IMC/ IR what's the difference????

[jam123]

Can someone be kind enough to tell me the difference between the IMC rating and the IR rating? is the IR much more difficult and is there much more to learn or is it simply a difference on minimas.

If you pass the IMC is it straight forward to pass the IR as well?


thanks

Jam

[-IBLB-]

The IMC rating, is basically a "instrument rating-light" there is a little less you have to do for it, and the hour requirement is less. In return among other things, the minimums are higher.

It is a UK rating, and only valid in the UK

The IMC rating is not an instrument rating and, originally intended for getting people out of trouble when they get stuck, should not be used as such.

If you are planning on doing your instrument rating, getting the IMC rating first won't give you an advantage really.

[scubawasp]

Except it would be the cheapest actual instrument instruction that you would get!

[jam123]

thanks for the replies,

Another point, the Trevor Thom book's of which i think series 6 is for instrument flying, would that be geared for the IMC or for the IR?

how much more is there in the IR than the IMC with regards to Radio navigation. I am reading through this book and i cant seem to think what more there is in the IR than what's covered in the book e.g. NDB's, VOR's, approaches, SID, STAR's, ILS etc etc???

anyone know?


cheers

[-IBLB-]

Except it would be the cheapest actual instrument instruction that you would get!

Is that bit of money worth killing yourself for? Like i said, the IMC rating was meant to get you out of trouble, not in trouble.

A normal instrument rating course is about 45-50 hours. What makes people think they can do the same after 15 hours? Because the simple fact is, they can't, and they should not.

I've trained people for the IMC, and they have passed their checkrides, but i don't believe in the rating for the simple fact that too many people use it as an instrument rating. Besides the UK, there are not alot of other countries who (still) have one. (I would say none, but i am not sure about that). I imagine that is for a reason.

People who get the IMC rating, to use it as an instrument rating are, to my opinion, not fit to have that rating to begin with.

[englishal]

I've got an IMC which I use like an IR.....And I never even sat an IMC exam nor took a flight test :O Am I fit to hold the rating?

[BEagle]

About the only extra in the IR is airways navigation. The IMC Rating does not entitle you to fly airways or in IMC in Class A airspace - although in VMC, SVFR is permissible with the relevant clearance in, for example, Class A CTRs. But not for en-route airways flying.

For the IR, you will probably spend hours and hours grinding round the NDB hold - this seems an obsession of most FTOs!

The main problem is that you will need to pass much more stringent CAA exams, many of which have precious little to do with Instrument Flying. You will need to sit them at a regional test centre, do your flying training at a FTO and take the IR Skill Test with a CAA Staff Examiner - plus the CAA still use the IR Skill Test as the final filter for commercial flying suitability, rather than as an assessment of safe IF skills as the military do. Whereas for the IMC Rating you can do everything at a RF and take the test with a suitably qualified PPL/FE.

There is some light at the end of the tunnel though. AOPA started an initiative to have the JAR-FCL IR(A) brought closer to ICAO requirements and to have the theoretical knowledge requirements eased.

Few aircraft used for the IMC Rating Test have the luxury of RMIs or stable gyro compasses, so the specific handling skills are different to those needed for the IR. Battling with a crosswind NDB approach in a less-than-young Cherokee with a primitive ADF and fixed card RBI with only a DI for guidance is a lot more difficult than just towing the tail of a RMI whilst referring to a nice accurate HSI....

The IMC Rating is often denigrated by self-important IR holders who have never held an IMC rating. It is an extremely useful rating and should not be thought of as merely a 'get me out of this' rating!

[wobble2plank]

I go my IR in 15 hours??? Is that bad :}

[bfato]

I've always imagined the difference in standards required between an IMC and an IR as akin to the difference required between a PPL and a CPL.

At one level you need to be safe and competent, at the other safe, competent and professional.

Fair assessment?

[BEagle]

No.



In a word.

There's another word for anyone who isn't professional in IMC....



....dead.

[FlyingForFun]

BEagle,

Although I know what you mean, I also know what bfato means, and I think you are both right in your own way.

For example, when "grinding round the NDB hold", the IR pilot will be looking to see if the gate is coming in at the correct rate, assessing his position and altering it if necessary; checking the needle is leading him onto his inbound track correctly during the inbound turn; checking his stopwatch and adjusting the timing if it's not spot on. This is a very professional attitude to flying a hold (albeit that "professional", or commercial, pilots rarely grind around the hold, and if they do they often have an autopilot to do it for them).

An IMC-rated pilot, on the other hand, might fly his planned outbound heading for his planned time, turn inbound and make some corrections to get back on track. If his planned headings and times are grossly wrong he might adjust them. He will hold his altitude accurately, and his track will keep him well within the protected area for the hold. So although his approach to the hold might not be quite so "professional", he is most certainly not dead!

