Total time/instrument ratio

[Kingairrick]

Mine's 11.5% Lots of freight doggin', and then the King Airs in the high 20s. (Why is FL290 ALWAYS IMC?)

 

[145FO]

I have logged 4.5% of my flight time as instrument time. I only log instrument time if it is my leg and I am actually in the clouds more than a few minutes.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

If you are cruising along at FL330 and their is a solid layer under you from CLE to all the way to DEN, is still doesn't count as "sole reference to instruments." You still have a horizon out there. Now, I agree that you can't find I-70, but ya need to be in the clouds to be logging instrument time.

.

If you are above a solid layer and have blue sky above, chances are you can maintain the aircraft solely by visual reference. If you are flying a jet without, at least %50-80 of your scan inside the cockpit than I think someone needs to give you a swift kick in the bolars though! In every example I gave, there was no horizon reference. You don't need to be in the clouds to experience any number of visual and physiological pitfalls. If you go back to your instrument textbook in Chapter One, you'll find them there. Many people have flown airplanes into the water or snow on a clear day or spun an aircraft into the dirt on a clear moonless night. There are many situations where you need to put your head down and stay on instruments beyond just being in the clouds. Wouldn't you agree? That is why the definition states clearly...maintain the aircraft solely by reference to instruments not "when the aircraft is entirely enveloped in any of the FAA designated definitions of cloud-type visible moisture for a period which must exceed .01/hr"?! .... or something to that affect.

 

[Tired Soul]

Actual and simulated 170 hrs.
On an IFR Flightplan 400hrs, depending how you look 14.25% or 4.25%.
I log all my IFR flightplan time to have some sort of record of recent instrument experience. Put it in a separate column marked IFR so their's no confusion about actual/simulated/IFR FLIGHTPLAN.
Hope it will all make sense one day............

 

[mattpilot]

Wouldn't you agree? That is why the definition states clearly...maintain the aircraft solely by reference to instruments not "when the aircraft is entirely enveloped in any of the FAA designated definitions of cloud-type visible moisture for a period which must exceed .01/hr"?! .... or something to that affect

I do agree with that (and with the moonless flight over water). But we also agree that logging any time on an IFR flight plan as IMC regardless of VMC weather is total BS, right ?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

10 % of your total time, once your flying high performance jets for a living it's 5% of your total time.

Exactly... I don't log instr time, but rather take the page total and X.05% and use that number..... the KISS method

 

[Uncle Sparky]

But we also agree that logging any time on an IFR flight plan as IMC regardless of VMC weather is total BS, right ?

Absolutely!

The idea that you log every minute of an IFR filed flight as IMC just on the grounds of the type of flight plan is ludicrous.

I can agree with Tired Soul's technique though. I really think it boils down to personal standards of integrity. Like someone stated...." is the FAA really going to perform a Wx history investigation" to check on your logbook accuracy? The real question, I believe, is, will a potential employer have a cow if you're showing a %50 ratio of Total vs IMC or with some individuals, apparently, a 2.5 logged, with a 2.5 IMC.......a 3.7 logged........3.7 IMC.......again and again consistently in their book!?

 

[vclean]

Look at the true intent of the rule. If you couldn't control the aircraft without reference to the instruments (gyros, not nav), then it is loggable as "actual instrument". IFR flightplan flown in VMC conditions and day VMC above an overcast does not constitute 'actual instrument'.

Log what you like. If you can convince your potential employer (through interview and sim check) that your logged instrument time is accurate, go for it.

Remember the implications when you sign your logbook page.

 

[avbug]

So you think that if you file IFR you should not necessarily log most of that flight as Instrument?

Part 61-g) Logging instrument flight time. (1) A person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments under actual or simulated instrument flight conditions.

I mean if you are VMC but on an IFR, then that pretty much falls into the category.

Does that mean if you have the auto pilot engaged while in the clouds you shouldn't log that time?

It is interesting how the CFRs only talk about "simulated" when talking about time for a qualification.

I looked at my time and it is about 15% of my TT. That is for over 12 years of aviation experience so I don't think I am out "fat logging" instrument time.

IMO, if you are on an IFR flt plan, flying GPS Direct, Victor Airways, or etc. and this is how you are navigating, then it is Instrument time.
__________________

That one is on an IFR flight plan has nothing to do with logging instrument time. The only requirement to log instrument time, in accordance with 14 CFR 61.51, is that the flight time logged as instrument time must be flown soley by reference to instruments.

If you can't control the airplane by any means other than by instruments, then it's instrument flight. If you can look out the window and see something that helps you control the airlplane, then you're no longer controlling the airplane soley by reference to instruments, and it's not instrument flight time.

Notice that 61.51 states nothing about logging "IFR time." The regulation speaks only to logging instrument time. Nothing about logging RNAV or GPS time. Only instrument time. That period of time during which aircraft control must be maintained by reference to flight instruments, and only by reference to flight instruments. That's not navigation, picking one's way over the ground. That's aircraft control. Simpy because you're following the FMS doesn't make it an instrument flight, and simply because you're on an IFR clearance doesn't make it an loggable as instrument time.

Flight over dark areas on a dark night, flight between obscuring layers, and other situations when flight by reference to instruments is necessary, are times when one is controlling the aircraft soley by reference to instruments, and this is instrument time.

