Single Engine IFR

[chucksweet]

Is anybody making a single engine helicopter today that is IFR certified in the US? I hear several companies used to, but I am having a heck of a time trying to find one being made today. Is it just unrealistic?

Chuck

[widgeon]

Bell (407) and Eurocopter (350BA) managed to get limited approvals ( unlikely that they would be approved today ) . The cost of adding second Hydraulic and second power generation would make it a very expensive option probably brings cost close to that of a light twin. The EC130 does have dual hydraulics so maybe the second alternator would not be too expensive. I am sure if the market was there someone would certify it.

Supplemental Type Certificate (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/AB901D79BCA4506786256DF3006894C2?OpenDocument&Highlight=ifr)

Supplemental Type Certificate (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/168B4FAD7328F8FF86256DF300686DD5?OpenDocument&Highlight=ifr)

Supplemental Type Certificate (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/3265FA683F2582E386256D5E006A6B34?OpenDocument&Highlight=ifr)

Supplemental Type Certificate (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/5B72069888AB2F5885256CC2005C313B?OpenDocument&Highlight=ifr)

[ShyTorque]

Presumably the market would have to be international to make it economically viable, especially in these harsh times. There is no UK market, for one example, due to CAA legislation disallowing single engine IFR helicopters.

[Shawn Coyle]

The A119 comes closest to being IFR approvable - I believe all it needs is a second source of electricity (and that can be added to the transmission if memory serves me right).
The engine is basically the same one that is used in the Caravan and Pilatus PC-12 - both of which are allowed to fly IFR with paying passengers in N. America. The logic (and proof) was that this engine, under specific maintenance and operating procedures was much safer than the twin piston engine airplanes that were allowed to fly IFR. I wonder when the Europeans will see the light on this.

[chopjock]

There is no UK market, for one example, due to CAA legislation disallowing single engine IFR helicopters.

I presume fixed wing is allowed for single engine IFR operations in the UK. Sounds like discrimination against helicopters to me.:rolleyes:

[paco]

A company called Martini were set to do freight operations at night with a caravan along the E coast of UK - despite its good safety record it was still shot down in flames in court (by somebody called Blair) so if the fixed wing isn't allowed, you won't get the helicopter approved!

It isn't discrimination against helicopters, it's blanket discrimination!

phil

[nigelh]

Typically the brits are against it regardless of safety !! We are a country that is anti everything ...especially flying !! I heard the other day that an irish dauphin pilot came over to do some work for a company . Apparently he had to do , amongst other things , one hour of hovvering .....:confused: was some daft rule and he had over 8,000 hrs ontype :eek: With an attitude like ours when do YOU think we will certify a single ifr helicopter !!!!!!!!!!
......now of couse when it comes to handing out children to be adopted by gay couples ...well we lead the world in that :D

[flap flap flap]

I've heard that the CAA are going to insist all IFR ops in the UK have to be three engines, from 2012. Something to do with them requiring funds for re-furbishing the canteen at Gatwick HQ.

[EN48]

Bell (407) and Eurocopter (350BA) managed to get limited approvals


I have been told by a Bell employee that a total of three 407's have IFR approval in the US.

[nigelh]

Well thats just typical of you yanks .....dont you realise that its REALLY dangerous to fly in cloud in a single resulting in almost certain death ???
Its times like this that i am so thankful that we have our good old CAA to save us from such crazy things :ok: Next thing you will be saying you can land vertically in a small patch of ground like a back yard :eek: you silly crazy people ......come to CAA land , where we are protected from dangerous things ....such as ...flying , which can actually be really dangerous if you dont fill in the right form with the correct colour ink ...in triplicate . THIS is why we are safe ....because due to all the paperwork we actually do VERY little actual "off the ground work " ( OTGW) but a lot of (FISFDBI )
Thank God for the CAA .

ok its filling in stupid forms designed by idiots.

[flap flap flap]

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/291055-where-does-uk-jar-twin-only-mentality-come.html

[heli-mad]

I was asked the question and i am not sure ...

Can a single engine IFR helicopter on N-reg fly in the UK privately, no AOC??

With the owner having and FAA licence with IR

I think i know the answer but..

I have seen in the past some 206 for sale with IFR kit on??


:ugh:

[Soave_Pilot]

I have seen in the past some 206 for sale with IFR kit on??



It was probably for training purposes only...

[ShyTorque]

I think i know the answer but..

