What counts as an instrument approach

[UndauntedFlyer]

One way of maintaining currency as an IFR rated pilot is to log 6 instrument approaches within the last 6-months. So my question is: What counts as an instrument approach? I know an approach to minimums with a hood would count. And an approach to minimums in actual would count too. But what about an approach when you break out at 400 feet above minimums, or when you break out at 1200 feet, or what if you are cleared for an approach by ATC and the weather is VFR or even clear.

About 20 years ago I wrote to the FAA on this subject and they said that you could log an approach if the weather was below 1000 & 3 but I can find no FAA reference on this.

Does anyone have a reference on this, or even an opinion as to what counts as an approach?

 

[schoolio]

There was a big discussion on this a few months ago, with legal interpretations and everything. Do a search for it and it should come up.

 

[Doozer]

This should answer that -- and several other questions. The currency rules and airspace designations have changed a bit since the opinion; however, the underlying reasoning is still easily applied.

January 28, 1992

(no name given)

This is in response to your October 24, 1991, letter in which you asked several questions about certain Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR).

First, you asked whether a clearance is required to operate in a control zone, "...when an aircraft is 5000 feet over the airport, in VFR conditions, but the airport itself is covered in low stratus." We assume from your scenario that the airport is at sea level and that the pilot of the aircraft is merely planning to transit the control zone at 5000 feet above ground level (AGL). FAR Section 91.155 lists the basic VFR weather minimums for certain altitudes, within and outside controlled airspace (14 CFR Sec. 91.155). A control zone is a type of controlled airspace. Using your example, if the pilot maintains basic VFR weather minimums and is transiting the control zone, he may enter a control zone at 5000 feet AGL without obtaining an ATC clearance.

Second, you questioned how low a pilot must descend (i.e., minimum descent altitude or decision height or full stop landing) on the six instrument approaches he must log to meet the recent IFR experience requirements specified in FAR Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) (14 CFR Sec. 61.57 (e)(1)(i)). You also asked if an instrument approach "counts" if only part of the approach is conducted in actual IFR conditions. Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) states that:
No pilot may act as pilot in command under IFR, nor in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR, unless he has, within the past 6 calendar months - (i) In the case of an aircraft other than a glider, logged at least 6 hours of instrument time under actual or simulated IFR conditions, at least 3 of which were in flight in the category of aircraft involved, including at least six instrument approaches, or passed an instrument competency check in the category of aircraft involved.

For currency purposes, an instrument approach under Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) may be flown in either actual or simulated IFR conditions. Further, 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.

Third, you questioned the meaning of the phrase, "...in the vicinity of an airport...", as specified in FAR Section 91.103(a), Preflight action (14 CFR Sec. 91.103(a)). Section 91.103(a) provides that, "Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include - (a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;" We have no specific, fixed definition of "vicinity", but instead, interpret its meaning on a case-by-case basis.

Your fourth question concerns FAR Section 91.185, IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure (14 CFR Sec. 91.185). You asked at what point may a pilot begin his descent for an instrument approach if he experiences communications failure when operating under IFR. Your example assumes the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins. Section 91.185(b) provides that, "If the failure occurs in VFR conditions, or if VFR conditions are encountered after the failure, each pilot shall continue the flight under VFR and land as soon as practicable." If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if Section 91.185(b) cannot be complied with, FAR Section 91.185(c)(2) specifies that the pilot shall continue the flight at the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown: (i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received; (ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in section 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or (iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance. FAR Section 91.185(c)(3)(ii) provides, in pertinent part, that if the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins, "...proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time enroute." In sum, if the communications failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if Section 91.185(b) cannot be complied with, the pilot maintains the highest of the altitudes or flight levels specified in Section 91.185(c)(2) for the particular route segment being flown until reaching the fix from which his approach begins. After reaching this fix, he may commence his descent as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended estimated time enroute.

Fifth, you asked who is responsible for obtaining clearance through a restricted area when an aircraft is operating on an IFR clearance, and the ATC clearance assigns, "VFR conditions on top". If the aircraft is operating via a route which lies within joint-use restricted airspace, and if the restricted area is not active and has been released to the controlling agency (FAA), the ATC facility will allow the aircraft to operate in the restricted airspace without issuing specific clearance for it to do so. Conversely, if the restricted area is active and has not been released to the controlling agency (FAA), the ATC facility will issue a clearance which will ensure the aircraft avoids the restricted airspace, unless it is on an approved altitude reservation mission or has obtained its own permission to operate in the airspace and so informs the controlling facility. If the aircraft is operating via a route which lies within nonjoint-use restricted airspace, the ATC facility will issue a clearance so the aircraft will avoid the restricted airspace, unless it is on an approved altitude reservation mission or has obtained its own permission to operate in the airspace and so informs the controlling facility. These procedures are set forth in the Airman's Information Manual, paragraph 3-43.

