IFR Currency Clarification

Penguinforce

Penguinforce

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
208
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
Penguinforce
Asking on behalf of a friend. She asked me and I wasn’t 100% certain. She is out of currency but still within the second 6 months you have to get your ifr currency back before being required to do an IPC. Of her last 6 approaches, she has 5 done in the months of March and April but her 6th approach was back in December of last year. Specifically, December 9th.

If she went up tomorrow and completed one approach, would she then have until march to get the other 5 approaches done, or does she need to do all 6 before she lapses in a week?

I know when you are current, your approaches can be counted on a rolling basis. The actual language from the FAR is why I am slightly confused, as it states:

A pilot not meeting the instrument recency of experience requirement may not exercise the privileges of the instrument rating until the requirements are met. If the pilot fails to meet this recency of instrument experience for a period of one year, the pilot must pass an IPC in the category of aircraft involved

How I interpret this is that you must become completely current again to reset the expiration date, so to say. Since only completing 1 approach tomorrow would not make her current, since her last 5 were in March and April, this would still make her lapse. That’s how I interpret it but I want to see what you all think/know so that I can advise her what to do to avoid doing an IPC
 
It’s simple. If you can look back 6 months and have qualifying approaches you are current until you have gone a year without currency.

It is now December. Looking back 6 months brings us to June. The approaches last December, in March and April dropped off the count.

If she is within the second 6 months, but she needs another 5 6 approaches and a hold before the end of the month. But in terms of advice, unless your friend is a very experienced instrument pilot, I’d advise an IPC after going this long. They can be very efficient and they do not have to be difficult. Nor lengthy for a competent pilot.
[Edits - good catch, @BillTIZ]
 
Last edited:
The approaches can be done in a simulator if cost is an issue.
 
Midlife, redo your count. She had approaches in March/April 2024 and Dec 2023. LAST YEAR.
All approaches have dropped off the count. Counting Dec 2023 forward, I agree, she dropped out of the first 6 mos in June 2024. She has until the end of Dec 2024 to accomplish all 6 and holding to not REQUIRE an IPC.

I do agree, that after this long a span, an IPC is the recommended solution. RedBird FMX simulators are great for all except the "Circle to Land" requirement of the IPC. Everything else can be accomplished in a RedBird, with a CFII. Then go grab an airplane for the approach with circle to land.
 
BillTIZ said:
Midlife, redo your count. She had approaches in March/April 2024 and Dec 2023. LAST YEAR.
Click to expand...
Good catch. I missed that it was 2003. In which case she needs all 6 this month. I'm going to fix my reply.

We are also assuming that this pilot was actually current last December.
 
midlifeflyer said:
But in terms of advice, unless your friend is a very experienced instrument pilot, I’d advise an IPC after going this long. They can be very efficient and they do not have to be difficult.
Click to expand...
I second that advice. If she is a competent instrument pilot, an IPC can be done in less time than six approaches plus one hold. If not, an IPC and possibly some instruction to shake the dust off would make her a lot more proficient than simply flying approaches with a safety pilot.

Flying by reference to instruments is a very perishable skill; thus, currency and proficiency should be taken seriously.

Regards,
Martin
 
IPC is easier, 3 approaches and a hold and done. Plus an instructor is helping you out.
 
mandm said:
IPC is easier, 3 approaches and a hold and done. Plus an instructor is helping you out.
Click to expand...
Also need unusual attitude recovery.

I agree that an IPC is usually more efficient but not necessarily easier. If your usual currency or for that matter real world flying consists of flying fully coupled approaches you know like the back of your hand, you might get a bit of an awakening when asked to do something different. If the only holds you ever fly are HILPT or the end of a published missed, you might not be able to do a random one. Not that many pilots I know do loss of primary flight instruments with their safety pilot. And if the instructor is helping you, it should take longer.

I think I'm actually pretty easy. I don't make up silly tasks to try to catch anyone. Never had to. But I do have the list of "GPS Tasks Pilots Do Not Know How To Do" I've mentioned other times. I typically only pull out only one of them for the flight portion of an IPC (as opposed to a ground review), but my list is there for a reason based on my experience.
 
mandm said:
IPC is easier, 3 approaches and a hold and done. Plus an instructor is helping you out.
Click to expand...
The ACS specifies what what must done on an IPC, it's more than 3 approaches and a hold.
 
IFR currency comes in many mulitples of 100 dollar notes.
 
Martin Pauly said:
Flying by reference to instruments is a very perishable skill; thus, currency and proficiency should be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Can we take this quote and permanently paste it on top of this section?

Strongly suggest at this point - as others have done - to spend time with a CFII. Then do safety pilot under the hood approaches continuously; shoot for two once a month. You'll actually end up with a little more than 6 in 6, but remember - that's the minimum. You really want more than minimum Instrument Flying proficiency.

I read another gem here but I can't remember to whom credit. Apparently the Navy Seals take the approach that "when you get stressed and things get intense, you don't rise to the occasion, you fall to the highest of your training".
 
midlifeflyer said:
Also need unusual attitude recovery.