Yes, you do know the answer. ;)

[212man]

Apparently he had to do , amongst other things , one hour of hovvering

Yeah right - nothing like a bit of complete bollocks to help with an argument :ugh:

[rotarywise]

I have seen in the past some 206 for sale with IFR kit on?? Ah yes, G-AVII, I remember her well. It seems that when one has the right friends, the rules no longer apply. T'was ever thus.

[Ascend Charlie]

Here in Oz we have two IFR B206. Basic 2-axis autopilot, 2 x AI, 2 x HSI, 2 x altimeter, extra battery for power. Does the job for training, obviously needs 2 engines for IFR charter, but we are only using it for Airwork.

[stringfellow]

nigelh, doesnt society make us into raving cynics!!! only yesterday they made it illegal for insurance companies to price on gender!! who pays these people!!

back on thread wasnt simon oliphant-hopes all singing all dancing md round the world exploder single ifr???

[MikeNYC]

I have been told by a Bell employee that a total of three 407's have IFR approval in the US.Sounds right to me... a few years ago I'd heard there were two IFR 407's in the US. One of them, I believe, was based (or had maintenance done) at KRNT Renton, WA.

[The Nr Fairy]

Stringfellow:

If it was an MD Explorer (as I seem to recall it was) then it would perhaps have been single PILOT IFR, not single ENGINE IFR.

[notar]

But his 500 is! N Reg,single engine,SP/IFR.

[Torquetalk]

nigelh & stringfellow

The poster is in the US, not the UK: Your musings about the ills of UK society are off-topic and irrelevant. Please write to the Mail or meet on Jetblast if you want to rant.

nigelh

Flying IMC is a serious matter. I have met several pilots who venture SE unstabilsed to get on top or have done a bit of training in the soup. They are a danger to themselves and others. If a SE aircraft IS certified (some are) that is a different matter: it will have stabilisation and system redundancy.

An hour of hovering might actually do you good: you may remember how to spell it.

[ShyTorque]

Flying IMC is a serious matter. I have met several pilots who venture SE unstabilsed to get on top or have done a bit of training in the soup. They are a danger to themselves and others. If a SE aircraft IS certified (some are) that is a different matter: it will have stabilisation and system redundancy.

The UK military used to fly single engined, unstabilised helicopters in IMC. I was trained to do this and also trained others to do it. It requires a lot of concentration.

More recently I flew a UK police helicopter, albeit a twin, that had no stabilisation or trim system. Thankfully it's been retired now and these days I fly approved SPIFR twins with good systems and 3/4 axis autopilots.

Illegal IMC? Yes, it certainly still happens. I had a close shave under the London TMA when an unknown contact (squawking mode A only) was notified to me by ATC, who were providing me with a radar service. As it had no Mode C and was manoeuvring I (wrongly) assumed it was flying in VMC at low level. However, a few seconds later it appeared just underneath my aircraft, probably closer than 100 feet below, in solid IMC, at 90 degrees to my path. There would have been no time for avoiding action from either aircraft, it all happened in a flash. I had taken the option to transit at 2400 feet under IFR and a radar service because the cloudbase was not much above 1000 feet. The pilot was obviously not under a radar service because I was speaking to the only provider. If he had, he would have given the game away by declaring his altitude. I regret not filing an Airprox at the time because it was an R-44. I know the colour, if not the registration, and from which airfield it came.

[heli-mad]

You are right Shy Torque, i knew the answer....

I do remember some photos in the past on the "views from the cocpit" thread with some singles ie EC130 on top of the fluffy white stuff...:uhoh:

Yes it can be done and only recently i heard a few people telling the private owner that asked me that they can show him how to get on the top and get down through a hole....what if there is no gap in the clouds :confused: they didn't have an answer to that..it will be fine!!!

Story has it that a chap a few years ago did that from Liverpool to Cardiff and had to come back 100 miles to find a hole in the clouds and came down with very,very little fuel left onboard:ugh:

Crazy to even think about it in R44, B206 etc with no proper instruments on board..

H-M

[John R81]

Err....

