PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AOPA and IAOPA clarrify their position on the IR and IMCr
Old 17th November 2009 | 11:37
  #40 (permalink)  
mm_flynn
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
From: Surrey
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
Bookworm

How do you rationalise the lesser training requirments of the IMCr with its excellent safety record? In other words what is the magic that seems to keep these pilots safe without their having done a full IR?
The IMC rating, as currently constructed has a number, of features you would expect to help with the low number of accidents.
  1. The CAA, many instructors and others have advocated the IMCr as a 'get you home' rating.
  2. It has a minimum visibility requirement for landing and takeoff that means you need to be ICAO Class G VMC after you breakout of the clouds
  3. The CAA recommend significantly higher minima than the system minima
  4. The nature of UK airspace restricts the operating envelop in most parts of the country to be low altitude, making knowledge of higher altitude operating procedures and weather phenomenon less relevant.
  5. The geographic restrictions
    • make understanding procedures in the general sense (vs. UK specific procedures) irrelevant.
    • restrict typical weather phenomenon to temperate maritime
    • provide a generally benign and consistent geographic environment

The first three points are likely to have reduced the number of 'challenging' IFR operations to a very small number vs. IR holders. It is likely that the small number of 'Active' [as in using their approach capability for below Class G VMC operations) IMCr pilots helps signficantly to keep the accident statistics down (think Concord moving from safest to least safe aircraft in the world in the course of 15 minutes). To my knowledge, there is no data on relative exposure of IR pilots and IMCr pilots, so it is difficult to make a statement about the relative safety.

The geographic restriction and de facto altitude limitations, I think significantly reduces the relevant theoretical knowledge.

This is offset by a more 'complex' MSA planning requirement in that one must actually look in detail at the charts for obstructions and terrain as you can not use published MEAs and MORAs. However, in most areas of the UK this is offset by the generally consistent elevation (and may be part of the reason for the relative frequency of Southern based pilots collecting granite North of the boarder.

Last edited by mm_flynn; 17th November 2009 at 11:48.
mm_flynn is offline  
Reply