IMC Rating in USA [Archive]

P1 Forever

16th Apr 2006, 08:56

Good Morning,

I may go hour building in the states sometime in the near future and was considering doing an IMC rating when I am over there.

My question is, if I can do the course for the rating in the US then will I be able to use it when hour building over there? For instance flying IFR instead of VFR and flying into cloud.

I am a little unclear as I know it's a UK rating but if you can do the course in the states then surely you can use it for hour building I would have thought.

Thanks for your help.

mcgoo

16th Apr 2006, 10:14

i'm not 100% but I would have thought that being a UK rating it would only apply in UK airspace!

drauk

16th Apr 2006, 11:33

No you can't.

FlyingForFun

16th Apr 2006, 18:46

Two points:

1) According to the CAA, the IMC rating is only valid in the UK

2) Assuming you are flying an N-registered aircraft in the US, you will need to do so on an FAA license. Even if your FAA license is based on your JAR license, it will not contain an IMC rating.

So - No.

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

IO540

16th Apr 2006, 19:05

According to the CAA, the IMC rating is only valid in the UK

Oh no not that one again, and I see DFC is spreading the same stuff on the other thread.

The IFR privileges of the IMCR are limited to the UK, in the ANO.

But the IMCR does something else too, unrelated to the IFR privileges. It removes the "in sight of surface" requirement of a UK issued PPL, and this removal is valid worldwide.

Having said that, none of this is any good in US airspace, flying an N-reg. For that he needs an FAA PPL, and needs an FAA IR to fly IFR.

Dr Eckener

16th Apr 2006, 19:21

I think it is great that you can do a rating in one country that is only valid in a different one! From my experience US IMC rated pilots tend to be of a poorer standard then UK ones, mainly because of the lack of NDB's over there.

englishal

16th Apr 2006, 22:40

Who needs NDBs when you have GPS;)

flyboyike

16th Apr 2006, 23:56

From my experience US IMC rated pilots tend to be of a poorer standard then UK ones, mainly because of the lack of NDB's over there.

There is no shortage of NDBs over here. Even if there were, why is that a determinant of any "standard" other than NDB currency?

Leclairage

17th Apr 2006, 05:48

IO540

17th Apr 2006, 08:54

There are 3 things that matter in instrument flying

currency on type
currency on type
currency on type

:O

So it doesn't matter where you got the piece of paper that allows you to fly in clouds legally.

The majority of private IR pilots in Europe got their piece of paper in the USA. Many of those fly 300+ hours/year.

I did my IR in the USA and it was bl**dy hard work, the hardest flying by far I've ever done and far harder than UK IMCR training was.

But, if you do 20hrs/year and rent a different spamcan (with mostly duff avionics) each time, it doesn't really matter where you got the piece of paper.

And yes there is a strong implication here of

currency on type = aircraft ownership

or at least sorting out good access to something suitable. Most people are never told by the school (which took £3000 off them for the IMC Rating) that actually..... the planes they can rent are not much good for the job.

Leclairage

17th Apr 2006, 09:11

I think I was trying to broaden the thread from IMC to ALL licences and ratings earned in US and used in UK, and I stand by the sentiments expressed. Perhaps I should have started a new thread!
There is, of course, no comparison between a UK IMC and a US IR - they are completely different beasts - one is intended for us amateurs, the other a qualification for professionals. I would enjoy the challenge of a US IR but dont fly an N reg, or have the time/money to achieve the rating.
I dream of flying 300 hours a year! As do most others, I believe......

One point I share your view on competely - the IFR ill-equipped kites that flying club aircraft offer having taken our IMC money. Often a disgrace.

IO540

17th Apr 2006, 10:02

OK, but I think currency is important in VMC too.

So, a year or more after you got your PPL, it doesn't matter where you got it. What matters is how many hours you clock up and doing what where.

If you save £3000 doing a JAA (or FAA) PPL in the USA and then spend the extra £3000 flying around the UK (about 30hrs in a rented spamcan) that's a lot of flying! It's about 18 months' flying, based on what I believe is a UK PPL's average annual time. Most people who get a PPL chuck in flying for good even before reaching 30 hours.

That said, going to the USA isn't for everybody. I could have never done a PPL out there - could not get 4-6 weeks off work, and it certainly won't be a holiday!

Leclairage

17th Apr 2006, 10:09

Quite agree. Currency in all matters !

tmmorris

17th Apr 2006, 11:47

Most people are never told by the school (which took £3000 off them for the IMC Rating) that actually..... the planes they can rent are not much good for the job.