VFR in UK - in sight of ground. When you run out of holes, I understood that to be IMC. I understand how this can be legal in a plank but I had not thought "up and over" possible in a heli

John

[ShyTorque]

Visual Flight Rules, copied from CAP393:

Flight outside controlled airspace
28 (1) Subject to paragraph (6), an aircraft flying outside controlled airspace at or above flight
level 100 shall remain at least 1,500 metres horizontally and 1,000 feet vertically away
from cloud and in a flight visibility of at least 8 km.
(2) Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), (5) and (6), an aircraft flying outside controlled airspace
below flight level 100 shall remain at least 1,500 metres horizontally and 1,000 feet
vertically away from cloud and in a flight visibility of at least 5 km.
(3) Paragraph (2) shall not apply to an aircraft which:
(a) flies at or below 3,000 feet above mean sea level;
(b) remains clear of cloud with the surface in sight; and
(c) is in a flight visibility of at least 5 km.
(4) Paragraph (2) shall not apply to an aircraft which is not a helicopter and which:
(a) flies at or below 3,000 feet above mean sea level;
(b) flies at a speed which, according to its air speed indicator, is 140 knots or less;
(c) remains clear of cloud with the surface in sight; and
(d) is in a flight visibility of at least 1,500 metres.
(5) Paragraph (2) shall not apply to a helicopter which:
(a) flies at or below 3,000 feet above mean sea level;
(b) flies at a speed which, having regard to the visibility, is reasonable;
(c) remains clear of cloud with the surface in sight; and
(d) is in a flight visibility of at least 1,500 metres.
(6) Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not apply to a helicopter which is air-taxiing or conducting
manoeuvres in accordance with rule 6(i).

[XX514]

The UK military used to fly single engined, unstabilised helicopters in IMC.Yes, I seem to recall that night PARs to RW04 at Portland with a 300ft cloudbase were particularly prone to concentrate the mind! And then the bar steward beefer switched the hydraulics out!!!

[serf]

The UK military still fly single engined, unstabilised helicopters in IMC.

[Flyting]

If the UK mil can do this, how come it is not possible for civi's to do their training in singles???

[ShyTorque]

Because the military have a different set of regulations.

[172510]

I've been through many threads here, but I still cannot find the answers.

1 Everybody seems to agree that single engine helicopter IFR is forbidden even for private flights in the UK. Where can I find the official rule? I could not find it in the ANO using the search capability of adobe reader.

2 Are there any single engine Easa or FAA certified helicopters authorized by their Flight Manual for IFR operation, even with limitations? I've been through Eurocopter, Robinson, and Bell websites, but could not find any.

[Jet Ranger]

You can still find a few (at least four) IFR certified B206 Long Rangers in Europe, where you can train and fly the SE/IR(H), under EASA rules.

For example, Proflight Nordic in Sweden (2 helicopters), Billund in Denmark, also one in Holland ... Hope it helps!

JR

[timprice]

Years ago there was a AS350 certified IFR it use to back and forth to the channel islands?

[Thomas coupling]

What about this:

JAR–OPS 1.525 General

(a) An operator shall not operate a single engine aeroplane:

(1) At night; or
(2) In Instrument Meteorological Conditions except under Special Visual Flight Rules.

[Gordy]

Thomas:

(a) An operator shall not operate a single engine aeroplane:

emphasis added by moi...

So in JAR land you do not distinguish between airplanes and helicopters?

[JimL]

For helicopters - CAT only:

SUBPART I – PERFORMANCE CLASS 3

JAR-OPS 3.540 General

(c) An operator shall ensure that operations are not conducted:

(1) out of sight of the surface;

(2) at night;

(3) when the ceiling is less than 600 ft; or

(4) when the visibility is less than 800m.]

[puntosaurus]

I don't think private flight in a single engine helicopter under IFR is forbidden in the UK. All you have to do is observe the requirement of Rule 6 of the Rules of the Air Regulations 2007, and have appropriate license privileges and an appropriately equipped machine.

I can't at the moment find anything prohibiting private flight in a single engine helicopter in IMC either at the moment, although you'd have to be careful of Rule 5(3)(a) of the same regulations. That's the part of the low flying rule (Rule 5) which talks about the failure of a power unit not endangering persons or property on the surface.

[Redland]

Do you not need SAS, and altitude hold to fly IFR, and there are just no SAS equipped single engine craft out there?

[172510]

Thank you for your answer. So there is no special regulation in the UK about single engine IFR helicopter, it's forbidden for public transportation, as everywhere else in Europe, but not forbidden for private operation.
Can a AS350 for instance be authorised for IFR operation? What kind of expensive stuff is required to add to a night VFR one to enable IFR operation?

I cannot find anything on their websites. On Eurocopter and Bell website, there is a paint configurator (who needs that?) but almost nothing about performance or kind of operation.

[puntosaurus]

Equipment fits are covered in Schedule 4 to the ANO.

