IFR currency question

AggieMike88

AggieMike88

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
20,804
Location
Denton, TX
Display Name
Display name:
The original "I don't know it all" of aviation.
I had a buddy ask a question about IFR currency, specifically intercepting and tracking a course through use of navigation systems. My application of Google Fu isn't finding this answer. So I turn to the PoA Hive Mind.

The regs sayeth.....

61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
spacer.gif
c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless within the preceding 6 calendar months, that person has:
  1. For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in an aircraft (other than a glider), performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions, either in flight in the appropriate category of aircraft for the instrument privileges sought or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of the aircraft category for the instrument privileges sought --
    1. At least six instrument approaches;
    2. Holding procedures; and
    3. Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigation systems.

  1. How long or far must I track that "beam" for the activity to satisfy the regs?
  2. Does intercepting and tracking a localizer count?
 
If you’re established on the course you’re done and yes ILS counts...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don’t think you could really do any of the other stuff for currency and NOT end up tracking.
 
don't over think this.....it's not necessary. :confused:

once those things are logged....it's history.
 
Yes to your question Mike, as the others have said. Tracking on approaches and/or holding meets the requirement of intercepting/tracking courses.
 
Last edited:
mscard88 said:
Yes to your question Mike, as the others have said. Tracking on approaches meets the requirement of intercepting/tracking courses.
Click to expand...
Maybe I need to schedule an IPC with you someday.... not only get that on the books, but also prove to myself that I can fly in IMC with you needling me the entire time.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Maybe I need to schedule an IPC with you someday.... not only get that on the books, but also prove to myself that I can fly in IMC with you needling me the entire time.
Click to expand...

I have the perfect outfit to wear too!

image.jpeg
 
James331 said:
I don’t think you could really do any of the other stuff for currency and NOT end up tracking.
Click to expand...
Unless you tried to fly 6 ASR or PAR approaches for currency. I think that is what the tracking requirement is intended to prevent.
 
You could conceivably perform 6 ASR approaches to get the "approach" credit without tracking courses. However, I can't see how you could do "holding procedures" without tracking a course.

Darn, @azure beat me. But still, the holding pattern.
 
azure said:
Unless you tried to fly 6 ASR or PAR approaches for currency. I think that is what the tracking requirement is intended to prevent.
Click to expand...

Lol, thank god they put a stop to that!
 
Fifties and Hundreds.
 
((Must resist doing a pilot's parody of the Major General song from Pirates of Penzance))
 
mscard88 said:
Yes to your question Mike, as the others have said. Tracking on approaches and/or holding meets the requirement of intercepting/tracking courses.
Click to expand...
Technically any tracking you do while flying meets the requirement...the devil in the details is merely logging it, since if you didn't log it, it doesn't count. I logged tracking every time I logged a hold so that I wouldn't have to look in too many places.
 
AggieMike88 said:
I had a buddy ask a question about IFR currency, specifically intercepting and tracking a course through use of navigation systems. My application of Google Fu isn't finding this answer. So I turn to the PoA Hive Mind.

The regs sayeth.....

61.57 Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.
spacer.gif
c) Instrument experience. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless within the preceding 6 calendar months, that person has:
  1. For the purpose of obtaining instrument experience in an aircraft (other than a glider), performed and logged under actual or simulated instrument conditions, either in flight in the appropriate category of aircraft for the instrument privileges sought or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of the aircraft category for the instrument privileges sought --
    1. At least six instrument approaches;
    2. Holding procedures; and
    3. Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigation systems.

  1. How long or far must I track that "beam" for the activity to satisfy the regs?
  2. Does intercepting and tracking a localizer count?
Click to expand...
 
All approaches involve intercepting and tracking an electronic navigation source, so the “intercepting and tracking is implicit in the six required approaches. The currency refs may as well just say, 6 approaches and holding procedures. The “intercepting and tracking” verbiage is superfluous.
 
