? Will I fly into a thunderstorm cell?...I do find that in real dense cloud the cockpit lighting does get dim and I sometimes have to turn on a light to read my skin books, actually I don't read much in them either come to think of it.
Cat
Lets have a quick look at what exactly an instrument rating is used for.
To file IFR one should be the holder of the qualifications to legally do so for many reasons the most important being that if you have an accident and you walk away from it the insurance will be valid.
When flying under an IFR flight plan you are flying in protected airspace ( usually ) and your navigation will be done by using radio aids and radar vectors from ATC. Once airborne it is far more simple to use the instrument panel to accurately fly the path that you were approved to fly by ATC, looking outside only interupts the picture that you should be using to maintain the path that you want to stay on.
Flying by reference to instruments is easier than flying visual looking outside because there is less to distract you from the job of " flying the thing " and once safely inside clouds it becomes even easier to pay attention and accurately maintain your desired flight path......
Also flying under an IFR flight plan entails far more than just maintaining a desired attitude and flight path , it involves being constantly aware of where you are and more important where you are going.
Therefore when filed IFR you " ARE IFR " ...remember the "R "stands for rules and you are following them by the very fact that you filed, accepted and started the flight IFR.
Don't get all excited about whether you are in or out of cloud because it really does not make much difference except to make it easier to concentrate on flying the thing accurately when you are in cloud. Like most things in aviation instrument flying is highly over rated as far as being difficult to do.
Once you get out of the world of make believe and actually get experience flying IFR being in cloud will only mean that you better know a few important things, such as will I be able to get out of the clouds before I hit the runway? Will I start picking up more ice than the airplane will safely handle? Will I fly into a thunderstorm cell?...I do find that in real dense cloud the cockpit lighting does get dim and I sometimes have to turn on a light to read my skin books, actually I don't read much in them either come to think of it.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Myself, I log it as I enter cloud and leave cloud.
If you file IFR in VFR weather, to me you are not in IFR conditions, you have a horizon.
If you have a horizon your VFR, no horizon IFR.
as already bein said in this topic, you can ask anyone person and everyone's opinion will vary.
If you file IFR in VFR weather, to me you are not in IFR conditions, you have a horizon.
If you have a horizon your VFR, no horizon IFR.
as already bein said in this topic, you can ask anyone person and everyone's opinion will vary.
-
talkinghead
- Rank 4
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:14 am
OK, Heres one for you.flyinhigh wrote:Myself, I log it as I enter cloud and leave cloud.
If you file IFR in VFR weather, to me you are not in IFR conditions, you have a horizon.
If you have a horizon your VFR, no horizon IFR.
as already bein said in this topic, you can ask anyone person and everyone's opinion will vary.
If you are flying IFR, ontop of cloud AND you can see the mountains in- front of you. Are in IFR conditions, do you LOG it as inst. time
(Do you see what I am getting at?)
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
May I suggest that the subject is academic and reality will come with experience?
I just can't imagine trying to keep track of the time in and out of cloud, hell I can't remember when I last kept track of any time except for billing the customer.
Bottom line is if you are concerned with being in cloud to log time you are still in the learning curve so don't go there by yourself.
By the way what do the gurus at TC have to say about logging IFR time with regard to being in or out of cloud?
Cat
I just can't imagine trying to keep track of the time in and out of cloud, hell I can't remember when I last kept track of any time except for billing the customer.
Bottom line is if you are concerned with being in cloud to log time you are still in the learning curve so don't go there by yourself.
By the way what do the gurus at TC have to say about logging IFR time with regard to being in or out of cloud?
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
talkinghead
- Rank 4
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:14 am
So I'm an IFR instructor...
1.) Is it OK (and honest) for me to log "simulated" whenever teaching IFR under an IFR flight plan (I don't train under VFR plans)
2.) If I have an employer asking me about my IFR time - should I state actual IMC or simulated time? I actually just had a potential employer ask this question (and I think I f'd it up by just stating my IMC time which, admittedly, could be more...it's just about always nice on top where I live...)
