PPL (A) With (IR)

[eugegall]

Hi all,

I have just a PPL. I’m 22 and passed in march on 46 hours INC my night rating. I have no desire to become an airline pilot nor do I have to any desire to become an instructor.

I own a warrior PA28-161 and since I have passed I’m now on 125 hours. I have done 7 trips to 3 different airfields in France and I have also been to the channel islands twice. Also two weeks ago I flew to Carlisle from Fairoaks which inc Heathrow SVFR and two zone transits over major airfields each way.

My point is.... I’m getting bored now! Not so much bored but id like to move on to bigger and faster aircraft.

Is it worth me getting my IR? I don’t want an IMC as I understand the future for it is bleak?

Any advice would be welcomed?

[what next]

Hello!

I’m getting bored now!

If you want to avoid boredom, IFR flying is probably not the right thing to do... straight and level along predefined routes all the time. And all the clouds in the world look exactly the same from inside (with the exception of some CBs maybe).
Learing to fly IFR is certainly demanding, but once you have mastered the thing, it really hasen't much to offer, anti-boredom-vise! (Even instructing IFR is boring most of the time, but it pays better.)

Greetings, Max

[BackPacker]

Ever tried aerobatics?

You need to move to a smaller aircraft instead of bigger, while keeping the power at least equal to what you've got now, but it can be great fun. Particularly if you've got a goal to work towards, e.g. competition aerobatics.

[stickandrudderman]

The IR would only really come in handy if you've got somewhere on the continent to go to regularly.
You're only 22 and already own an aircraft, so I'm guessing that a family or friend's home in Switzerland , Spain, Southern France, Italy etc might be common destinations, in which case it'll be very useful to have IR.
Or perhaps regular business trips to these places might feature in your future?
Otherwise, aerobatics might well be the next step for you young man....

[IO540]

If you have a decent IFR-capable and airways equipped plane, have the ample time to do the JAA PPL/IR, and want to go places seriously, then get the IR. It transforms European touring capability, reducing the random-planned trip cancellation rate from about 75% for pure VFR to about 25%, and this is reduced further if you have de-ice, radar, a decent operating ceiling (say 25,000ft), etc.

[tuscan]

Go for aeros if your bored:} Your young, theres plenty of time for touring.

You could also go to Como and do an amphibious course and go tearing round the alps hitting land and water options.

A lot will depend on your budget. If you are lucky enough not to have any concerns here then why not do both.

Money aside, the only limit is your imagination.:ok:

[PlasticPilot]

I'm a fan of IR, so I won't discourage you. But you can also try many other things:

Training for complex endorsement
Tailwheel
AerobaticsOr fly to other destinations: why not go more to the south, and fly in the Alps. Flying with other pilot is also a great help to fight boredom (and reduce costs...).

Hope this helps.

Try something else - Fighting boredom | Plastic Pilot (http://www.plasticpilot.net/blog/2008/08/29/try-something-else-fighting-boredom/)

[eugegall]

Thanks so far guys! Maybe i should have been a little clearer.

Within the next 18 months or so i will be buying a new aircraft. either a brand new:

-Piper meridian
-TBM 850 (not new)

Or any other fast single.

with this i would like to tour europ. now do you think the IR is a good idea?

regards

[BackPacker]

Definitely.

Although it surprises me that someone who is 22, had "only" 125 hours experience, would already know exactly his flying habits and invest in those kinds of planes. There must be more to your story.


(Or maybe it's just envy...)

[eugegall]

lol Maybe so!

However it is an ambition and i intent to live it! Ok next! How does the IR work? theory exams? How many? ect ect

thanks again

[Ultranomad]

eugegall, with all due respect, if you are really getting bored, are you sure flying is the right thing for you? i'm not trying to moralise, there is in fact an objective problem here: more often than not, a bored person will either start deliberately taking ever-increasing risks, or gradually lose the sense of curiosity, which really amounts to a loss of lookout. some talented people manage to do both at once. the outcome is often fatal. having been in a very similar situation myself, i am not trying to dissuade you from flying, but in your situation, the best course you can take now is not IR but flight safety and risk management.