Finally, you asked when a pilot can leave a fix, from which an approach begins, to commence his approach, if he is operating under IFR on a tower enroute clearance and experiences two-way radio communications failure. The procedures specified in FAR Section 91.185 (14 CFR Sec. 91.185) apply when operating under IFR on a tower enroute clearance. Section 91.185(c)(3)(i) provides that, "When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if one has not been received, as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time enroute."

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require any further information in this regard.

Sincerely,


Donald P. Byrne
Assistant Chief Counsel

 

[RichardRambone]

So if you're shooting an ILS and you break out 400 feet above the DH but keep flying the ILS to minimums then it counts as an approach?

 

[Doozer]

Yes -- and I really don't mean to be condescending -- although I really can't understand why merely doing that is met with such resistance by so many people.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Well then, what if you break out at 900' and continue descending on the GP to minimums. Or what about if it it's clear and you descent on the ILS all the way to DH(A), is that logable to count for one of the 6 approaches?

If a person has to fly approaches in actual to minumums to count then no one will be able to stay current unless they fly in very low weather (part 91) all the time and miss the approach often. In reality, a 121/135 pilot rarely make a missed approach because they need landing minimums to pass the FAF.

Of course, who says that any pilot must indicate the weather conditions for the approach anyway?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Here. Try this. It's my FAQ on the subject. No answers but it pretty much sets out the issues and the various positions with references. See if it helps or makes things worse:

http://www.midlifeflight.com/faq/faq.php?s=5#13

 

[Doozer]

I didn't write the legal interpretation; however, it is a legal interpretation. Having said that, in my opinion, here's the most relevant part:

For currency purposes, an instrument approach under Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) may be flown in either actual or simulated IFR conditions. Further, 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.

If you've got a copilot, what's wrong with the flying pilot staying on the gauges until MDA/DA? The interpretation says "actual or simulated IFR conditions." If you do that, you've complied with what's in the interpretation. If you're uncomfortable transitioning from the gauges to visual for landing at DA, brief it so the copilot will land the aircraft. If you're single pilot IFR and your judgment tells you it's dumb to fly on the gauges in VMC to mins, you've acted in the interest of safety -- and you've complied with the interpretation.

If your Ops Manual prohibits going all the way to MDA/DH -- or swapping controls at DA -- it's likely for safety reasons. There again, you've complied with the interpretation and can log the approach.

Just the other day, I was on a GPS 05 to some podunk airfield. A Lear called taxiing to 23 for departure. We took the approach to slightly past the FAF and broke it off (for safety reasons) when my safety pilot saw the aircraft taxi onto 23. I didn't go to mins, but I did meet the criteria for counting the approach in the interpretation.

For safety-conscious pilots, I just don't think it's that hard to find a way to comply with the interpretation.

 

[nosehair]

If a person has to fly approaches in actual to minumums to count then no one will be able to stay current unless they fly in very low weather (part 91) all the time and miss the approach often.

Why does everyone have the mindset that these approaches must be accomplished while "working"? I have always assumed that the required approaches for currency (which implies proficiency) would always be to minimums - just as you do in initial training. Don't you always do landings to the touchdown? It's the last 500 feet or so of the instrument approach that we need to stay in practice on.
Why is there such an outcry at having to stay proficient on the last 500 feet of the instrument approach?

You guys just don't want to put a hood on.

 

[CJCCapt]

So if you're shooting an ILS and you break out 400 feet above the DH but keep flying the ILS to minimums then it counts as an approach?

For currency purposes I would log it in class C, D, and E airspace. You are in IMC until 500' below the clouds. In class B, I wouldn't. You aren't in IMC once you are clear of clouds. The same logic (if you can call it that) applies to approaches in class G during the day.

The issue with this thinking is 61.57(g)(1) ...a person may log instrument time only for that flight time when the person operates the aircraft solely by reference to instruments... However, I think it's reasonable and expected that when the runway comes into the field of view in IMC the pilot would bring the runway into their scan.

For currency purposes, an instrument approach under Section 61.57(e)(1)(i) may be flown in either actual or simulated IFR conditions. Further, 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.

Thanks Dozer for that info. My POI has said the same thing.