Logging Approaches

[ilkwamh2]

As a CFII, is it legal to log an instrument approach when in Actual conditions teaching an instrument student/CFII student even though I'm not actually flying the airplane???

 

[Flying Illini]

Do you log PIC when in IMC when teaching a CFII even though you aren't flying?

 

[avbug]

You may log PIC, but you may not log the approach for currency.

 

[Flying Illini]

Avbug's got a good point there. Are these being logged for currency or just for the sake of logging them?

 

[avbug]

I should have clarified. You may log PIC, but you may not log the approach for currency, unless you actually perform the approach. Watching the student perform the approach, or instructing the student as the student performs the approach, is not the same as having performed it.

The FAA doesn't require that one be the "sole manipulator of the controls," and and used the wording "performed" as the guiding terminology. Some might try to justify it by stating that the student flies they approach, but the instructor is performing it. The FAA disagrees.

Sometimes the issue of logging approaches is equated with 14 CFR 61.51, logging of flight time. However, the FAA Chief Legal Counsel specifically stated that currency requirements cannot be equated with logging requirements of 61.51, in the following legal interpretation (last paragraph...I've eliminated a large part of the text as it's not germaine).

OCT. 28, 1980

WINSTON SCOTT JONES

Dear Mr. Jones:

This is in response to your letter in which you request an interpretation of Section 61.51(2)(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, regarding logging of pilot-in-command (PIC) flight time.

In each situation, the CFI may log PIC time for all flight time during which she or he acts as flight instructor. The pilot receiving instruction may also log PIC time in each of these situations, as the pilot is the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which she or he is rated. Specifically, neither the currency requirements of situation 4 nor the log book endorsement of situation 6 are ratings within the meaning of Section 61.51. "Rating" as used in that section refers to the rating in categories, classes, and types, as listed in Section 61.5, which are placed on pilot certificates.

We trust that this discussion answers your questions.

Sincerely,

EDWARD P. FABERMAN
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division

 

[Visceral]

It is possible that with a date of 1980, this interpretation may have been replaced by another. Still, a good indicator of the way things have been interpreted in the past. I don't log them for currency just to be conservative btw.

 

[Ralgha]

You can log the approach and it does count for currency.

Here is the source, it is a Word document, and was last updated on July 14, 2003.

Quote from that source:

QUESTION: Am I correct in understanding that a CFII may log approaches that a student flies when those approaches are conducted in actual instrument conditions? Is there a reference to this anywhere in the rules?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.51(g)(2); Yes, a CFII may log approaches that a student flies when those approaches are conducted in actual instrument flight conditions. And this would also permit that instructor who is performing as an authorized instructor to “. . . log instrument time when conducting instrument flight instruction in actual instrument flight conditions” and this would count for instrument currency requirements under § 61.57(c).

 

[avbug]

The Part 61 FAQ is not binding, nor regulatory, but opinion. It does not represent the Administrator, nor is it defensible.

The legal interpretation has not been superceded, and is legally accepted, and is the official stance of the Administrator. It is an interpretation of the regulation.

Approaches flown by a student cannot be counted for currency.

 

[Ralgha]

Excuse me for being doubtful of a letter from 1980. I think I will call the FAA Regulations Division on Monday with this question.

 

[LJDRVR]

Your call to the FAA is a pointless exercise. When the regulations (Read that LAW) require interpretation, the ONLY source of guidance is a legal interpretation from the FAA Chief Counsel. Anything else is meaningless opinion. What Avbug means by indefensible is that in the event of certificate action, your FAQ's or "Inspector so and so told me..." would not be of any value to you at all. You would still be violated. Chief Legal Counsel interpretations are valid until superceded, so the 1980 date is irrelevant. You mention the regulations division. Still worthless opinion. those folks have no ability, right or mechanism under the law to interpret the law.