[Hughes500]

Bit off the subject but The DGAC has just certified a single engine aeroplane for public transport IFR. I would love to know how they have done that considering they are an EASA country. Or is it just typical French sticking 2 fingers up !!!!!!!!!!!

[HeliHenri]

.
Or is it just typical French sticking 2 fingers up !!!!!!!!!!!

Low level as usual ...


DGAC as an exemption from EASA because this one would like to change the regulation on this matter and needs experience for that.

I koow, it's a positive point of view from EASA ans some here don't like change ...

.

[9Aplus]

It is quite long time under consideration for EASA lands
Like here:
http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/docs/research/Single%20Engine%20Operations%20in%20IMC%20and%20at%20Night%2 0Risk%20Assessment%20Issue%202.pdf
It is expected that EASA OPS full implementation, will bring soon single engine IFR to fix wing-s and rotorcrafts with some limitations.

At the moment France and Finland use derogation for single turbine fixwing PAX ops...

[Aucky]

and there are just no SAS equipped single engine craft out there

The aforementioned BAC Longranger is SAS and AP equipped (3-axis) and certified for SE IFR.

Can a AS350 for instance be authorised for IFR operation? What kind of expensive stuff is required to add to a night VFR one to enable IFR operation?

Appendix B of this document (http://www.easa.europa.eu/agency-measures/docs/agency-decisions/2012/2012-021-R/CS-27%20Amendment%203.pdf) gives you an idea of what must be demonstrated for instrument certification of small rotorcraft (<3175kg & <9 pax seats).

[Jet Ranger]

Two IFR 206 Longrangers in Sweden are also SAS equiped with 2-axis-oldfashion-but-good-autopilots.

If you have relatively flat terrain (I mean, no mountains) below you, and reasonable amount of space between the terrain and cloud base (let's say 500-1000') it's not the problem to stay in clouds with SE.

But, probably it's not acceptable for CAT.

JR

[jymil]

These old JetRangers probably run under grandfather rights. Is there something in the current certification rules preventing single engines for IFR ? Or ist there just no market for it without CAT ?

[Jet Ranger]

You are right. I think these days it's not possible to certificate such a helicopters anymore ...

JR

[puntosaurus]

It looks like the certification issue is likely to be your problem.

I've checked the a/c that I thought most likely to meet CS27 Appendix B, the EC130B4 with dual hydraulics, SAS, two axis autopilot, etc. yet in the limitations section it still says 'The helicopter is approved to operate by day and night in VFR'.

I think it's probably right that the manufacturers can't be bothered to certify the a/c for IFR/IMC flight, even if the equipment fit would allow it, because there's no market for it.

[172510]

I think this makes sense: even SE helicopter that could be certified for IFR operation, because they have the stability required for certification, won't be IFR certified because there is no market.

[Evil Twin]

Happily flying a B206 IFR regularly in oz...:cool:

[Good Vibs]

To Evil Twin...Wishing you good luck if you have an engine failure when in IMC.
Enjoy your autorotation on instruments waiting to pop out for a landing "somewhere".

[AnFI]

Enjoy - YES!

Needing to be IMC - rare

Engine fail - unlikely

Not popping out in a good place - also unlikely.

(That's unlikely^3)

"waiting to pop out" - not necessarily going to pop out but you'd still be unlucky for it to be unsurvivable - 40kts, into wind, lever up gently from about 3 to 8 meters, surface in sight. Rad Alt would make even easier. Probably survivable, maybe messy...

Potential safety gain to be had by allowing SE IMC in helos - like they do for Aeroplanes.

Aeroplanes do SE IMC regularly... and landing is worse for them



prune needs a coat emoticon - I'm not advocating it - just sayin'...

[nigelh]

What we do know is that the current rules and training are not working re CFIT .
The fixed wings developed an IMC rating that has massively improved safety . They now don't need to grope along at sub 500ft to get home or to a suitable airport if they get caught out by the weather . IF , and its a big if , the rules and training went the same way then we may see the same improvement . Also if the demand for cheap helicopter autopilots increased dramatically the price would come down dramatically . I certainly don't see a big difference in safety between a properly equipped IFR twin and a single and banging on about an engine failure during the 1% of time you are likely to be flying in cloud is not a properly thought out argument .... There are plenty of other things that will bring a twin down just as quick as a single !!
The cost of training will of course go up , as will the cost of the helicopter but it would at least give people an option . Single engine planes can I believe now fly commercially ifr and twins cross the Atlantic ... So you never know . I just know I have felt a lot safer ifr in say a suitable squirrel or 500 than grovelling low level . ( obviously with a suitably experienced , current instrument rated pilot !!)