3.) I think oldtimer stated that actual doesn't matter vs. simulated for ratings or licences...doesn't it on the ATPL?
Glad someone asked this one...
Pugster
1.) Is it OK (and honest) for me to log "simulated" whenever teaching IFR under an IFR flight plan (I don't train under VFR plans)
2.) If I have an employer asking me about my IFR time - should I state actual IMC or simulated time? I actually just had a potential employer ask this question (and I think I f'd it up by just stating my IMC time which, admittedly, could be more...it's just about always nice on top where I live...)
3.) I think oldtimer stated that actual doesn't matter vs. simulated for ratings or licences...doesn't it on the ATPL?
Glad someone asked this one...
Pugster
-
twotterdriver
- Rank 1
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 3:42 pm
- Location: Sacramento
Actual IFR
I log only time spent in the cloud (or approximate anyway).
I heard somewhere that your actual should only be about 10% of your total anyway. Any more than that is a little hard to believe unless you live in a permanent bad weather place.
When I flew in the caribbean, any night flight had to filed as IFR - no night VFR allowed. Again, I only logged actual.
The ATPL does have requirements for instruments - but I can't remember how its split (or if it is split) between actual and simulated.
twotterdriver
I heard somewhere that your actual should only be about 10% of your total anyway. Any more than that is a little hard to believe unless you live in a permanent bad weather place.
When I flew in the caribbean, any night flight had to filed as IFR - no night VFR allowed. Again, I only logged actual.
The ATPL does have requirements for instruments - but I can't remember how its split (or if it is split) between actual and simulated.
twotterdriver
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
What is the problem with aviation?
You either fly under VFR flight rules or under IFR flight rules.....
...what in hell does it matter if you are in or out of cloud as long as you are filed IFR and following your clearance / 's ????
If some pilot were to start talking to me about their time in or out of cloud I would then know that he/ she are at an experience level that would make them unsuitable for flying IFR as PIC.
Come on troops lets get real here, there comes a time when we have to get beyond the flying training mentality.............or go to work for TC.
Cat
You either fly under VFR flight rules or under IFR flight rules.....
...what in hell does it matter if you are in or out of cloud as long as you are filed IFR and following your clearance / 's ????
If some pilot were to start talking to me about their time in or out of cloud I would then know that he/ she are at an experience level that would make them unsuitable for flying IFR as PIC.
Come on troops lets get real here, there comes a time when we have to get beyond the flying training mentality.............or go to work for TC.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
I'm in agreement with Cat on this. To me the key is the 'R' for rules. The question is not whether one is 'IMC' or not. It would, in my opinion, be unrealistic to keep track of when one is in cloud or out for a given flight.
I am likely not in cloud at FL 410, I still consider it instrument time.
I am likely not in cloud at FL 410, I still consider it instrument time.
-
Right Seat Captain
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 1237
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
- Location: Various/based CYOW
Personally, that's what I do, and many other instructors that I know.Pugster wrote:So I'm an IFR instructor...
1.) Is it OK (and honest) for me to log "simulated" whenever teaching IFR under an IFR flight plan (I don't train under VFR plans)
Why not total instrument time? That way it doesn't matter.2.) If I have an employer asking me about my IFR time - should I state actual IMC or simulated time? I actually just had a potential employer ask this question (and I think I f'd it up by just stating my IMC time which, admittedly, could be more...it's just about always nice on top where I live...)
The only split in the instrument time for the ATPL is between simulaTOR and simulaTED and Actual combined. Logging Actual means nothing to TC. for licence/rating application. It's only instrument flight time and simulator time. If I recall correctly, ATPL requirements are 75 hours instrument, with max 20 hrs in the simulator.twotterdriver wrote: The ATPL does have requirements for instruments - but I can't remember how its split (or if it is split) between actual and simulated.