[Keef]

As an old lag who did the IMCR, and an (FAA) IR, I would say "What are your ambitions?" What would stimulate you?

Drilling holes in clouds can get very boring very quickly. As someone said, the inside of one cloud looks very like the inside of another. But - with the IR you can fly through the clag over "home airfield", and off into the bright sunlight of somewhere else. I've done that many times. If it's hissing down with rain at home and at proposed destination, I usually don't bother to go.

If seeing the world is your thing, sightseeing from aircraft, and visiting places, can be brilliant. For me, flying over the Grand Canyon, and around Arizona and California, landing at Sedona and the like, is fantastic. I remember landing at Palm Springs, wife and me deciding it was too hot (35 degrees C), so we took off again, and landed at Big Bear City, 8000-ish feet up in the mountains, where it was around 20 C.

I've had as much fun in a taildragger landing in fields on Exmoor. It's a different sort of fun. I'd do both, but certainly don't see a high-tech glass cockpit as the ultimate flying machine. I fly an old Arrow, and that is ideal for 90% of the time.

[whirlwind]

Sounds to me as if you should try rotating wings for a complete change! Much more versatile...

Or go open cockpit for some seat of the pants stuff - you won't get bored in a Tiger Moth in a crosswind!

Cheers,
WW

[UncleNobby]

Instrument flying is some of the most demanding and rewarding you can do. If you are getting the type of equip you mention above (MSFS maybe?!!) then it's a waste flying that around without an IR.

[Fright Level]

remember landing at Palm Springs, wife and me deciding it was too hot (35 degrees C), so we took off again, and landed at Big Bear City, 8000-ish feet up in the mountains, where it was around 20 C

I did just this a couple of months ago. Left Torrance where it was 22 degrees, landed at Big Bear for breakfast where it was 8 degrees then round to Palm Springs where it was 43 degrees! All in less than three hours flying at 100kts.

[jamestkirk]

An IR is only good if you stay current. I fly a glass cockpit aircraft and I think I would have trouble trying to IMC a Seneca etc. into somewhere on raw data.

Although, its great you are considering building your skills and of course then you could fly in class A airspace (SVFR taken into account).

[Ian_Wannabe]

You should do what Ive always wanted..... Safari flying in SA.

Sounds like you have the money!

(Totally irrelevant post I know, just jealous....)

[englishal]

Lets be practical about this.......

To be frank, you wouldn't get insurance on a TBM850 without an IR and with your number of hours - (in JARLand a Type Rating). You would need to employ a pilot to fly your TBM850 and you could sit in the right seat, but the time wouldn't count unless they were an instructor. In that case you wouldn't need an IR. Why not just charter the plane when you need, and sit in the back drinking Gin and Tonic?

Not surprised you're bored with the PA28 - 161 - it is a boring aeroplane (no offence ;)) Get something with a bit more power (250HP) , a bit faster (150+ kts) and build your experience. When you have 1000 hrs and an IR then get your TBM850, or VLJ.

[tuscan]

However it is an ambition and i intent to live it! Ok next! How does the IR work? theory exams? How many? ect ect


I am surprised that someone who already owns their own aircraft with your ambition and resources asks such a question here:confused:.

[Cusco]

I remember landing at Palm Springs, wife and me deciding it was too hot (35 degrees C), so we took off again, and landed at Big Bear City, 8000-ish feet up in the mountains, where it was around 20 C.

So I'm your wife now, am I Keef!

M might have a view on that..................

Cusco.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Cusco]

Thanks so far guys! Maybe i should have been a little clearer.

Within the next 18 months or so i will be buying a new aircraft. either a brand new:

-Piper meridian
-TBM 850 (not new)

Or any other fast single.

with this i would like to tour europ. now do you think the IR is a good idea?

regards
eugegall is offline Report Post Reply

If you are kosher then yes , do it:

It involves 7 exams (as opposed to ATPL 14) and circa 55 hours flight training, much of which can be done in a FNPT 2 simulator.

If you're keen enough you can go to CAA/FCL website and get the full details yourself...

Cusco

[Lost man standing]

To actally answer the question, it is quite an involved process.

