Basically, from the time you accept a vector or are using own nav to establish yourself on an Approved Instrument Approach and you are in IMC conditions, you can log the approach and if the approach took you .2 you can log .2 as actual since you are flying by refrence to instruments the moment you encounter IMC conditions. There is nothing that states that you have to fly the approach to mins, or 200 feet above mins.
Aahhh, no.
We've been through this a few times already, let's try it again.
The legal interpretation gives two provisions. One is that the approach must be conducted in instrument conditions. Not part of it, not a little bit of it, but the proceedure must be conducted in instrument conditions. The issue of "IMC" is irrelevant, as the instrument conditions may be actual, or simulated.
And. There's the word. Nor or, not if, not but...but and. The approach must be conducted in instrument conditions AND...
It must be conducted down to minimums, unless it must be abandoned for safety reasons. Which part of down to minimums do you not understand? Seems rather clear, doesn't it?
This isn't an either/or propostion. Two provisions are given, and both must be met; we can glean this from the use of the word "and" in the legal interpretation by the chief legal counsel. The approach must be conducted under instrument conditions AND it must be conducted down to minimums. Ergo, it must be conducted under instrument conditions down to minimums. Not part of the approach must be conducted in instrument conditions. We don't have an interpretation to say that. Not the start of the approach must be conducted in instrument conditions. We don't have an interpretation to say that. Not .2 must be conducted in instrument conditions, becasue quite obviously the interpretation says no such thing at all.
What it does provide us is a requirement to conduct the approach in instrument conditions. The proceedure. Not part of the proceedure, but the proceedure. Lacking any contrary loophole, we clearly have only one avenue by which to read that, and this is the entire proceedure. Had the chief counsel wanted to say something else, one might imagine he would have...for example, he might have said that the proceedure must at some point encounter instrument conditions, actual or simulated. Or he might have said that so long as .2 of the approach is conducted under instrument conditions, it's good enough.
But he didn't.
What he did say is that the proceedure must be conducted under instrument conditions, and to add further clarification, added that it must be conducted to minimums. The only exception to conducting it to minimums is when the approach must be abandoned for safety reasons.
Now, you seem to believe you've found a loophole, wherein the use of the term "we believe" means that it's purely speculation, purely opinion, and is of no effect. You've highlighted that wording, as follows:
unless the instrument approach procedure must be abandoned for safety reasons, we believe the pilot must follow the instrument approach procedure to minimum descent altitude or decision height.
As this is a legal interpretation representing the FAA Adminstrator, by the Chief Legal Counsel, the use of the wording "we believe" does not negate the fact that this represents the official defensible interpretation of the regulation as administered and enforced by the FAA Administrator, as provided by the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as ammended. In other words, the wording "I kinda prefer," "we think," "we believe," "we insist," "we done thought," or "for the most part we generally agree that..." all has the same effect. Namely, this is the rendering of the regulation to which we are beholden, and as it is to be enforced.
The interpretation really leaves no room for bargaining or loopholes; it's clear. The proceedure must be flown in instrument conditions, period. It must be flown to minimums, period. It must be flown in instrument conditions, and flown to minimums, period. It must be flown in instrument conditions to minimums, end of story.
(Whether he prefers it or NOT!)
