Today's stupid question: practice approaches with VFR equipment

iamtheari

iamtheari

Administrator
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
4,903
Display Name
Display name:
Ari
Asking for a friend...except you already know I don't have any of those. :)

When you fly a practice approach in simulated instrument conditions by wearing a view-limiting device and having a safety pilot, under VFR, do you have to use IFR navigation equipment or can you use VFR-only equipment? For example, if I have a Garmin 696 and use it to navigate to each fix on an LNAV approach, can I log the approach? What if I have a handheld VHF radio that has a VOR receiver and CDI, which I use to fly a VOR approach or even an ILS?
 
iamtheari said:
Asking for a friend...except you already know I don't have any of those. :)

When you fly a practice approach in simulated instrument conditions by wearing a view-limiting device and having a safety pilot, under VFR, do you have to use IFR navigation equipment or can you use VFR-only equipment? For example, if I have a Garmin 696 and use it to navigate to each fix on an LNAV approach, can I log the approach? What if I have a handheld VHF radio that has a VOR receiver and CDI, which I use to fly a VOR approach or even an ILS?
Click to expand...

I can think of no rule that says no, you can’t do that. I can think of reasons to do it cautiously and have a safety pilot who is smarter than the average bear
 
As long as you maintain VFR, there’s nothing that says you have to have IFR equipment to fly or log any kind of hood work.

The bigger question (and possibly what you’re really asking) is can it count toward your IFR currency...I would assume no, since part of the process is understanding what indications should look like, and executing a missed approach if you don’t have what you need. With a non-certified GPS, you won’t see the indications you need to see.

But there is no reg I know of that says that.it would have to be an interpretation, and I don’t recommend asking for those. ;)
 
I suppose it's no different than doing it on an approved flight simulator as long as you have a safety pilot. I doubt you can log it as a practice GPS approach though since you have no approach armed annunciation... idk just guessing here. You certainly can't take an IFR check ride using it.
 
paging @Sinistar .. think he had a similar Q like this just to fly GPS Approach using handheld under VFR (not wearing hood etc)
 
To clarify, the stupid question is indeed the full stupid version of it. Flying under VFR so you do not need IFR equipment. Flying under the hood so you need a safety pilot. And then flying an approach while under the hood, using non-IFR equipment. (If it helps, imagine a Garmin 430 that was installed as "VFR only" which happened from time to time.) Can you log that approach for IFR currency?

I don't see anything specifically saying no. And I promise not to ask for an official interpretation. That would just be silly. But did someone already ruin this for us by getting in trouble and/or having an interpretation written?
 
At the very least it is good practice for when you would have to do that for real to get down.
 
Practicing something like this for when you might need it in an emergency is a good thing, so I certainly recommend doing it. I'm not sure I'd personally log it as an approach for currency purposes though, even if there is no rule against it. That little voice inside my head would keep nagging, this is not really good practice for my SOP instrument flying. Doesn't really help proficiency for normal instrument flight. Not the buttonology part, anyway, though if done under the hood, certainly good practice in controlling the plane on the gauges.

I think it's a judgment call. Personally I wouldn't count it, but I can see the argument for counting it as well.
 
You can do whatever you want VFR. You cannot perform an instrument approach with a portable, so logging it as an approach defies common sense.
 
dmspilot said:
You can do whatever you want VFR. You cannot perform an instrument approach with a portable, so logging it as an approach defies common sense.
Click to expand...
The regulations occasionally defy common sense.
 
Good for an emergency practice if you flew vfr into imc with only vfr equipment but I wouldn't log it. A better idea would be not getting into imc with vfr equipment.
 
Paulie said:
Good for an emergency practice if you flew vfr into imc with only vfr equipment but I wouldn't log it. A better idea would be not getting into imc with vfr equipment.
Click to expand...
That is far from the only scenario where it would be useful. I know someone who used one of the early portable Garmins to shoot an approach in hard IMC when her HSI crapped out. This was many years ago.