[Hughes500]

Well years ago used to fly a mil 341 in IMC with no sas or come to that sat nav or nav system, don't include mini tans as it never seemed to work when it was wet outside. How many accidents did the UK mil have with a singe engine in IMC ? The adage about a twin is rubbish when you look at the number of engine failures helicopter have, greater percentage of accidents are CFIT then engine failure

[skadi]

Well years ago used to fly a mil 341 in IMC with no sas or come to that sat nav or nav system, don't include mini tans as it never seemed to work when it was wet outside. How many accidents did the UK mil have with a singe engine in IMC ? The adage about a twin is rubbish when you look at the number of engine failures helicopter have, greater percentage of accidents are CFIT then engine failure The UH-1 in the German Air Force and Army flew in IMC on a regular basis and I never heard of an forced AR in IMC due to engine failure. But there was an Army CH53, which lost both engines ( icing ), popped out at 500' GND and made a safe AR-landing in the grass...


skadi

[nigelh]

So .... Are we saying that there should be another look at getting ( properly equipped ) singles up high and safe rather than scudding around trying to stay vfr ?? When you look at the apparent statistics for all ifr flights it looks compelling . The illogical fear of an engine failure versus inadvertent ifr and then CFIT should be challenged . I know a large number of excellent pilots who have flown and do fly ifr in singles and the one thing they all have in common is that they feel a lot safer above the obstacles and not amongst them . If and when I get another single , I shall almost certainly follow their lead and either land or go up rather than grovel !!
Will the lunatics who run this asylum even look at this as a possible safety development , as per the IMC for planks ???

[SASless]

If you were to impose a Ceiling and Vis Limit on singles that would allow for a visual EOL Landing after breaking cloud....even the fear of Engine Failure would be greatly diminished not withstanding how infrequently they happen anyway.

I would worry more about the single Generator failing than I would the engine failing.

Likewise, Single Pilot IFR in a Helicopter without a nice operable SAS/Auto Pilot system can get very darn interesting too.

At least in the Huey....sans SAS....we always had two Pilots.

Single Pilot IFR in a Bell 412 with a full Sperry Kit was work....but when the Sperry Kit went on strike.....it was an altogether different story......it got to be very damn hard work with not a lot of margin for error.

[nigelh]

Good points . I imagine that IF the rules changed the manufacturers could look at building these things into ifr machines ? As I said before , the cost of autopilot could plummet if they started fitting to a lot of singles . It would be interesting to the the accident stats ( CFIT ) on planks before and after the IMC rating came in .... I suspect the figures dropped to almost zero .....

[ShyTorque]

Needing to be IMC - rare

AnFI,

Why do you say that? Some of us routinely need to fly IMC, and do so.

I agree with SASless regarding the genny failure situation. Problem with a single is that it's more difficult to design in the duplicated electrical systems required. If a single donk stops, you are likely to have more than a "straightforward" autorotation to deal with.

[handysnaks]

As I said before , the cost of autopilot could plummet if they started fitting to a lot of singles
Nige, I think you own and operate your own helicopter, so I guess you have had a lot of experience dealing with the manufacturers.

Do you really believe that?

[nigelh]

Yes , without any doubt . Pretty everything that is manufactured and sold depends on volume to bring the price down . A solid state new tech autopilot could prove to be v reliable and be the biggest innovation in small helicopter safety there has ever been . After 30 yrs of chugging around at 100ft over the hills I now would like to go up and get safe where all you commercial boys are !
Is the genny issue all to do with the batt life ? If so wouldn't carrying a spare battery with a switch give you at least 1hr of flying ?? I am assuming 30 min from each battery which may be wrong ......

[tartare]

Question from a plank driver... bit confused after looking at the Cobham website.
Helisas can be engaged and the machine flown hands on cyclic, collective and pedals.
But if you're IFR with it on and hand flying - then get into an unusual attitude, or start to get the leans, you can simply release the controls and the machine will return to a level and stable attitude... correct?
As well as that, it has the same functions as a fixed wing autopilot - with various hold modes and course flown/approach settings?

[ShyTorque]

Tarter, No, incorrect!

You're missing the point that unlike fixed wing aircraft, helicopters have no natural aerodynamic stability. SAS provides some stability but unless it is tied to gyros, it will not know which way is up.

Even then, the pilot will have to recover from a "UP" by himself.

