Instrument flying hours a thing of the past?
Thread Starter
Instrument flying hours a thing of the past?
Since the Fifties, the requirement for instrument flying currency has been a minimum of three hours in the last 90 days. Similarly, when those rules were established, it laid down that only hand flying while on instruments was acceptable in order to meet the three hour requirement. Autopilot time was not to be counted.
Most of the flying in those days was in propeller aircraft and logging those minmum hours by hand was relatively easy as flights were in lower levels where there was no shortage of clouds. It was a measure of true instrument flying handling skills.
Came the jets and with them sophisticated automatics with airlines insisting that automatics were safer than flying by hand and that hand flying in IMC should be minimised unless operationally essential at the time.
Now it was more difficult to log true instrument flying in order to meet the three hours. It was made worse for job hunters when some operators required a significant number of log book I/F time before interviewing prospective applicants. RFDS for example. That was quite relevant in the propeller era but not now where jets get above the weather. Some pilots resorted to fudging their instrument flying time to get jobs. It still happens.
DCA (CASA) then bowed to airline pressure and changed the rules a little bit so that logging of the three hours could be easier. So now you can log autopilot time on instruments. There is no skill in watching the autopilot flying the aeroplane and in fact most pilots find time to chat up an FA and eat a meal while "monitoring" the autopilot. Try that single pilot in IMC and no autopilot..
The other day, an airline pilot told his first officer to "put me down for 30 minutes I/F in the records sheet" because although it was broad daylight and no cloud at 35,000 ft, the company needed to ensure that a CASA audit would show that three hours in the last 90 days would be met.
With almost 99% use of automatics in modern airline aircraft, and a marked reluctance by operators to allow hand flying IMC on instruments in big jets, there seems little point in CASA insisting on the three hours I/F in 90 days - as it is no longer a measure of currency and therefore skill. Three hours "I/F" on automatic pilot is just a laugh. The rule is ananchronistic and needs to be reviewed for relevance.
Most of the flying in those days was in propeller aircraft and logging those minmum hours by hand was relatively easy as flights were in lower levels where there was no shortage of clouds. It was a measure of true instrument flying handling skills.
Came the jets and with them sophisticated automatics with airlines insisting that automatics were safer than flying by hand and that hand flying in IMC should be minimised unless operationally essential at the time.
Now it was more difficult to log true instrument flying in order to meet the three hours. It was made worse for job hunters when some operators required a significant number of log book I/F time before interviewing prospective applicants. RFDS for example. That was quite relevant in the propeller era but not now where jets get above the weather. Some pilots resorted to fudging their instrument flying time to get jobs. It still happens.
DCA (CASA) then bowed to airline pressure and changed the rules a little bit so that logging of the three hours could be easier. So now you can log autopilot time on instruments. There is no skill in watching the autopilot flying the aeroplane and in fact most pilots find time to chat up an FA and eat a meal while "monitoring" the autopilot. Try that single pilot in IMC and no autopilot..
The other day, an airline pilot told his first officer to "put me down for 30 minutes I/F in the records sheet" because although it was broad daylight and no cloud at 35,000 ft, the company needed to ensure that a CASA audit would show that three hours in the last 90 days would be met.
With almost 99% use of automatics in modern airline aircraft, and a marked reluctance by operators to allow hand flying IMC on instruments in big jets, there seems little point in CASA insisting on the three hours I/F in 90 days - as it is no longer a measure of currency and therefore skill. Three hours "I/F" on automatic pilot is just a laugh. The rule is ananchronistic and needs to be reviewed for relevance.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't complain too much, over hear it's 6 hours/90 days. May not be that relevant for airline pilots, but sure as hell should be a bare minimum for those operating single pilot IFR in 1960s technology.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cloud Cutter - in NZ it will be 3 hrs in 90 days when the new Part 61 is released soon (2005?). NPRM out now. I agree with your remarks though.
ICAO is looking at changing the licensing structure from the current hierarchical Student - PPL - CPL - ATPL, to a "Y" shaped structure, student and PPL on the vertical stroke, then branch to either GA oriented CPL or to airline oriented ATPL.
If / when this happens, perhaps we'd end up with less currency required for jet pilots and more for bugsmasher pilots.
Course by then we'll all be flying glass cockpit machines, be they four pob or four thousand pob...
ICAO is looking at changing the licensing structure from the current hierarchical Student - PPL - CPL - ATPL, to a "Y" shaped structure, student and PPL on the vertical stroke, then branch to either GA oriented CPL or to airline oriented ATPL.
If / when this happens, perhaps we'd end up with less currency required for jet pilots and more for bugsmasher pilots.
Course by then we'll all be flying glass cockpit machines, be they four pob or four thousand pob...