I think maybe a better summary is that the Instrument Rated pilot is taught skills which enable him to operate the aircraft in a more thoroughly professional method. But both pilots will use the skills and methods which they have been taught in a totally professional manner in order to avoid being dead.

Now..... discuss!!!

FFF
----------------

[englishal]

So IR boys and girls do "pretty holds" and IMC pilots do "functional holds" both of which do the same job.......and at the end of the day it doesn't matter because a "professional pilot" will have his FMS fly it for him anyway ;)

Guess thats why they charge more for IR training over IMC training (never worked that one out):ok:

[BEagle]

An NDB is a non-precision navigational aid. There is a requirement to make 'due allowance' to compensate for the effects of head/tail and crosswind effects when in the hold. And that is all there is to it.

But all the crap about 'gates' etc is something dreamed up by some who relish the idea of turning something very basic into something unnecessarily complicated. Usually FTO IR instructors on the edge of senility who last flew a real aeroplane in the days of Viscounts.

"...checking the needle is leading him onto his inbound track correctly during the inbound turn"? I was always advised to believe my calculations and not to pre-empt the ADF indications during turns due to the effects of dip.......

[wbryce]

If you are planning on doing your instrument rating, getting the IMC rating first won't give you an advantage really.

It all depends on what you mean by advantage! I believe the IMC rating will help as it gives the candidate insight and experience on instruments and in return it knocks 5 hours of your IR minimum training hours.

will

[jam123]

thanks all for your replies.

I am nowhere near either rating. However, as i have been reading this book, i was a bit confused as to how much more there is in the IR rating. I mean apart from IR test being flown in Class A and along airways, surely there can't be that much more in the IR syllabus than in the the IMC???

[LFS]

wbryce, the IMC does NOT knock 5 hours off the IR course, the CPL does.

[wbryce]

blah argg! grrr..

Thanks for informing me of my error! :ok:

[wobble2plank]

Sure I'll get corrected if wrong but the IMC does not allow flight within airways, and this is a big point especially if flying anywhere near a major hub.

Oh, and having a full IR gets you 5 hours off the CPL requirements as well.

Also the MDA/MDH for an IMC is, considerably, higher than an IR

Cheers :p

[FlyingForFun]

Wobble2plank, not quite I'm afraid.the IMC does not allow flight within airwaysThat's true, but:this is a big point especially if flying anywhere near a major hubthat's not true. You can't use the IMC rating in Class A airspace, but that still allows you to get into every airport in the UK except for Heathrow, Northolt and the Channel Islands airports.Oh, and having a full IR gets you 5 hours off the CPL requirements as wellI think (and I'd have to look this up to confirm) it actually gives you 10 hours off the CPL. (Are you getting confused with doing it the other way around? Having a CPL gives you 5 hours off the IR, maybe that's where you got your 5 from?)Also the MDA/MDH for an IMC is, considerably, higher than an IRThat's true (almost, anyway). But on the other hand, if you're flying a single-engined aircraft (as most IMC-rating holders do) you wouldn't want to fly with a 200' cloudbase anyway.... what would you do if the engine quit in those conditions?

So, in conclusion, the priveleges of the IMC-rating really don't restrict the private pilot in a single-engine aircraft in any practical way beyond what he would be able to do with an instrument rating, other than that it can't be used outside the UK. But whichever rating you have, it's equally important to keep it current.

FFF
--------------

[wobble2plank]

IMHO, not being able to fly IMC in Class A airspace restricts your choice of aircraft, altitude and your routing, full stop. You wouldn't take a turbo prop low level because you can't file for an airway, think of the fuel burn!!!!

Apologies, I converted an ATPL(H) to and ATPL(A) which gave me a requirement for a 15 hour CPL(A) conversion, reduced by 5 hours when completed with a valid fixed wing IR, nominal course requirement 20, therefore 20-15=5.:p

You say that you wouldn't want to fly in a cloudbase of 200', quite correct most people wouldn't. Personally I wouldn't fly IFR if I didn't have to, nicer to see the ground! If, however, you have to get somewhere and the weather worsens drastically the the 200' MDA/MDH can help, I know I've used it (commercial requirements). If that doesn't really matter, why is it there? I think you will find that the IR is expected to be able to complete with a faster scan and tighter limitations.

I don't say that there is a two tier system, each to his own, but there has to be a differentiation between the two otherwise why do we have them. Otherwise why do I have to pay so b*****y much for my re-cats
:*

[englishal]

That's true (almost, anyway). But on the other hand, if you're flying a single-engined aircraft (as most IMC-rating holders do) you wouldn't want to fly with a 200' cloudbase anyway.... what would you do if the engine quit in those conditions?

No its not.