There are I think 7 exams. It will probably take at least 3-4 months of quite intense study to complete part time, with a couple of weeks full time before the exams. Last I heard GTS in Bournemouth was a very good company to guide you through that process. Then there is a 55-hour flying course. I would actually recommend that you complete the MEP first (6 hours and a test in a multi) and fly the IR in a twin. With the resources I presume you have then at some point you might decide that a twin is more appropriate to your needs, and an MEIR is valid on a single or a multi.

IO540 is being pesimistic. With an IR, if you keep in practice, you will find that in Europe you will get in more than 95% of the time into airfields with published instrument approaches. Also a great help to get into a visual-only airfield in marginal conditions to have another plan.

[BackPacker]

I've always been told that if you decide to either do the IR or the CPL, you might as well bite the bullet and do all the ATPL theory exams.

The ATPL theory exams cover just about everything mankind knows about fixed wing flight. IR theory, CPL theory but also things like high-performance, high-altitude, turbine operations and a few other bits and pieces that you might need to operate aircraft such as a Piper Meridian or TBM850.

So with your ATPL theory in your pocket there's only a few scenarios in which you would need to do another theory exam ever again. (Switching to rotary would be the only one I could think of, or getting a typerating.) But with just IR theory in your pocket you'll probably find that in a few years time you're going to do something which requires you to hit the books again. And again for something else a few years after that.

The cost difference between an IR course and exams vs. an ATPL course and exams is negligible if you're thinking about buying a second-hand TBM850. Question is: do you want to invest the additional time?

[Cusco]

If you read eugegall's post again you'll see he has no wish to be an airline pilot or instructor so what's the point of encouraging him to do the ATPLs, or even CPL for that matter.

Maybe he just wants to be a PPL/IR.

You can do the 7 IR exams in four months: (I did - some have done it in less) by distance learning with 'brush up ' groundschool days at weekends if you choose the right establishment.................

That's what I and a large number of fellow PPLs have done over the last 10 months.

Can't comment on the twin versus single notion and as eugegalls seems 'comfortable' then the significant extra expense of an IR in a twin won't be a problem.

I don't propose to get embroiled in the 'do the IMC, you won't regret it' or the 'go to USA and do the FAA/IR' arguments they've been done to death elsewhere.

Cusco;)

[Lost man standing]

Backpacker

For someone who never intends to be a professional pilot or to instruct the IR and HPA courses are far less effort than the ATPL!

[IO540]

There are many factors that go into the go/no-go decision under IFR. I mentioned a few. But I think it would simply result in another interminable thread, trying to answer a question which was never posed.

There is a strategy for the JAA IR which is to revise a bit, sit all the 7 exams in one go (over a day or two), and then revise properly for those which one fails. However, this works only for experienced pilots who already know about flying and IFR e.g. FAA IR holders. A totally ab initio pilot is going to have to swat for months and months, and anyway he will have the mandatory classroom attendance.

This is why the FAA IR / N-reg route is attractive. Many many pilots have followed this. You start with a UK PPL, IMC Rating, buy a plane, do a lot of IFR flying and get good, then go to the USA and do the FAA IR (and a standalone FAA PPL) in something like 2 weeks and 20-25hrs of flying under the hood.

Advantages of this route is that you can do the IMCR at the same old school near to where you live, and you get immediate (UK only) IFR rights which allow you to fly IFR, and to fly VMC on top into Europe (a key privilege for practical VFR touring). And when you do the FAA IR you get full credit for all IMCR training.

Whereas the JAA IR gives you zero credit for any previous training - unless you have an ICAO (e.g. FAA) IR in which case the 50/55 hrs min flying time reduces to 15hrs and the mandatory classroom attendance goes away.

The current EASA cage-rattling makes the FAA route more uncertain but as an overall route to the JAA IR it remains completely valid, due to the massive training credits

- IMCR training counts towards the FAA IR, and

- the FAA IR reduces the JAA IR min training time from 50/55 (SE/ME) to 15hrs

- the mandatory classroom on the JAA IR is eliminated

and obviously one would move to the JAA IR only when (if) EASA really is going to shaft foreign licensed pilots. The earliest likely date seems to be 2012.

The downside of the FAA route is that an N-reg plane is needed to get the worldwide IFR privileges. This has advantages though, in various respects.