In my case, I have alternate certified navigation means including a WAAS GPS with its own HSI-like display, but I could see doing something like that in case of total electrical failure.
 
iamtheari said:
Asking for a friend...except you already know I don't have any of those. :)

When you fly a practice approach in simulated instrument conditions by wearing a view-limiting device and having a safety pilot, under VFR, do you have to use IFR navigation equipment or can you use VFR-only equipment? For example, if I have a Garmin 696 and use it to navigate to each fix on an LNAV approach, can I log the approach? What if I have a handheld VHF radio that has a VOR receiver and CDI, which I use to fly a VOR approach or even an ILS?
Click to expand...

I trying to figure out what airplane you are flying that has IFR instruments and no VOR.
 
Clip4 said:
I trying to figure out what airplane you are flying that has IFR instruments and no VOR.
Click to expand...
Nothing in particular, as I really did just want to ask a stupid question (which seems to be a good way to avoid stupid answers, oddly enough!), but imagine going old school, or what we now call “partial panel”: needle, ball, and airspeed in something like a Citabria.
 
Clip4 said:
I trying to figure out what airplane you are flying that has IFR instruments and no VOR.
Click to expand...
I used to get some instrument dual in my Maule periodically...needle, ball, & airspeed, KX-145 Nav-or-crappy-Comm to start with, which I replaced with a VFR GPS/Comm. Approaches and all. Logged it as instrument instruction, bit didn't log approaches (I was/am always current otherwise).
 
MauleSkinner said:
As long as you maintain VFR, there’s nothing that says you have to have IFR equipment to fly or log any kind of hood work.

The bigger question (and possibly what you’re really asking) is can it count toward your IFR currency...I would assume no, since part of the process is understanding what indications should look like, and executing a missed approach if you don’t have what you need. With a non-certified GPS, you won’t see the indications you need to see.

But there is no reg I know of that says that.it would have to be an interpretation, and I don’t recommend asking for those. ;)
Click to expand...
My opinion (FWIW) is no, because part of RNAV approach procedure are annunciation, alerting, and sensitivity. As to VOR and ILS, the portable equipment doesn't come close to meeting IFR standards. These are IFR approaches.
 
iamtheari said:
Nothing in particular, as I really did just want to ask a stupid question (which seems to be a good way to avoid stupid answers, oddly enough!), but imagine going old school, or what we now call “partial panel”: needle, ball, and airspeed in something like a Citabria.
Click to expand...

Old school Needle and Ball? I can’t imagine finding a Citabria with an old Turn and Bank Indicator with no attitude indicator and no VOR. And some where the Handheld GPS doesn’t fit you old school image.

upload_2018-8-25_9-48-31.jpeg
 
iamtheari said:
Asking for a friend...except you already know I don't have any of those. :)

When you fly a practice approach in simulated instrument conditions by wearing a view-limiting device and having a safety pilot, under VFR, do you have to use IFR navigation equipment or can you use VFR-only equipment? For example, if I have a Garmin 696 and use it to navigate to each fix on an LNAV approach, can I log the approach? What if I have a handheld VHF radio that has a VOR receiver and CDI, which I use to fly a VOR approach or even an ILS?
Click to expand...

I am going to play devils advocate here. Strictly speaking you don't need any navigation equipment for IFR. Radar vectors is perfectly legal. You could also fly PAR or ASR approach with nothing but a com radio. For that matter, you could fly IFR with just your compass, and if you can maintain your route exactly and don't cause any deviations, no one is going to ask what you used for navigation.

As for logging, I have logged PAR/ASR approaches.
 
sarangan said:
I am going to play devils advocate here. Strictly speaking you don't need any navigation equipment for IFR. Radar vectors is perfectly legal. You could also fly PAR or ASR approach with nothing but a com radio. For that matter, you could fly IFR with just your compass, and if you can maintain your route exactly and don't cause any deviations, no one is going to ask what you used for navigation.

As for logging, I have logged PAR/ASR approaches.
Click to expand...

Lot of luck finding PAR/ASR these days.

Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown
Click to expand...

Radar vectors isn't equipment. Also, you don't know when radar vectors will be available.
 
sarangan said:
I am going to play devils advocate here. Strictly speaking you don't need any navigation equipment for IFR. Radar vectors is perfectly legal. You could also fly PAR or ASR approach with nothing but a com radio. For that matter, you could fly IFR with just your compass, and if you can maintain your route exactly and don't cause any deviations, no one is going to ask what you used for navigation.