Now now FFF, how do you know what we may or may not want to do?;) Besides, if the engine quits at least you can't see what you're going to hit:}

BTW, I thought Manchester was Alpha? Oh and the Channel Islands are Delta :D

[jam123]

By the sounds of it in summary the only difference is that you can't fly along airways and in class A with the IMC, and the minimas are higher. Apart from that, there is very little more in the syllabus i take it?

Jam

[wobble2plank]

Correct, enjoy, good luck

It's pants flying in clouds, they're cold, wet and sometimes very bumpy.
:}

[RVR800]

The IMC rating exists because the IR is seen by many as OTT

Only circa 20 PPL/IRS a year out of 60,000 PPLs in the UK !!!!!!!

:eek:

i.e. the PPL IR take up rate is laughable......

And as Beagle points out why the IAOPA/AOPA ICAO IR proposal
is being considered

[LFS]

pressman not exactly sure what you mean. The IMC allows you to fly instrument approaches at any airfield where there is a legal instrument approach (as long as it is not in class A). The only difference to the IR is the minima for the approach.

[LFS]

but that doesn't really limit your options much in this country, as there is only Heathrow that is Class A and how many people would want to spend the money to go there.

[LFS]

in fact that is the main disadvantage a lot of PPLs who fly for business find, not being able to use the IMC in europe.

[Dude~]

Don't forget too that typically the IR is tested on a twin engine aircraft whereas the IMC is usually tested on a single. Not that flying IFR in a twin is difficult as such, but its a bit more to cope with, and in the flight test one of the approaches has to be asymmetric which can be demanding, especially in turbulence and with marginal performance on 1 engine!

Perhaps another difference is that due to the need to enter an Airway, you have to climb higher, and the descent will take slightly more planning than from lower level in a single engine.

No single part of the IR is difficult, but putting the entire thing together in a competent manner and maintaining your scan for 2 hours whilst dealing with nav, RT, engine failure, weather, icing, fuel, timing etc requires some practice.

[jjhp]

This isn't entirely germane to the question of "what is the difference?". However, I am about halfway through my IMC training. One thing is clear to me: I am a better pilot now than I was when I started. I am also convinced that the improvement in my skills, attitude and professionalism is due in large measure to the extra discipline that is imposed on me by having to aviate, navigate and communicate without visual reference to the outside world during my training. This improvement has been observed not only by myself but also by people who fly with me regularly who have commented on the greater precision with which I now fly in VMC.

However, what is also clear to me is that while the toolkit of skills I am learning for IMC is "good enough" to get me back on the ground safely, it is not going to be refined to the level where I would have comfort departing in IR minimum conditions, flying cross country in those conditions and landing on the other end in those same minimum conditions. In my mind, that is the practical difference between the IMC and the IR.

Re: the amateur vs. professional debate. I have always stuck to the basic premise: "Amateurs practice until they can get it right, Professionals practice until they can't get it wrong"

[FlyingForFun]

Jjhp,

Well done on realising the limitations of your experience. You are quite right, you will not be equiped to carry out a flight entirely in IMC, with weather at minima at either end, immediately after completing your IMC course.

But that is not because of the IMC course itself, it's because of your level of experience. After completing the course, if you chose to regularly fly in real IMC (but setting yourself minima which realistically reflect your experience), and to regularly fly approaches to minima under foggles with a safety pilot, you would no doubt soon gain the experience to be able to undertake much more challenging IFR flights - as long as you had access to a suitably equipped aircraft, of course.

FFF
-----------------

[NDB]

Have got an IMC, used it 2!!!

I kept myself current with a few approaches each month. I enjoyed my training, enjoyed the qualification even more!

From a PPL holders point of view it'll sharpen your flying, and you will wonder how you flew before you did the course! It will all start coming together after a few hours (Fly it, Point it and Talk it!)

Going through IR training now, the IMC rating has helped as i've had the practice at cockpit workload/chart prep! Also, like mentioned above, the instruments used by a IMC rating do require a bit more thought! i.e DI-HSI, RBI-RMI..

One question - Why do you need to do such aggressive unusual attitudes (UP's)? Seems like its the examiners play time 2 me!

NDB

[High Wing Drifter]

I thought the IMC was great, but I can't say it improved any fundemental aspects of my flying. If anything, my instrument flying has developed a couple of slight rough edges during my CPL since the IMC. I think this is possibly because much of my CPL instrument time was partial panel or being lobbed about the sky with great abandon.
Why do you need to do such aggressive unusual attitudes (UP's)? Seems like its the examiners play time 2 me!
Except I was almost thrown in my CPL exam because the examiners idea of an unusual attitude was wasn't terribly unusual a bit of a steeper climbing and descending turn almost. I was so used to being chucked all over the place by my instructor.