Training in the USA is also much cheaper. My IR over there cost me about $3000, for ~ 25hrs. Plus another $1500 for the motel and flights. Considering the JAA IR gives no credit for any previous training, if you did the 50/55 hrs here (can't do it in the USA) it would cost a huge pile more.

Just another perspective....

[scooter boy]

My advice for what it's worth is based on what I did.

Do the FAA/IR

Buy an N-reg aircraft

Believe me, instrument flying in IMC is far from boring.
Perhaps I'm unlucky but all clouds except the most wispy stratus ones tend to be unhappy to have light aircraft flying around inside them.

I would agree that it is both the most demanding and most rewarding flying you will ever do. Once you have your IR your self discipline will be regularly tested and you will learn about icing, turbulence and CB avoidance pretty quickly.

You need the right aircraft with the right equipment though if you really want to use the rating.

SB

[SR71-Blackbird]

I am surprised that someone who already owns their own aircraft with your ambition and resources asks such a question here

Tuscan, you've hit the nail right on the head :D:D:D

[IO540]

Don't know.... he might have just spent his whole time hanging around flying schools. They are hardly fountains of knowledge on the wide world of aviation, and often you are fed bull by self interested people who want you to rent their wreckage instead. I started looking for a plane even before I finished my PPL and you would not believe the amount of bull I was told. Real pilots who fly to real places rarely hang around schools because the school doesn't want them polluting their students' knowledge :)

[eugegall]

Guys im not here to waste anyones time and if i was there would be no point. I'm for real,

I have decided to go to florida in JAN and and get the FAA IR. when i get the Piper meridian then ill just make sure its on the N-REG. if its not then ill convert by doing the 7 exams and 15 hours worth of flying...

Your right i do spend quite alot of time at flying clubs. infact as im self employed i get there loads! I enjoy being around it.

There is no crime there

thanks

[IO540]

The Meridian is a nice plane, but also consider the Jetprop (http://www.jetprop.com). This is 1999kg and thus considerably cheaper to fly IFR around Europe. Almost the same airframe.

You will have a lot of mission capability with a piece of hardware like this. Most people here would envy you :ok:

Just make sure you get LOADS of type specific training. With modern avionics, these are seriously complex machines and it is pointless getting one unless you understand it.

[collectivefriction]

Some of the poster son here make the ground school sound daunting, its not.

The complete course will take you some time but it is doable at weekends and does not require weeks of full time study.

I know of a good few people who signed up in Jan and took exams in April and June (the exams are on a Monday and Tuesday and only take place every two months). The revision for most was minimal and mostly involved the cardinal sin of learning the question bank.

The flying trianing can be done at weekends, althouh this will drag it out a bit and for an SEP you only require 50 hours (not the 55 quoted above) or which 20 can be in an FNPTI and (I think) 25 in an FNPTII, athough imo after about 15-20 hours you will get limited benefit from a sim..

[englishal]

I got an insurance quote for a C402 whan I had 250 hrs and a CPL/IR.
£20,000 pa.....

;)

[IO540]

The complete course will take you some time but it is doable at weekends and does not require weeks of full time study.

You must be kidding. I haven't done it but have seen it. Weekends yes but it will take somebody (ab initio IR) a year to do it that way.

Obviously converting a FAA IR to a JAA IR, experienced IFR pilots, is a lot less work.

[collectivefriction]

Not kidding at all - I have just done it :)

[IO540]

and your prior experience was?

(precisely)

[collectivefriction]

200ish hours over 5 years and an IMC that I had never used

[IO540]

You did well - congratulations. I know some very sharp people like that too but they are not common. Most people take a lot longer.

There is a slightly reduced theory coming in, due late 2009. The reference is a page on the CAA website somewhere. This was worked out 1-2 years ago (took several years to get there, I gather) but then it got delayed due to some technicality over the study material provision or something like that.

[Shunter]

The theory is a pain, but it's nowhere near as bad as many make out. It took me just under 6 months from start to finish, and that wasn't just IR, I did doing the CPL exams in the alternate months.