As for logging, I have logged PAR/ASR approaches.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Radar Approaches have lost com instructions. The places I’ve worked GCA at had lost com instructions that included Non Radar routings. @Timbeck2 @Velocity173 ??? @aterpster , I can’t find any 8260’s on Radar Approaches. Do the Lost Com procedures always include Navaids?
 
luvflyin said:
Hmm. Radar Approaches have lost com instructions. The places I’ve worked GCA at had lost com instructions that included Non Radar routings. @Timbeck2 @Velocity173 ??? @aterpster , I can’t find any 8260’s on Radar Approaches. Do the Lost Com procedures always include Navaids?
Click to expand...

I agree, there has to be a non radar routing or alternate routing with some sort of NAVAID. Would be impossible if the aircraft had no NAV equipment at all.

This is from my old facility. Never was in printed format back then though. A PITA trying to rattle this off with multiple flights inbound. ;)

CODED LOST COMMUNICATIONS
SCARLET
TACAN equipped aircraft: If no transmissions are received for one minute
final approach, attempt contact with Beaufort Approach on 328.425/123.7 and proceed VFR. If unable, climb and maintain two thousand four hundred, proceed direct COSAW, execute TACAN runway 23 approach.

GOLD
RNAV/GPS equipped aircraft: If no transmissions are received for one minute in the pattern or 5/15 seconds on final approach, attempt contact with Beaufort Approach on 328.425/123.7 and proceed VFR.
If unable, climb and maintain two thousand eight hundred, proceed direct HOWEL and execute
RNAV/GPS Rwy 23 approach.
 
Last edited:
iamtheari said:
The regulations occasionally defy common sense.
Click to expand...

Which regulation allows you to log it? Common sense should prevail when a regulation covering the scenario in question does not exist.
 
dmspilot said:
Which regulation allows you to log it? Common sense should prevail when a regulation covering the scenario in question does not exist.
Click to expand...
Which regulation requires you to have the GRAB CARD equipment for simulated instrument time? That stuff is only required to operate under IFR.

Which regulation requires you to use IFR-certified navigation equipment to perform an IAP under simulated instrument (which is performed under VFR)? That’s the real gist of this question as I think that the first half (required equipment for simulated instrument conditions) clearly allows my original, silly idea.
 
sarangan said:
I am going to play devils advocate here. Strictly speaking you don't need any navigation equipment for IFR. Radar vectors is perfectly legal. You could also fly PAR or ASR approach with nothing but a com radio. For that matter, you could fly IFR with just your compass, and if you can maintain your route exactly and don't cause any deviations, no one is going to ask what you used for navigation.

As for logging, I have logged PAR/ASR approaches.
Click to expand...
You can’t fly IFR without the minimum required equipment, which rules out actually filing when you don’t have an attitude indicator and so on.
 
Clip4 said:
Old school Needle and Ball? I can’t imagine finding a Citabria with an old Turn and Bank Indicator with no attitude indicator and no VOR. And some where the Handheld GPS doesn’t fit you old school image.

View attachment 66660
Click to expand...
Some planes have what you might call “steampunk gauges.” :)
 
iamtheari said:
Which regulation requires you to have the GRAB CARD equipment for simulated instrument time? That stuff is only required to operate under IFR.

Which regulation requires you to use IFR-certified navigation equipment to perform an IAP under simulated instrument (which is performed under VFR)? That’s the real gist of this question as I think that the first half (required equipment for simulated instrument conditions) clearly allows my original, silly idea.
Click to expand...

Have no idea what the first question has to do with the topic.

As for the second question, you can't do a GPS instrument approach without a GPS that can do instrument approaches, duh. A handheld GPS and an IFR approach GPS aren't even comparable.
 
Last edited:
I think regardless of WX, the GPS would have to be a TSO version approved to log an IAP. RAIM, annunciation, CDI etc. AIM 1-1-6 note 4 even states that a hand held can’t be used for instrument approaches.
 