Well, by the sounds of it I'm gonna revamp the logbook a bit. When I referenced the CARs, there's nothing that states that the ATPL time has to come in IMC conditions...
d) 75 hours instrument flight time of which a maximum of 25 hours may have been acquired in approved instrument ground trainers and a maximum of 35 hours may have been acquired in helicopters. Instrument ground time shall not be applied toward the total 1500 hour flight time requirement.
Maybe I'm just feeling like a rebel, but I think I'm gonna toss the whole lot under actual (whenever I'm on an IFR FPL). I run a computerized logbook, so changing it around shouldn't be a huge deal if I have to to satisfy the TC wolves (and then I'll change it right back just for you Cat!).
Peter aka: Pugster
d) 75 hours instrument flight time of which a maximum of 25 hours may have been acquired in approved instrument ground trainers and a maximum of 35 hours may have been acquired in helicopters. Instrument ground time shall not be applied toward the total 1500 hour flight time requirement.
Maybe I'm just feeling like a rebel, but I think I'm gonna toss the whole lot under actual (whenever I'm on an IFR FPL). I run a computerized logbook, so changing it around shouldn't be a huge deal if I have to to satisfy the TC wolves (and then I'll change it right back just for you Cat!).
Peter aka: Pugster
-
Northern Girl
- Rank 1
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:14 am
- Location: Yellowknife
IFR vs ACTUAL IMC
Well at the risk of becoming unpopular................ IMC time is time in cloud. Thats that. If you go to some big time employers overseas and try to pass off all your IFR flying as actual you wont be regarded real seriously!!!! The usual amount is as said above - a resume looks good if the actual time is around 10% of total ( unless from a bad wx area).
Do what you want but be ready for questions if you have say 2000 hours IFR with 1900 hours actual!!!!!!!!! IMHO.
Cat I get what you are saying about the "RULES" thing, but I think that they are asking for something other than that info when asking for "actual" time.
Do what you want but be ready for questions if you have say 2000 hours IFR with 1900 hours actual!!!!!!!!! IMHO.
Cat I get what you are saying about the "RULES" thing, but I think that they are asking for something other than that info when asking for "actual" time.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Northern Girl :
The only difference that I can see is it is easier to fly in cloud due to nothing outside to detract you from flying.
The big difference is how many different conditions you have experienced, as you know there is a big difference in flying in the ITCZ and being pounded around in turbulence and flying on the guages in smooth stratus cloud.
Cat
The only difference that I can see is it is easier to fly in cloud due to nothing outside to detract you from flying.
The big difference is how many different conditions you have experienced, as you know there is a big difference in flying in the ITCZ and being pounded around in turbulence and flying on the guages in smooth stratus cloud.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Gotta agree with Cat here. If you're operating in the IFR system, you are ACTUALLY in the IFR system. If they wanted it in cloud, they'd have made a column titled IMC, not actual. My thoughts.
Aviation- the hardest way possible to make an easy living!
"You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace!" Michael Franti- Spearhead
"Trust everyone, but cut the cards". My Grandma.
"You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace!" Michael Franti- Spearhead
"Trust everyone, but cut the cards". My Grandma.
-
Right Seat Captain
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 1237
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
- Location: Various/based CYOW
Well from the sounds of it here, who really cares about actual or IMC? Why not just log it as INSTRUMENT time? Whether you are VFR, IMC, dual, whatever...log INSTRUMENT. If you're working towards a licence or rating, log Simulator too. But once you have 25 hours, it's not worth much except to brag that you've done it.
Yeah, what Northern Girl said...I have heard of that before! People getting told in a job interview that they have too much instrument time for their total time. I want to avoid that situation.
I don't know if I agree with the statement that flying instruments is easier in cloud then out. To me having a visual cue outside the window as to what the airplane is doing is a pretty big indication that the plane is doing something that I don't want it to! And, if you can fly straight and level in VMC on a VFR trip, it really shouldn't be any more difficult to do it in VMC on an IFR one!