So true. The nameless school where I did my IMCR brought a nicely-equipped Warrior down from another base for me to do my course, then took it back again afterwards. Perhaps a coincidence, but very frustrating as I had learned on a properly-equipped ac and was left with one which was barely able to do an NDB approach outside CAS with the outbound leg timed..!

Tim

fly_sd

17th Apr 2006, 22:29

Whilst training in US for UK license and ratings may be cheaper (and probably lots more fun!) than doing it in UK I have always held the view that it is better (safer?) to learn and have the benefit of instructor time in the weather conditions and airspace that one is actually going to fly in.
Since qualifying I have enjoyed balmy flying in US with barely no one else in the sky too, but am glad that I learned and qualified in the congested/restricted/crap weather skies of the South East where I do a lot of my day-to-day flying.
Anyone else have views?

My 2c - the US is a big country and congestion, weather and airspace really varies depending on where you fly. The airspace around here is pretty congested and the airport that I fly out of can get pretty busy to the point of getting difficult get the call in to the tower when inbound. The pacific northwest has the reputation of having weather quite similar to the UK - overcast, rain etc. So it really depending where you have been. Not saying it is harder or more complex than the UK as I've never flown there - jus pointing out that it is not the same wherever you go here.

P1 Forever

17th Apr 2006, 23:13

Thanks for the feedback guys.
Sorry to drag this on but couldn't you fly into clouds IFR in an N-reg aircraft in the US even although you had a JAA CPL/IR ATPL.
I guess the point here is that it's an N-reg plane. Obviously it's ok flying IFR on a G-reg BA boeing777 in the US.
Cheers!

Leclairage

18th Apr 2006, 05:55

172driver

18th Apr 2006, 07:35

Good point fly sd and I stand corrected.
I guess the people I had in mind are the many who seem go over to Florida to do it at certain times of year to schools affiliated with the UK. They come back praising clear, uncluttered skies, perfect weather, etc. etc. i.e. their whole learning experience is based on conditions inapropriate to, say the South East of England.

I think it all boils down to what an instructor told me before I got my ticket. I enquired where best to go and his reply was 'Do you want to get a ticket or do you want to learn to fly ?' I wanted to learn to fly and did not go to FL or AZ. Went to LA instead: beautifully congested airspace (try getting a word in sideways with SOCAL....), mountains, all kind of weather rolling in from the Pacific (this was Spring), haze - you name it. Indeed, the US is vast enough to cater to all sort of environments. Thou maketh thy choices......

slim_slag

18th Apr 2006, 08:43

Your average freshly minted private pilot is barely competent enough to take passengers to the local area where they learned how to fly. So if you learn in the LA Basin you get the heebie jeebies when you have to fly into an uncontrolled field without radar service, if you learn in the boondocks you get all hot and bothered if you have to fly to a towered field and talk to a controller on the radio. The only thing I'd say about about the SE of England is the airspace is poorly designed, there isn't the ATC infrastructure to provide much of a service to small planes, and you have to pay to do anything. Nothing special about it really. It's nowhere near as busy as loads of places in the US, and busier than quite a few. as 172driver says, the US is a big place. Who really cares?

Sorry to drag this on but couldn't you fly into clouds IFR in an N-reg aircraft in the US even although you had a JAA CPL/IR ATPL.No. You need to get an FAA 'issued' IR. The FAA make it very easy, you need to take the foreign pilot instrument test, take your pass sheet to a FSDO and they will give you a N-reg legal IR based upon your JAA IR. You could have your temporary IR in your hands and be IR legal before lunch on the same day.

As an aside. The pass rate for the non US trained pilot instrument test is lower than the pass rate for the US trained pilot instrument test. But again, who cares?

172driver

18th Apr 2006, 08:51

So if you learn in the LA Basin you get the heebie jeebies when you have to fly into an uncontrolled field without radar service, if you learn in the boondocks you get all hot and bothered if you have to fly to a towered field and talk to a controller on the radio.

Well, to a degree you're right. The difference is if you train in busy airspace you can (and do - I certainly did) go to small non-towered fields and get acquainted with this type of situation. Hardly an option the other way round, certainly not in the UK :ugh:

The only thing I'd say about about the SE of England is the airspace is poorly designed, there isn't the ATC infrastructure to provide much of a service to small planes, and you have to pay to do anything.

Absulotely agree.