It really boils down to whose opinion should hold the force of regulation, because there is no regulation that specifies what equipment needs to be used when logging approaches for currency.

And we can’t apply common sense, because the FAA doesn’t...if the FAA allows you to file IFR, simulate instrument flight, and log approaches, and take an instrument checkride in an airplane that isn’t allowed to fly in the clouds, why would anyone think they require instrument approaches to be logged in an airplane that is equipped for flight in the clouds?

Are there reasons not to log a practice approach using a non-certified gps? Absolutely...just like there are reasons not to get a Commercial certificate and carry passengers for hire with a whopping 15 hours in your logbook without a flight instructor on board. Doesn’t mean it’s not legal.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
And we can’t apply common sense, because the FAA doesn’t...if the FAA allows you to file IFR, simulate instrument flight, and log approaches, and take an instrument checkride in an airplane that isn’t allowed to fly in the clouds, why would anyone think they require instrument approaches to be logged in an airplane that is equipped for flight in the clouds?
Click to expand...

All examples for which a regulation or guidance from the FAA exists, versus a scenario where such guidance doesn't exist. You can't extrapolate from "well, the FAA explicitly says I can do XYZ, and XYZ doesn't make sense to me, therefore I can do anything that doesn't make sense, as long as the FAA doesn't say I can't." Besides the FAA policies you used as examples do make sense if you understand the reasoning behind them instead of looking at them in a vacuum.

VOR approaches are performed the same way whether your equipment is certified or not. GPS approaches are not.
 
Last edited:
I've heard both positions argued reasonably.

Those who say no, say that it's not an IAP unless you have the equipment to fly the IAP. Even a sim, FTD, or ATD need to be certified and approved to be countable.

Those who say yes say that practicing for an emergency IAP, even using a handheld or EFB is valuable and an important skill.
 
dmspilot said:
All examples for which a regulation or guidance from the FAA exists, versus a scenario where such guidance doesn't exist. You can't extrapolate from "well, the FAA explicitly says I can do XYZ, and XYZ doesn't make sense to me, therefore I can do anything that doesn't make sense, as long as the FAA doesn't say I can't." Besides the FAA policies you used as examples do make sense if you understand the reasoning behind them instead of looking at them in a vacuum.

VOR approaches are performed the same way whether your equipment is certified or not. GPS approaches are not.
Click to expand...
But again, the bottom line is that your opinion is just like mine...it doesn't carry the force of regulation.
 
MauleSkinner said:
But again, the bottom line is that your opinion is just like mine...it doesn't carry the force of regulation.
Click to expand...

No kidding, well I don't work for the Chief Counsel's office, so I'm not surprised to hear that my opinions don't carry the force or regulation.

I didn't weigh in on whether it was legal. I just weighed in that it's stupid.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
No kidding, well I don't work for the Chief Counsel's office, so I'm not surprised to hear that my opinions don't carry the force or regulation.

I didn't weigh in on whether it was legal. I just weighed in that it's stupid.
Click to expand...
why quote a post that's not relevant to what you're weighing in on?
 
midlifeflyer said:
I've heard both positions argued reasonably.

Those who say no, say that it's not an IAP unless you have the equipment to fly the IAP. Even a sim, FTD, or ATD need to be certified and approved to be countable.

Those who say yes say that practicing for an emergency IAP, even using a handheld or EFB is valuable and an important skill.
Click to expand...
Except that is not necessarily an argument for logging it, just that it is a worthwhile thing to practice. As I said earlier, I personally wouldn't log the approach for currency, but that's just me. I'm not sure there's a clear answer here.
 
aterpster said:
Radar vectors isn't equipment.
Click to expand...
The equipment required to fly radar vectors is a compass.

Also, you don't know when radar vectors will be available.
Click to expand...

True, but you also don't know when electronic aids to navigation will become inop. ;)
 
azure said:
Except that is not necessarily an argument for logging it, just that it is a worthwhile thing to practice. As I said earlier, I personally wouldn't log the approach for currency, but that's just me. I'm not sure there's a clear answer here.
Click to expand...
There isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top