I don't know if I agree with the statement that flying instruments is easier in cloud then out. To me having a visual cue outside the window as to what the airplane is doing is a pretty big indication that the plane is doing something that I don't want it to! And, if you can fly straight and level in VMC on a VFR trip, it really shouldn't be any more difficult to do it in VMC on an IFR one!
"Hell, I'll fly up your ass if the money's right!"
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
Orlando Jones - Say It Isn't So
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Trust me it is easier to fly in cloud by reference to instruments than visual...not to mention your flying will be more accuratte. 
Cat
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Ok, i think i need to summarize to make sure i'm not missing something. This is the way i do it, and assumed was ok.
For the purposes of an ATPL (75 hours instrument, max 25 sim), i don't believe you can count anytime you filled IFR towards that. I do log my IFR time for my own purposes under a seperate IFR column, but don't add it into my total "instrument time".
Depending on how much training you've done, you'll probably start working with around 50-60 hours instrument (including all hood, IMC and max 25 hours sim), so an additional 15 hours cloud and/or hood time isn't unreasonable by 1500 hours TT.
According to CARs 400.01, instrument time means:
-instrument ground time (approved sim)
-actual instrument flight time (IMC)
-simulated instrument flight time (hood or other view limiting device)
That being said, i still count my IFR time as i see it as valuable for other reasons.
Correct me if i'm wrong.
For the purposes of an ATPL (75 hours instrument, max 25 sim), i don't believe you can count anytime you filled IFR towards that. I do log my IFR time for my own purposes under a seperate IFR column, but don't add it into my total "instrument time".
Depending on how much training you've done, you'll probably start working with around 50-60 hours instrument (including all hood, IMC and max 25 hours sim), so an additional 15 hours cloud and/or hood time isn't unreasonable by 1500 hours TT.
According to CARs 400.01, instrument time means:
-instrument ground time (approved sim)
-actual instrument flight time (IMC)
-simulated instrument flight time (hood or other view limiting device)
That being said, i still count my IFR time as i see it as valuable for other reasons.
Correct me if i'm wrong.
Well said 'Northern Girl', I have to agree with you on this one!
At the end of the day the you will be asked for your instrument time twice:
1. ATPL
2. Interview(s)
So for the ATPL you need 75h. Every single person I know wrote their ATPL with a hell of a lot more that 75h "Actual IMC" time (let alone "instrument time")!!
That leaves the Interview. Would you really risk walking in to an interview and leaving yourself exposed by saying that something-like 88.7% of your total time is "instrument time"! That's suicide!
I have always interpreted "Instrument Time" as "Time on Instruments"...NOT time filed under IFR. We file IFR for every flight and at the end of each day I estimate the time I spent on instruments. About 10% of my tatal time is "Instrument Time"!
I understand what a lot of you (ie 'Cat') are getting at about being in the IFR-system and therefor logging "IFR Time", but I fly IFR for weeks on end and never see a could...and am never relying soley on instruments. So how can I go into an interview and try to "sell" IFR time as Instrument time!?!?!?
G
At the end of the day the you will be asked for your instrument time twice:
1. ATPL
2. Interview(s)
So for the ATPL you need 75h. Every single person I know wrote their ATPL with a hell of a lot more that 75h "Actual IMC" time (let alone "instrument time")!!
That leaves the Interview. Would you really risk walking in to an interview and leaving yourself exposed by saying that something-like 88.7% of your total time is "instrument time"! That's suicide!
I have always interpreted "Instrument Time" as "Time on Instruments"...NOT time filed under IFR. We file IFR for every flight and at the end of each day I estimate the time I spent on instruments. About 10% of my tatal time is "Instrument Time"!
I understand what a lot of you (ie 'Cat') are getting at about being in the IFR-system and therefor logging "IFR Time", but I fly IFR for weeks on end and never see a could...and am never relying soley on instruments. So how can I go into an interview and try to "sell" IFR time as Instrument time!?!?!?
G