SbestCFII said:
All approaches involve intercepting and tracking an electronic navigation source, so the “intercepting and tracking is implicit in the six required approaches. The currency refs may as well just say, 6 approaches and holding procedures. The “intercepting and tracking” verbiage is superfluous.
Click to expand...
Ummm... ALL approaches? Are you sure about that? Seems somewhere I heard of something called a PAR approach... also ASR approaches... :rolleyes:
 
It's still an electronic navigation source, it's just being relayed to you audibly.
 
azure said:
Ummm... ALL approaches? Are you sure about that? Seems somewhere I heard of something called a PAR approach... also ASR approaches... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So you are also going to do a PAR hold?
 
flyingron said:
It's still an electronic navigation source, it's just being relayed to you audibly.
Click to expand...
My understanding is, though, that it doesn't count for "tracking", and that's the main reason the requirement is stated explicitly.
 
ja_user said:
So you are also going to do a PAR hold?
Click to expand...
Not sure why you quoted my post for this, unless you misunderstood what I was saying. FTR, PAR approaches do NOT involve tracking (or holding) that you can count towards the requirement.

AFAIK, that is. :)
 
azure said:
Not sure why you quoted my post for this, unless you misunderstood what I was saying. FTR, PAR approaches do NOT involve tracking (or holding) that you can count towards the requirement.

AFAIK, that is. :)
Click to expand...

Correct, but you can't do a hold without navigating and tracking something. That was my point.. If you have the 6 approaches and hold, you always have the navigation part done.
 
ja_user said:
Correct, but you can't do a hold without navigating and tracking something. That was my point.. If you have the 6 approaches and hold, you always have the navigation part done.
Click to expand...
Well it's tangential to the point *I* was making (so I still don't see why you quoted me), but okay. Your point is really that item 3 in the FAA's list (intercepting and tracking) is superfluous, and they could have left it at 1 and 2 if all they wanted to say was 6 PAR approaches for currency is not enough. Is that really true? You can't hold without tracking, but can you hold without intercepting? Hmmm...
 
azure said:
My understanding is, though, that it doesn't count for "tracking", and that's the main reason the requirement is stated explicitly.
Click to expand...
There really isn't much guidance in either the Proposed Rule or the 1997 Final Rule for the "intercepting and tracking" language which most find a bit superfluous.

The revision, which also included getting rid of the 6 hours requirement, was, according to the Proposed Rule prompted by a private rulemaking petition which argued the existing 6 approaches/6 hours rule was too loose and that certain tasks should be specified. So we got the holds as a requirement and, in the Proposed Rule, it was "intercepting and tracking VOR radials and NDB bearings"

In the final rule, it was expanded to "Intercepting and tracking courses through the use of navigation systems" for pretty obvious reasons. It does seem pretty clear from the context, that "navigation systems" means on-board navigation systems, not instructions from some guy on the ground. So, while not really clear, it does seem to fit the common wisdom (an oxymoron?) that there was some recognition there are approaches which do not use onboard nav systems and the FAA wanted to ensure intercepting and tracking was covered.

Superfluous with the holding requirement? Probably. But we have all seen the FARs strangely parsed by people looking for a loophole.
 
azure said:
Well it's tangential to the point *I* was making (so I still don't see why you quoted me), but okay. Your point is really that item 3 in the FAA's list (intercepting and tracking) is superfluous, and they could have left it at 1 and 2 if all they wanted to say was 6 PAR approaches for currency is not enough. Is that really true? You can't hold without tracking, but can you hold without intercepting? Hmmm...
Click to expand...

It seems like you'd intercept every time you enter or hold, and in many cases on every inbound turn.
 
ja_user said:
It seems like you'd intercept every time you enter or hold, and in many cases on every inbound turn.
Click to expand...
In my plane, that's true. My 480 tells my HSI to set the inbound leg as the desired course, so you have to intercept it after you turn. It does display the entire hold track with the outbound leg as a dotted line but gives no course guidance for it. If it's a timed hold it wouldn't make sense to give course guidance for the outbound leg, as you need to adjust its length based on wind conditions. But what about a hold where the legs are defined by distances, like most HILPTs on RNAV(GPS) approaches? I was wondering if some modern units might give you course guidance for the entire hold, so you could track it without doing any intercepting. I'm not sure how useful that would be since the placement of the outbound leg depends on wind as well, but anyway, that was my thinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top