Changes to Instrument Rating Cross Country Approach Requirement

[@cfidad7005]

I did this flight with my student about a week ago, but we flew in the Socal area, where there is more variety of approaches available. I could see where this would be difficult to abide in some other parts of the country. Even so, I still opted to do a VOR, ILS, and RNAV(APV), just in case. Meets the requirements of 3 different navigation and 3 different approach types by any definition. Will probably keep doing the same. As always, thanks for the content and for helping to spread the good news.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

You can't go wrong with just doing it!

[@SuperEddietv]

The arguments on this subject have been amusing at a minimum. Thanks for the link. Good stuff.

[@rn2811]

I was lucky enough to have done one of those “non-precision” approaches as an LPV. However the DPE made me do a localizer Approach and spiced it up to making it a partial panel as well. Needless to say I passed that instrument check ride.

[@warrenstump4044]

Many thanks Todd for the continued updates!!

[@brianb5594]

Todd - Funny I asked you this question shortly after getting my Double-I. Thanks for doing this session. Always insightful and great information my brother!

[@codylucero5855]

So essentially, I could fly an ILS and a LOC approach (even though they are literally the same exact approach plate), and then a GPS LNAV and call it good, as long as I have the other requirements met such as the 250 mile requirement and the IFR flight plan, etc.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

On the cross country and the checkride, this is acceptable. The ILS uses a different navigational aid than the LOC does. Being that is also provides vertical guidance.

[@claudiom4616]

I remember while doing my IFR x-country (about a decade ago), while on my final leg, tower canceled my GPS approach and cleared me for a visual approach. My instructor said, "that's still an approach! It counts as one of your 3! Regs say 3 different approaches, it does not say the must all be instrument." I was skeptical, but the DPE said everything "Looks good" as he reviewed my logbook. I passed the checkride. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@alessio272]

DPEs typically don’t try and verify every single skill of an approach. Once they are satisfied with your first two approaches there’s no need to waste any more time.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

There has been much clarification since you did your training, In this FAA InFO, you can read all about when an IAP can be logged. www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/info/all_infos/media/2015/InFO15012.pdf

[@IzzyFlys1]

Quick question about the 250nm requirement aswell I know reg says via airways or atc directed routing , by my Interpretation that means If you were vector to a certain approach fix or your routing took you longer distance than it would have direct to the airport that counts towards the requirement is this correct?

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

That is correct, as long as the total distance exceeds 250 nm. The keyword in 61.65(d)(2) is "cross country." This is where the airplane departs an airport and lands at another. So at some point along your 250 NM route, you must have landed at another airport to satisfy the requirement. A round-robin flight would not count as you did not land at another airport.

[@IzzyFlys1]

@@ToddShellnuttCPC thank you for the clarification and I appreciate the video

[@mytech6779]

Exellent as always.

[@Wingsnbeers]

Thanks for sharing! I didn’t get the Email! 😓 Really helpful video.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

You can if you want. When you visit a page on any of the FAA's websites, look for tools under the page title. If you see a "Subscribe" link, then they offer the service for that page. Next, click on the "Subscribe" link. Then, enter your email address. www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/

[@hunterfagan6272]

I’m confused at 17:00 You said that we can use the par, but not the asr because the par is in the acs, but I don’t think the ACS lists PAR or ASR approaches. Based on the letter of interpretation, wouldn’t PAR and ASR approaches be acceptable because they are listed in FAA order 8260?

[@FlyingtheBigTireCruzer]

I have an IFR equipped Experimental I built with "Legacy free" navigation, and I have had a hard time finding any DPE who would give me a check ride in my airplane because they said, "You can't fly 3 approaches with just the GTN-625 WAAS GPS, you need an ILS and VOR". Will this interpretation help me do a check ride in my own airplane with 3 variations of GPS approaches?

[@jaimerabins7183]

I have an experimental aircraft with a Dynon Skyview and GPS 175 , thus WAAS GPS only , luckily I found an CFI and DPE that let me train and test in my aircraft for Instrument, commercial, CFI, and CFII. Unfortunately it’s up to the CFI and DPE to use your airplane they are given the discretion to decline using your aircraft.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

Unfortunately, no. The ACS states. "The evaluator will select nonprecision approaches representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids." So you would still need to conduct another type of navigation aid approach. Best bet would be to find another owner of the same model airplane as yours and do the checkride in that plane. Just my thoughts.

[@mytech6779]

Kind of of a tangent, but why would you fly IFR without any alternate NAV system? Even if you have two independent GPSS receivers there are still times and places with satellite signal outages. Maybe I'm skewed conservative by living in a land of clouds and mountains.

[@FlyingtheBigTireCruzer]

@@ToddShellnuttCPC WASS and Non WASS are considered different Navigation systems.

[@haroldlocay3946]

WAAS and non WAAS GPS are both considered GPS/one NAV aid. You can do all of your training with WAAS only including XC (that is what the memo is referring to) but for the check ride you must use TWO DIFFERENT Nav aids (GPS and another, eg. ILS or VOR). My DPE just got a letter from FAA explaining this clearly. My 2022 Bristell 915 has Garmin 375/WAAS GPS only. So for my upcoming IR Checkride I will rent a plane. PS. Apparently the IR ACS will be updated in the next year or two to allow all WAAS for Checkride. We will see.

[@Superxpninja]

Hopefully AFS decides to make the asr a non-precision approach. Imo it should be

[@matthewsmall1817]

can you mention how to register on the FAA website to receive these?

[@matthewsmall1817]

I just figured it out

[@angesfan2334]

I dont know where to ask this, but is this regulation/interp retroactive? Like if I did a flight with an ASR approach on the 250nm before this letter does it then count. Or only flights after this came out

[@mytech6779]

The regulation didn't change, only the interpretation. Beside that the reg doesn't say exactly when a the flight must occur so a previous flight of xyz would be as valid as any new flight of xyz. You could use time logged 50 years ago before the regulation existed at all, just as long as that logged flight meets the all of the current requirements. Just to be clear there is some required flight time with a limited allowable calender frame, but many[most?] of the experience requirements are without calender limits.

[@ToddShellnuttCPC]

With this LOI, you can not count the ASR until AFS should determine whether ASR should be part of a non-precision instrument approach under §1.1, and whether the use of ASR is considered a navigation system under §61.65(d)(2)(ii)(C). So we need to wait until that is clarified first.

[@Tyler-yb4mc]

I love you

[@forrestdeak351]

Idk if it's been said before but.. hear me out- This week on "In a Nutshell" with Todd shellnutt Eh? C'mon. Don't miss an opportunity!