The IR is 7 exams. IFR comms needs absolutely no revision whatsoever and is a joke. Flight Planning requires little or no revision as all the info you need is there in the exam in the form of CAPs and your route manual. Essentially effort is only required for 5 exams. Most of it is drivel that is absolutely no use in the context of safely operating an aeroplane but some of it, particularly Met, is useful learning.

The main irritation for me was the fact that you have to go to Gatwick for them. This means adding return flights and a hotel into the deal. Plus the CAA exam department are atrocious at sending out paperwork on time, then take weeks to send out the results to candidates. Considering the cost is north of £60 per exam, I really think we deserve better in the 21st century.

[collectivefriction]

You often read comments of the gold plating CAA making the IR unachieveable to the average PPL - I'd just like to say that it is definitely acheiveable, the only real problem is that the 'gold plating' has added is to the cost - if you can afford it then it is doable.

In relation to the work that is required:

7 exams all taken at Gatwick on two days every two months, the same exams on the same days, they are multiple guess and are pretty easy. A lot of the stuff you will already know from your PPL but a fair amount is new, but nothing very onerous. Other than for MET I put minimal effort in reading the manuals nut mainly working through the question banks and when I say minimal I mean about 1 day per exam (plus 20 hours compulsory Ground School for all 7 subjects). So at a guestimate I spent about 10 days total (actaully that sound like too much) preping for the exams and 2 days taking them.

First exam was April and last in June.

You can start the flying training before you have had your results, but I decided to wait and started training in late july and had my 170a in mid October - other than the 170 all of my flying and SIM work up to the 170 took place at weekends (on 18 separate days).

After the 170a I had two more flights at weekends for brush up and practice while waiting for teh exam which was on a Wednesday.

No suprises in the flying or sim and nothing that a reasonably competent PPL could not handle.

All done in a single.

As I said, other than the cost it is very achievable. And as I fly for fun I have put it in my accounts as part of this years fun as I enjoyed every minute of it.

[englishal]

To put it in perspective though....

There are a bunch of people on the Flyer website who started their IR's in Jan I believe. Some are just finishing now.

By contrast, I went to the USA and did my FAA IR when I had about 120 hrs TT in 2001. It took 5 weeks from start to finish, and I had never flown on instruments and was short of cross country time. Before I went I read the Jeppesen Instrument Commercial manual and some Gleim books, I then sat the exam a week or so after I arrived and aced it.

The flying standard is the same and some would argue the test is harder than JAR - no set format, 1.5 hr oral exam, so you can't say it was "easier".....Just far more achievable.

Cost was about £10,000 cheaper :eek:

[collectivefriction]

If you can afford 5 weeks off that is - that would cost me more than 10K.

You say 10K cheaper though - what was the total cost for your IR including flights and accomodation etc.?

Some of the flyer bunch are current FAA/IR's it will be interesting to see whether they are ready for the exam in the minimum 15 hours.

[IO540]

To put it in perspective though....

There are a bunch of people on the Flyer website who started their IR's in Jan I believe. Some are just finishing now.

By contrast, I went to the USA and did my FAA IR when I had about 120 hrs TT in 2001. It took 5 weeks from start to finish, and I had never flown on instruments and was short of cross country time. Before I went I read the Jeppesen Instrument Commercial manual and some Gleim books, I then sat the exam a week or so after I arrived and aced it.

The flying standard is the same and some would argue the test is harder than JAR - no set format, 1.5 hr oral exam, so you can't say it was "easier".....Just far more achievable. That's very true. However there are so many (mostly individually small) differences between the Euro and the US system that while a comparison is interesting it is never going to result in the Euro system coming into line.

Take me as I was 3 years ago. JAA PPL, FAA PPL, IMCR, 500hrs TT.

Had I gone for the JAA IR - 50hrs, 7 exams, probably a year to fit it all in (I did give it a very close look).

I went to Arizona, and 2 weeks later I had done the FAA IR, ~ 25hrs flying. Also sat the single CPL exam on the last day after the IR checkride; cost $90. Earlier in the UK, I had revised for a total of about 20hrs for the FAA IR written exam; also done in the UK.

