What do you log?

[aviatoreb]

What is standard practice in terms of what you log for IFR time?  I have been logging just the time in the clouds as IFR time.  So on say a 1.2 hr trip, this past Wednesday say, I launched into 2500 ft cealings after filing and taking my clearance over the phone for a cross country.  A few minutes later, I was over the tops at 6000 on my way to 15000 way over the top in clear bright sunshine.  It was solid clouds way below me almost the whole way until the last 15 min where it broke up to "few" and easy visual conditions.  But I stayed on IFR rules and positive control the whole way as I usually do when flying into busy airspace.  I was given visual approach into my destination airport KHFD.

So, as usual, 0.1hrs IFR actual in my book?  At this rate it takes some time....

Or maybe I should record all the time from start up since it was an IFR operation to pick up my ground clearance over the phone, plan my ATC assigned path to the hold at PTD near KPTD, even if still visual, before clearance to climb up and over.  That makes more like 0.3.

What if it had not been visual on destination at KHFD - What about those flights that begin in IMC, then long cross country in sunshine over the tops and then end with a decent back into the mirk and with an approach.  So do I record 0.1 time in clouds at departure only, (or 0.3) and then the whatever on decent (say 0.2 maybe).  Or do you record the whole thing, 1.2, even the part over the tops.

How about when it is down right not so nice out the whole way, turbulent, cloudy, but you manage to stay clear even if between layers for a good bit of time.  Is that clear of clouds time VFR time or IMC time?

What about those times when I file because it might be lousy, but it turns out to be just plain nice, but nonetheless I fly positive controlled IFR the whole way partly for practice and partly because I like the handling when entering busy airspace.  So I usually record 0.0 for that.  But I do that a lot.

So recording 0.1 and 0.2 at a time, it sure builds IFR time slowly.  Am I cutting myself short is this the usual way.  What do you folks do?

[danb35]

According to FAR 61.51(g), "(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."  So, if (and only if) the outside conditions are such that you're needing to fly "solely by reference to instruments", you can log that as actual instrument time.

[jetdriven]

That also applies to dark night over unlit terrain or water. 

[aviatoreb]

Quote: danb35

According to FAR 61.51(g), "(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."  So, if (and only if) the outside conditions are such that you're needing to fly "solely by reference to instruments", you can log that as actual instrument time.

[gregwatts]

If you have no reference to the horizon and are flying by instruments.........log it! You don't have to be physically in a cloud to be on instruments.

[David Mazer]

I believe Mr Gregwatts is incorrect.  VFR on top is not loggable.  Neither is really dark, moonless, VFR at night.  You can log IFR when you aren't actually in the clouds only if your separation from the clouds is less than VFR required.  A visual approach doesn't count either.  I only log the time in clouds and really close to clouds.  I have been advised that the FAA won't ding you for under-counting but will really come after you for over-counting. How important is it to log a few extra minutes anyway now that hours aren't required for currency, only approaches, holding, and course interception?

[danb35]

Quote: Mazerbase

I believe Mr Gregwatts is incorrect.  VFR on top is not loggable.  Neither is really dark, moonless, VFR at night.

[aviatoreb]

Quote: danb35

As it happens, you are (at least partially) incorrect, and are making the common error of confusing IMC with actual instrument conditions.  IMC is conditions less than VFR minimums, while actual instrument conditions are outside conditions (typically, but not always, weather conditions) such that you need to fly "solely with reference to instruments."  Though the two sound similar, they are in fact completely unrelated (similar to logging PIC vs. being PIC).

If you're 1000' laterally from the only cloud in the state, in Class E airspace, you're in IMC, and legally you have to be instrument rated, equipped, current, and on an IFR clearance.  Same thing if you're 400' under a solid overcast layer, with perfectly clear skies below.  In neither case are you required to operate solely by reference to instruments, and in neither case can you log actual instrument time.

As to actual instrument conditions, the FAA Chief Counsel has addressed that issue in legal interpretation #84-29, a letter of 7 Nov 84 to Joseph P. Carr.  From that letter: "To answer your first question, actual instrument conditions may occur in the case you described, a moonless night over the ocean with no discernible horizon, if use of the instruments is necessary to maintain adequate control over the aircraft."  In this case, there's no legal requirement for an instrument rating, currency, equipment, or clearance, though I'd go out on a limb and say you're unwise to fly in those conditions without those items.