[wmy]

The Agusta 109SP has a very nice 4-axis autopilot which is equipped with a "Wingslevel" button in the collective.
Press "Wingslevel" and the AP takes the ship in a wings level (obviously) and 6 degrees nose up attitude.

Without the SAS (stabilization) which is always active as AP has to be ON in Flight, the 109SP gets very nervous and shaky to fly.

[ShyTorque]

Without the SAS (stabilization) which is always active as AP has to be ON in Flight, the 109SP gets very nervous and shaky to fly.

As do the earlier 109 series aircraft (ask Noel Edmonds :E ).

[AnFI]

Shy - "rare" because it is rare that the weather is bad enough that you CANNOT fly VMC and if it's a little bit worse then you CANNOT fly IFR either...

But it is nice to have the option, normally better to have more options than less

'Do' and 'need to' are different ...

and

Granted the A109 and a few others don't fly well without SAS (ref the Lynx ETPS IMC evaluations) - but some aircraft have excellent handling qualities eg the H500 is a breeze to fly very accurately IMC

[ShyTorque]

Shy - "rare" because it is rare that the weather is bad enough that you CANNOT fly VMC and if it's a little bit worse then you CANNOT fly IFR either...

If you are doing local flying or training, possibly.

But to operate legally in UK airspace as a reliable method of transportation, the aircraft needs to be fully certified for IFR and the pilot needs to be instrument rated.

[AnFI]

i get around a fair bit, 35 days non VMC? maybe 10 of which not IFR either?

so yes it helps get the reliability up on the wx 'front' - some of which u lose on the mechanical reliability front.

[AnFI]

... and the success rate of ifr twins onshore hasn't been all that great either (2 355, 3 109, 2 76 plus others)

[172510]

All the IFR certified helicopters I encountered are twins.
I understand that EASA Commercial Air Transport regulations mandate a twin engine helicopter for IR flying.
But I think that private or corporate operators are not bound by those rules.
So are there any single engine IR helicopters?

[ersa]

Bell 206 Longranger

[Ascend Charlie]

We had a fleet of B206 with glass screens and autopilot, teaching to Command Instrument Rating standard. Flew nicely too.

[HeliboyDreamer]

I understand that EASA Commercial Air Transport regulations mandate a twin engine helicopter for IR flying.
But I think that private or corporate operators are not bound by those rules.

Can anyone point me to the right direction on where to find related EASA regulaltions regarding the above?

[ApolloHeli]

Can anyone point me to the right direction on where to find related EASA regulaltions regarding the above?

Look at the "Easy Access Rules for Air Operations (https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/EasyAccessRules_for_AirOperations-Oct2019.pdf)"

Under Annex IV (Part-CAT), Subpart C, Aircraft Performance and Operating Limitations (Helicopters), Chapter 4: Performance Class 3

CAT.POL.H.400
(d) Operations shall not be conducted:(1) out of sight of the surface;
(2) at night;
(3) when the ceiling is less than 600 ft; or
(4) when the visibility is less than 800 m.


Considering all single engines are PC3 by definition, this prevents them from being used for commercial air transport operations under IFR.

[Georg1na]

Oh good lord - you lot have clearly not flown a Whirlwind 7 in IMC..........................Great skill needed or a complete lack of imagination - along with a complete lack of stabilisation, stick trim,auto throttle and so on. Please PM me with your plaudits.......................

[HeliboyDreamer]

Look at the "Easy Access Rules for Air Operations (https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/EasyAccessRules_for_AirOperations-Oct2019.pdf)"

@ApolloHeli, thanks you are a star

[SpindleBob]

Vantage Aviation in the UK operate a Longranger G-OSAR for single engine Instrument Ratings. It is certified to provide SE IR training but not sure what permissions / limitations it actually has to operate

October 26, 2017 Helicopter Single Engine IR approvedVantage Aviation Limited has been approved by the CAA to conduct Single Engine IR courses in the UK on the Bell 206 Long Ranger – G-OSAR. The aircraft is unique; it was built by Bell as a IFR helicopter and is capable of conducting IFR training (NDB, VOR, ILS) and most importantly is also PBN compliant.

The aircraft is fitted with a 3 axis auto pilot and dual electrical and instrumentation.

I think a mixture of Single Engine Training followed by ME upgrade during Type Conversion is a very efficient way of training. Considering the cost of a ME Instrument Rating, its hardly surprising that so few aspiring pilots can afford to go forward with the training.