To a degree, it is not a fair comparison because one cannot compare a solid 2-week project with the same project spread over 6-12 months. The latter will always be less efficient. However there is a vast difference in costs and general hassle. In the USA, you do your PPL and IR and the same place. In the UK, the vast majority of PPL holders will have to go elsewhere for the IR training and since most people live within realistic access of only one airfield, this introduces a major hassle. Add it all up, throw in the other bag of differences (custom made screen v. the hood, the rigid JAA exam timetable, etc) and one can see why so few bother.

History of this kind of group booking suggests that a fair % of the Flyer group will drop out. I believe they got a discount on the ground school (the training material etc) but not on flight training which is the really major expense. OTOH they benefit from being together with other pilots they know, which is nice. A lot of training in the USA is very lonely - I had precisely zero social contact in the two weeks. OTOH, had I gone to do the JAA IR say now, I'd be doing it with a load of mostly very young ATPL candidates....

The FAA oral is feared by ab initio candidates but pilots with previous experience find it easy - even if it stretches to several hours like mine did.

[englishal]

Some of the flyer bunch are current FAA/IR's it will be interesting to see whether they are ready for the exam in the minimum 15 hours.
Right and I'd say no way, unless they had been training in the USA with a view to converting to JAA. A friend of mine did it in minimums, but he'd been trained for the FAA IR with a view to conversion by a place in the USA run by Europeans who had been through the conversion. He did it in minimums, but the astounding thing was that the whole conversion process in Bournemouth took 5 weeks, even with only 15 hrs, of which I think 5 or so were in the sim (full time course this was and he already had the ATPLs). He had to rent digs for the 5 weeks......

[collectivefriction]

So if they can't do it in 15 hours then is the air over their different as is osmetimes claimed :) after all the only things that are really likely to fail you are the skill based stuff - holds, approaches and busting levels. Or is it not really trained to the same standards as maybe the CAA would have us believe.

[englishal]

No because more emphasis is placed on single needle NDB stuff in the UK whereas more emphasis is placed on everything but in the USA e.g. WAAS Precision GPS approaches with synthetic vision as an example, no NDB for 1000 miles ;)

I could fly a complete procedure on GPS, including missed approach, hold and re-approach down to precision minimums all via GPS with a G1000 equipped twin star, something which might give an examiner in the UK nightmares :} Equally dead reckoning your ground track to ORTAC on a Gurnsey SID would give me nightmares :eek:;)

[421C]

So if they can't do it in 15 hours then is the air over their different as is osmetimes claimed http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif after all the only things that are really likely to fail you are the skill based stuff - holds, approaches and busting levels. Or is it not really trained to the same standards as maybe the CAA would have us believe.


It can be and is done in the minimum of 10hrs in the sim and 5hrs in the aircraft. It's not easy, but it's not an issue of different standards - more a different test structure and some skills not practised often - the NDB tracking and formal Hold entry and pattern with wind/drift adjustment.

There are 6-12 standard training routes from each of the airports where the test is conducted. They take 1.5-2hrs to fly. So the 15hrs needs to include whatever de-rusting you need, practising NDB work, flying as many of the test routes as possible to get familiar with them, and, in general, practising the way you will be expected to conduct the Test flight (using the school's operations manual, performing simulated ice checks).

The ab-initio candidates will have spent 55hrs on the course - so they will know the training routes and approaches off by heart. Doing a conversion, if 15hrs sounds a lot for an existing IR, remember a lot of that is flying the training routes.

If you took the opposite case, a JAA IR going to pass the FAA IR checkride, it could take someone say 10hrs of training - to de-rust, and to get used to the ad-hoc way tasks and unbriefed procedures are thrown at you - plus the expectation that you know how to use all the aircraft equipment in what might be an unfamiliar aircraft at a training school, plus the rapid-fire ATC style and the partial panel approach. But the total time would probably be lower because there is less reason to fly long practice routes.

brgds
421C

[englishal]

MY flight portion of the FAA/IR comprised of a random DME arc, the instructions given a matter of seconds before so not much time to think it out. An LDA approach with a circle to land, an ILS down to minimums
I got a 5 DME arc around Seal Beach - After my instructor said "You never get less than a 10 DME arc" :eek:

[collectivefriction]

The ab-initio candidates will have spent 55hrs on the course - so they will know the training routes and approaches off by heart. Doing a conversion, if 15hrs sounds a lot for an existing IR, remember a lot of that is flying the training routes.