I agree that an IPC is usually more efficient but not necessarily easier. If your usual currency or for that matter real world flying consists of flying fully coupled approaches you know like the back of your hand, you might get a bit of an awakening when asked to do something different. If the only holds you ever fly are HILPT or the end of a published missed, you might not be able to do a random one. Not that many pilots I know do loss of primary flight instruments with their safety pilot. And if the instructor is helping you, it should take longer.

I think I'm actually pretty easy. I don't make up silly tasks to try to catch anyone. Never had to. But I do have the list of "GPS Tasks Pilots Do Not Know How To Do" I've mentioned other times. I typically only pull out only one of them for the flight portion of an IPC (as opposed to a ground review), but my list is there for a reason based on my experience.
Click to expand...
For me, an IPC is a bigger PITA cause I have to do them OEI, which puts a lot of strain on my TSIO360s. (Not that I don't need the OEI experience, but would prefer to do those on a sim and not stress my engines). Have been trying to at least do 3 a month, or every other month at the latest to keep proficient. Have a MEI friend and we trade off every month who is safety pilot and who is flying.
 
Tokirbymd said:
For me, an IPC is a bigger PITA cause I have to do them OEI, which puts a lot of strain on my TSIO360s. (Not that I don't need the OEI experience, but would prefer to do those on a sim and not stress my engines). Have been trying to at least do 3 a month, or every other month at the latest to keep proficient. Have a MEI friend and we trade off every month who is safety pilot and who is flying.
Click to expand...
Do part in a sim, part in the plane
 
Even though I have been continuously current, I still do an IPC every year.
Find someone who has flown in the system for a long time, and has good tidbids to share, not some green CFI looking for work.
 
One of my insurance requirements for a T210 is yearly IPC’s. (62 years of age and 360hrs). I’m fine with that.
 
Tokirbymd said:
For me, an IPC is a bigger PITA cause I have to do them OEI, which puts a lot of strain on my TSIO360s. (Not that I don't need the OEI experience, but would prefer to do those on a sim and not stress my engines). Have been trying to at least do 3 a month, or every other month at the latest to keep proficient. Have a MEI friend and we trade off every month who is safety pilot and who is flying.
Click to expand...
IPC is not the only avenue. Using a device to maintain currency can also maintain proficiency. You can also do a much better simulation of a circling approach in a trainer than an airplane, even if it can’t count for an IPC. And some real good unusual attitude recoveries!

Same for using safety pilots. It depends on the tasks you choose to do during these sessions. Trading off with a flying buddy is a great way to do it. I did that for a number of years before I moved to NC.

I fell out of love with IPCs for basic currency in the past few years until they changed the requirements so we no longer had to play make believe in order to artificially create that nonprecision approach using a ground-based navaid.

6 in 6 or IPC, currency is checking off boxes. Proficiency is intentional.
 
midlifeflyer said:
You can also do a much better simulation of a circling approach in a trainer than an airplane, even if it can’t count for an IPC.
Click to expand...
I feel strongly both ways about that. But also keep in mind that I’ve done hundreds of CTL’s in airplanes in real weather.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I feel strongly both ways about that. But also keep in mind that I’ve done hundreds of CTL’s in airplanes in real weather.
Click to expand...
In real weather, definitely. That’s true even with straight-in approaches.

But the typical CTL IPC task is pretending in CAVU with the one and only issue not being used to flying a pattern at a low CTL MDA (and I have seen pilots thrown off by that). I can understand not counting landings but even a basic 3-screen TD2 is more realistic for circling itself.
 
mandm said:
IPC is easier, 3 approaches and a hold and done. Plus an instructor is helping you out.
Click to expand...
Not in my experience. In my experience, those who come to me because they need an IPC to get current generally take more than 3 approaches. Usually, I'd say, about 6, coincidentally enough. Because the reason they need an IPC is they are completely non-current, and are therefore very far from proficient. I've flown with many people for whom that IPC is the only approaches they will do each year.

An IPC in its minimal form is really only for people who don't need it for currency or proficiency reasons, but for insurance or personal-minimums type of reasons, and are already otherwise proficient.

And if the CFI is helping you out, it's not an IPC. I'm not going to sign someone off for an IPC if I had to prompt them through the approaches. Once I "clear" them for the approach, if I have to say "altitude" or "don't forget to switch to VLOC" or anything else similar, that approach isn't getting checked off the list.
 
midlifeflyer said:
In real weather, definitely. That’s true even with straight-in approaches.

But the typical CTL IPC task is pretending in CAVU with the one and only issue not being used to flying a pattern at a low CTL MDA (and I have seen pilots thrown off by that). I can understand not counting landings but even a basic 3-screen TD2 is more realistic for circling itself.
Click to expand...
I agree, but there are also skills involved with flying below pattern altitude that change the geometry of what you’re looking at, which is a big part of misjudging turn radii and stalling the airplane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top