The letter observes that the determination of whether you need instruments for control is somewhat subjective, and that the final determination is up to the pilot.  But it definitely leaves the door open to other similar scenarios.  I wouldn't (personally) consider flying well over a cloud layer, with clear skies above, to be "actual", but a moonless night over the desert could be.  What about if you're in between two layers?

[aviatoreb]

Quote: Mazerbase

I believe Mr Gregwatts is incorrect.  VFR on top is not loggable.  Neither is really dark, moonless, VFR at night.  You can log IFR when you aren't actually in the clouds only if your separation from the clouds is less than VFR required.  A visual approach doesn't count either.  I only log the time in clouds and really close to clouds.  I have been advised that the FAA won't ding you for under-counting but will really come after you for over-counting. How important is it to log a few extra minutes anyway now that hours aren't required for currency, only approaches, holding, and course interception?

[gregwatts]

Quote: Mazerbase

I believe Mr Gregwatts is incorrect. VFR on top is not loggable. Neither is really dark, moonless, VFR at night. You can log IFR when you aren't actually in the clouds only if your separation from the clouds is less than VFR required. A visual approach doesn't count either. I only log the time in clouds and really close to clouds. I have been advised that the FAA won't ding you for under-counting but will really come after you for over-counting. How important is it to log a few extra minutes anyway now that hours aren't required for currency, only approaches, holding, and course interception?

[David Mazer]

As Mr Brown notes, the letter of the regulation and the interpretation in practice are often different.  I haven't read 84-29 but have read 61.51.  Thanks for the reference.

[M016576]

If you really want to build up the instrument time, fly on dark, moonless nights over the ocean (or other large body of water).  Not saying it's the lowest risk solution, but it will get you some hours!

[jlunseth]

As noted by many, IFR and IMC are definitely different,

[M20F]

Quote: aviatoreb

So recording 0.1 and 0.2 at a time, it sure builds IFR time slowly.  Am I cutting myself short is this the usual way.  What do you folks do?

[danb35]

Quote: Mazerbase

As Mr Brown notes, the letter of the regulation and the interpretation in practice are often different.  I haven't read 84-29 but have read 61.51.  Thanks for the reference.

[M016576]

I've had this discussion before with some of my co-workers (is it legal to log instrument time on dark nights over the ocean, near clouds, but not in them, etc, etc).  The debates can get surprisingly heated! 

My personal opinion on this is probably the same as most in here:  that hours alone are not a true measure of skill/proficiency... more just an indicator of potential experience.  I like M20F's conclusions- focus on what brings you experience, what keeps you safe, and make silent note of the hours.  If you keep flying and stay current, they will pile up eventually!

[danb35]

I've seen discussions on the subject get pretty heated too, and there's really no need for it.  The rule is pretty simple, and has been clear for 27 years, even if its application is necessarily somewhat subjective--if (and only if) you need to use the instruments to keep the plane under control due to outside conditions, you can log the time during which that is the case as actual instrument time.

I think the confusion stems from the FAA using very similar terms to describe very different things.  In this case, you have IFR, IMC, and "actual instrument conditions".  The terms are similar enough to be confused, but they mean very different things--and if you start to thing that actual instrument conditions and IMC mean the same thing, you're going to get confused in a hurry.  Unfortunately, the FAA seems to enjoy doing that; another example is logging PIC vs. acting as PIC.  It really isn't difficult to understand, as long as you can remember that even though they sound like the same thing, they're actually completely different.

[Immelman]

Sounds like 0.1 to me. I do a lot of the same. Here out west, without a known-ice airplane, most of my IMC comes in very short increments like that.

Last night I was returning home and flew about 2 hours at night. The little sliver of moon didn't illuminate the horizon, and there was a lot of high cirrus that blocked out the stars after all light was gone - so even though there were city lights and roads here and there there was no horizon; I had to use my instruments to maintain straight and level (though it was still a lot easier than being in cloud). I went ahead and decided to log 1 hour IMC because that's just what it was... no way to maintain straight and level flight without resorting to my scan.