Employers have a good feel for what constitutes authenticity or no. I spoke with a chief pilot for a fractional provider a few days ago, and discussed an individual in the company who wishes to upgrade. This individual submitted his total times nine months previously when he hired on, and now reports one thousand hours more. He submits that he's flown a thousand hours in those nine months, and that a quarter of that is instrument time. The CP was disinclined to support this individual, and denied his request...especially as the company keeps very close tabs on the pilots and hours flown. He was clearly lying.

A pilot who has too much experience in one area or another doesn't have to worry about how he or she looks in an interview, because failing the smell test means that he or she probably won't get the interview in the first place. The 500 hour civillian pilot who has four fifty of that in multi engine airplanes, a hundred hours of instrument time, and three fifty turbine in equipment requiring a type rating. I've seen that more than a few times in a stack of resumes...it's possible in a few cases that these claims are valid. But mostly it just looks ridiculous.

I like to see about ten percent instrument experience. Somewhat more if simulator time is counted. I also don't like to see folks include an simulator experience in any of their times, though they're always welcome to add it separately.

 

[mattpilot]

So how does simulated Instrument factor into the 10% rule? Is it included or are you guys only talking about actual time ?

I got 200 hours & 5 actual + 33 simulated (hood) + (some simulator time, not relevant).

So do i have 2.5% or 19% ?

 

[Caveman]

"...but ya need to be in the clouds to be logging instrument time."

I disagree. There's no guarantee that the boundries of the layers above or below you are absolutely level and if you add in some visibilty restriction such as haze, night, or precip there is no way you can fly without relying on the instruments

My actual time is around 10% of my TT. I don't log actual unless I'm the PF. I know I can, but I choose not to.

 

[avbug]

Matt,

Instrument time is instrument time. The FAA doesn't care if it's "actual" or "simulated," and makes no differentiation between the two with respect to obtaining an certificate or rating, or recency of instrument experience (currency).

Weather you're in the cloud, flying under a hood or view limiting device, or skipping around in the dark over the ocean on a moonless night while it rains black ink, it's all instrument flight time.

Simulator time isn't flight time and should be left out of the equation.

 

[Uncle Sparky]

So how does simulated Instrument factor into the 10% rule? Is it included or are you guys only talking about actual time ?

I got 200 hours & 5 actual + 33 simulated (hood) + (some simulator time, not relevant).

So do i have 2.5% or 19% ?

There should be two columns in your book for each type plus several "fill in" columns in case you feel inclined to do something like Tired Soul has done. If you meant "does my hood time count towards this magical %10", I believe the number most people are referring to is actual only. Again, this percentage is just a baseline. Some people may have much more or less. If you exceed %10 by a good bit, come employment time, some employers might be suspicious. If you fall short, your resume' may be tossed in the circular file due to lack of experience or failing to meet insurance requirements.

 

[mattpilot]

If you meant "does my hood time count towards this magical %10", I believe the number most people are referring to is actual only.

That was the question. Thanks. I understand the entire concept - i just wasn't sure if you all counted hood time in your calculations or not .

 

[avbug]

"Hood" time counts. It's all instrument time. Refer to my previous post. There is no difference between "actual" or "simulated" instrument flight time, and the FAA doesn't make the distinction for the purposes of recency of experience or experience toward any certificate or rating.

 

[mattpilot]

ya i know that - The question arose because i doubt you folks flying 121/135 put on your hood and let the pilot-not-flying be the safety pilot. Therefore all your 'recent' instrument experience would of been actual time. So i was wondering if you guys with 1000+ hours included the hood time you gained during training in your calculations.

"Hood" time counts. It's all instrument time. Refer to my previous post. There is no difference between "actual" or "simulated" instrument flight time, and the FAA doesn't make the distinction for the purposes of recency of experience or experience toward any certificate or rating.

 

[FracCapt]

I have a little under 13% of my TT as actual. That number about 20% years ago when flying single pilot night freight(with no autopilot) throughout the midwest and east coast in a turboprop. About FL210 was as high as I ever went(beyond that the cabin was getting pretty high), and there were many nights I spent 4 hours IMC out of a 4.5hr block time. It's been going down steadily ever since I started flying jets 6 years ago.

 

[Thedude]

Nobody freakin' cares what your instrument time is once you get your first 135/121 job. You people are putting way to much time and energy into this. I remember when Eagle put the 10% on the application and it was nothing more than another descrimator for the day. Sure, I would not hire a guy who has been doing ditch tours and has no instument skills but I have never had the question of how much instrument time come up during an interview and the only instrument time I care about is enought to stay legal.

 

[avbug]

I've worked for a number of certificate holders, and every one has cared about my experience. Perhaps you simply work for employers who lack the rats posterior to give. Even certain government contracts that have no IFR flying in them have taken a hard look at my instrument time, to say nothing of every FAA certificate holder. I wouldn't exactly say nobody cares.

 

[Thedude]

I've worked for a number of certificate holders, and every one has cared about my experience. Perhaps you simply work for employers who lack the rats posterior to give. Even certain government contracts that have no IFR flying in them have taken a hard look at my instrument time, to say nothing of every FAA certificate holder. I wouldn't exactly say nobody cares.

Re-read the above post

 

[habubuaza]

Once you start flying 121 air carrier stuff prospective employers pretty much know what type of environment you have been flying in.

 

[avbug]

Re-read the above post

I did. Each employer has asked about my instrument experience, and yes, employers do care. Each certificate holder has cared, just as non-certificate holders have cared. I wouldn't say that nobody cares...because they do.