50 hours in a single - in my case about 27 of them in the air prior to 170a. 20 in the SIM.

[Airbus Girl]

I also did the route of PPL then IR. I did my single engine FAA IR first, as a relatively inexperienced PPLer, and I did mine in 15 days from start to finish. I didn't have any instrument experience prior. By the way, I'm not saying it was easy!!! Certainly lots of hard work!! When back in the UK I asked for a dispensation from the CAA and, back then, somehow I managed to convince them to let me do the UK multi IR in "as many hours as instructor deems necessary". Which meant around 8 hours training and then the test. Doing it this way, even with flights and accommodation included, was still way cheaper than doing it all in the UK. One of the biggest savings is actually on approach fees - in the UK it was around £20 an approach, if not more, and in the USA it was $0. So that makes a big difference.

Once you have your IR there isn't a lot of difference between countries, if you were taught well. After doing my FAA IR I did my CAA IR and then did a bit of flying in Europe and USA. USA is much easier from the point of view of filing a flight plan and the fact that many more places have ILS or VOR approaches rather than NDBs, and also more radar coverage.

Doing an approach in Greece still generally requires you to have your wits about you and remember your basic instrument flying!!!!

[eddiec]

wow.................. I fancy you!

[chrisbl]

Going back to the original question, if you are bored already after 125 hours, then an IR and a higher performance aircraft will leave you just as bored having spent a lot of money in the process as you watch the automation fly the aircraft.

Two options, give up flying and do something else or try helicopters until you get bored with that.

[Ghosted]

Howdo, I would say that if your bored of fixed wing flying then why not give rotary a go. If you have the time and resources as you seem to have available then it would be daft not to give it a blast. Its a damn sight harder than fixed wing and gives you plenty of options for new 'adventures', 'challenges' and a nice AW109 would see you right.

Happy landings.:ok:

[IO540]

The OP needs to define what he wants to do flying-wise, and obtain the papers and the plane which matches that mission profile.

Nobody else can tell him how to stop himself getting bored.

IFR flying in itself is fairly pointless. What is great about it is the way one can use it to go A to B, while sitting comfortably in sunshine (above any clouds) and not worrying about ATC clearances into CAS, and potentially having great views.

IFR flying is actually same as VFR flying would be if one did not need a clearance for anything. If I fly from the UK to say Greece, IFR, I go the same way as I would go if I was going VFR. But I can't go VFR on that route because there is some CAS into which I would never get a clearance....... the result of totally meaningless restrictions, implemented for totally arbitrary rule-based reasons.

[englishal]

IFR flying is actually same as VFR flying would be if one did not need a clearance for anything
Actually much easier! Coming back from Spain our clearance went something like this:

Direct Barcelona
Direct (somevoronfrenchborder)
Direct Bordeaux
Direct Nantes
Direct Guernsey
Direct SAM

Easy peasy, twiddle the knobs every half hour, speak to ATC every half hour, eat bacon butties and drink coffee in between.

[Fright Level]

Actually much much easier!

At work, I've often had clearances when somewhere over the Med "direct ALESO" (UK FIR). Over Canada last week we got cleared direct to the US entry point which was over 1,000nm away.

Went IFR from Fairoaks to Plymouth recently and after Farnborough handed me over to London, they said "do you have ERMIN in your nav box?". When I replied they cleared me direct to it and after a few seconds looking for it on my chart (it wasn't there), I discovered it was the IAF for Plymouth on the approach plate about 130nm away.

IFR is much much easier!

[IO540]

I don't think you guys read what I wrote :)

I wrote:

IFR flying is actually same as VFR flying would be if one did not need a clearance for anything.If one didn't need a clearance, one would fly DCT most of the time. Exactly what one does under IFR, with a nice long DCT like those described.

The whole VFR v. IFR division is a bizzare legacy of old times and silly local policies. It is self evident that ATC will let IFR traffic through the controlled airspace - they HAVE TO. And if they can do that, why can't they let VFR traffic through?? It is up to the pilot to maintain the VMC rule but after that, nothing is different. It's a funny old world we live in.