IRI course requirements

[Mickey Kaye]

Am I getting this right?

Under EASA if you want to teach for the IR you have to complete an IRI course.

The entry requirements for which are 800 hours IFR time or 200 hours IFR time if you hold an FI rating.

Now I can see airline pilots meeting this requirement quite easily although how much was actually instrument flying would be another question. But for someone like myself who is a career instructor this figure of 200 hours IFR is nigh on impossible.

In the past all I have ever done was logged time in IMC Would I be able to add my night hours to this figure? As flying at night is now flying VFR. But even if I did this it would still leave me well short of 200 hours.

Could I just start flying in accordance with IFR and would that count or would I actually have to file a IFR flight plan?

[BillieBob]

Yes, you are getting it right. IRIs are going to be a very rare commodity in the future.

The Instrument Flight Rules outside controlled airspace do not include the filing of a flight plan whereas inside controlled airspace they do.

With certain limited exceptions, you must fly above MSA and, if above 3000ft, in accordance with the quadrantal or semicircular rule as appropriate.

This will all change on 4 Dec next year when Part-SERA comes into force in the UK.

[nick14]

Billiebob, your comments about SERA intrigue me, what's on the cards to change?

[Mickey Kaye]

So am I getting this right?

If I now fly all my trial lessons and nav lessons in accordance with IFR. They will be all outside controlled airspace so no need to file a flight plan and in all reality will never be in IMC. I could then use all these hours to count towards the now magic figure of 200.

What about my night hours presumably the hours that I have already logged can count towards the 200 hours night requirement but now night is regarded as VFR the hours I'm logging at present can't?

[S-Works]

Sounds like I will be busy!

Mind you, with the rate the commercial schools are going bust there is going to be little need gap for IRIs!

[vetflyer]

who has gone now ?

I still need that IRI job :(

[BillieBob]

Part-SERA is available here (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:281:0001:0066:EN:PDF)

[chrisbl]

So am I getting this right?

If I now fly all my trial lessons and nav lessons in accordance with IFR. They will be all outside controlled airspace so no need to file a flight plan and in all reality will never be in IMC. I could then use all these hours to count towards the now magic figure of 200.

What about my night hours presumably the hours that I have already logged can count towards the 200 hours night requirement but now night is regarded as VFR the hours I'm logging at present can't?

I doubt it.

[LostYetAgain]

If I now fly all my trial lessons and nav lessons in accordance with IFR. They will be all outside controlled airspace so no need to file a flight plan and in all reality will never be in IMC. I could then use all these hours to count towards the now magic figure of 200.

What about my night hours presumably the hours that I have already logged can count towards the 200 hours night requirement but now night is regarded as VFR the hours I'm logging at present can't?Provided you have a current IR or IMC on you license, I believe you are indeed correct. You can log IFR for your (trial)lessons. If you book in/out IFR, then you can claim the time inside the zone too.

As far as night flight goes, VFR at night outside of controlled airspace didn't exist until recently, so that had to be IFR ... right? With an IR or IMC, I believe you now have the choice at night, either VFR or IFR outside the zone, or SVFR/IFR inside.

[S-Works]

Don't be daft. Since when has a trial lesson been IFR?

The very point of it is that it is a lesson from the VFR PPL to introduce a new potential pilot.

It may come as a surprise to many FI's that its purpose is to try and capture new rather pilots rather than as a personal hour building exercise:ugh:..........

[Bornfreee]

It always has been 200 hrs IF time (if you are an FI) before you could do the upgrade course to teach IR!

I know in the old CAA days you used to be able to count 4 hours for every 1 hour of IF if by sole reference to instruments, not sure if that is still the case with EASA rules??

Quite agree with Bose-x, how on earth can a VFR trial lesson be counted as IFR!!

[BEagle]

I know in the old CAA days you used to be able to count 4 hours for every 1 hour of IF if by sole reference to instruments, not sure if that is still the case with EASA rules??

The CAA allowed 50 hrs of Instrument Flight Time as an alternative to 200 hrs of flight time under IFR specifically for the removal of the 'No Applied Instrument' instruction for FIs. For the IRI(A), applicants needed at least 800 hrs of IFR flight time, 400 of which had to be in aeroplanes. But 1 hour instrument flight time could still be counted as 4 hours flight time under IFR for this purpose.

None of which applies under EASA at present. This will lead to a shortage of instrument instructors, which will mean that training for the EIR and C-BM IR will become very difficult. The CAA and others already realise this and are working on solutions. Otherwise the only people meeting the criteria will probably be ex-airline pilots with very little single pilot IFR time - and even less inclination to bother with instructing under the leaden hand of EASA €urocracy.

An FI who does not hold applied instrument instructional privileges will find it even more difficult to amass IFR flight time than some hours builder as he/she will be spending most of his/her time teaching in VMC.

As for trial flights under IFR.....:rolleyes:

[Mickey Kaye]

It was actually meant as a piss take.

But worryingly with all the changes that are currently going on is probably perfectly legal.

[Whopity]

For the IRI(A), applicants needed at least 800 hrs of IFR flight time,Since this was introduced in 1999, I have only ever encountered 2 stand alone IRIs indicating what a pointless qualification this is!

[Happy Wanderer]

With certain limited exceptions, you must fly above MSA and, if above 3000ft, in accordance with the quadrantal or semicircular rule as appropriate.

Can someone just steer me in the right direction please (sorry to be pedantic):

Quadrantal rule and semi-circular rule
IFR Rule 34 (1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), an aircraft in level flight above 3,000 feet above mean sea level or above the appropriate transition altitude, whichever is the higher, shall be flown at a level appropriate to its magnetic track, in accordance with Table 1 or Table 2, as appropriate.

E.g. in my neck of the woods (Class G), TA = 6000', but that would put me well inside CA (4500'). Up to the base of CA, I could therefore feasibly fly in accordance with IFR but without necessary flying the quadrantal rule.

Or have I missed something? :O

HW

[S-Works]

I did the IRI(A) before I did the FI(A) so I have a standalone IRI(A) on my licence. I also have standalone CRI(SE/ME) as well. I figured that way if I ever let the FI(A) lapse I would still have something to teach the stuff that I do.

As it turns out I have actually kept them all current at the same time as my job requires me to be an FI(A) and although most of my work is done on CRE/TRE I do occasionally do FE stuff so it needs to be current.

[DeanP]

Did anyone find out if instrument time gained while using an IMC rating or IR(R) before they gain an IR count to this time?

Also I haven't found anything that says it needs to be conducted as PIC, saying that, does the time spent as PUT doing your IR rating count towards it too?

[Whopity]

The requirement is for 200 hours Flight Time under IFR; there is no other stipulation so any flight time IFR counts.

[Level Attitude]

The requirement is for 200 hours Flight Time under IFR
Which, as IFR was mandatory, includes all night flying in the UK prior
to last summer.