IMC Question

[Easy226]

Hi everyone, i am currently studying for my PPL and i'm looking to go on to commercial flying (eventually). I was wondering if you have an IMC. rating , will you be creditied with some flying hours and ground training towards the Instrument Rating course?? If not, is there any benefit from gaining an IMC for another 2-3 grand on the bill?!
Many Thanks
Dan

[flyer4life]

Easy226,

I remember reading about this last year on the CAA website. There used to be a 15 hour credit towards the IR if you had an IMC on an old UK licence but not if you had a JAA licence... yeah, another crazy rule but there you go.

Even if you had a UK licence now, the right to claim the credit for the IR ended last June if I remember correctly. There was never any credit for ground training.

Now this is the case, I see little point in paying for dual time training for an IMC if you're going to take the full fATPL training pretty soon. I'm sure others will disagree though, particularly the training schools!

Getting a non-JAA IR from an ICAO country (eg. USA) is an option to save money and have a jolly abroad. Then you'll just have to do 15 hours JAA IR training, which I found more than enough to get used to the different procedures in the UK.

Of course, you'll have to take the JAA IR exams too.

[tmmorris]

Agree it's crazy. The IMC and IR have now become either/or options - it seems that they don't really want PPL/IRs any more, since the IR training requirements are so heavily geared towards full-time professional courses.

Personally I'd love to do an IR but couldn't justify the cost compared to the IMC rating (I've got my IMC test today so think of me this afternoon!)

Tim

[FlyingForFun]

Agree with the answers so far. Except that there is one case where an IMC is useful in getting an IR.

Step 1: get an IMC rating.

Step 2: get an FAA IR. Can't remember the exact requirements, but it's something like 40 hours of instrument flying, of which 25 have to be with an approved instructor, following an approved course. The rest can be anything you like - such as an IMC course.

Step 3: convert your FAA IR to a JAR IR, which requires a minimum of 15 hours of flying.

This is a more expensive route than just getting an IR. But I think it's more interesting. And if you've already got an IMC rating before you decide to go for the IR, it's probably the cheapest/quickest/easiest way of doing it.

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

[Easy226]

So once you have got an FAA IR, how much would it roughly cost to convert back to a JAA IR?? However, would employers like this method of gaining an IR if you were to work in England?
Cheapest IR i have seen in the UK is for 12 grand at the moment.
Many thanks for the replies

[flyer4life]

See page 3 here for the conversion requirements: LASORS Section E (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/Lasors_Section_E.pdf). Check out the FTOs for the hourly dual multi IR rate and sim cost and work out the costs involved, probably around £3-4k.

Then remember you'll need about two hours solo hire for the test plus the bargain £578 examiner fee. Oh, and not to mention £276 for the licence issue :eek:

One downside of going the FAA route is getting up to speed on the FAA regulations... the written test isn't so bad, but you really have to know your stuff for the hour or so oral interview with the examiner before the flight test. If you do some hour building before the IR in the same country, this will help you get used to the local rules.

See The FARs (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet) for the FAA IR requirements (40hrs instrument to include 15hrs with an FAA instructor). Search under "Current FAR by Part" for Part 61, then look for Section 61.65.

Take a look at South Africa too for the IR; from what I hear it's cheaper than the US.

As for what employers think of it, your JAA licence will be the same as one gained from a £60k integrated course. The only way anyone can see your history is by checking your logbook, at which point you can ramble on about your experiences in different countries make you a more rounded pilot... after all, there aren't many airline pilots in UK who don't regularly fly abroad :)

[Doghouse]

That's now becoming an important question for those certain of wanting to get the full CPL/IR.

As someone said, FTO's will probably argue in favour of the IMC. So I'll announce my personal interest and let you know that I run an FTO so I may be biased.

I think the answer to your question all depends on how you intend to hour build and when you intend to take the CPL flying training.

If you want to hour build in the UK as quickly as possible, then I'd say an IMC would be worth having - a) because you can fly in the poorer weather days and b) because you can practice your I/F for the CPL. If you intend to go to the US or somewhere like that, then there's no point having an IMC.

If you are building the 100hrs P1 time with the intention of going straight on to the CPL, then again I'd say it might be worth considering an IMC. There's a reasonable chunk of I/F in the CPL flight test and the more comfortable you are with it, then the easier you'll find the test. If you actually have a number of hours then maybe the IMC isn't so critical as you should already be able to handle the aircraft comfortably.

As I said, I'm probably biased, but my rule of thumb has always been to get the training done using the cheapest instructor available. If you think there's a risk of over-running on the required hours for the CPL or IR and paying £400 per hour for the pleasure, you might find that having the additional I/F experience at say £130 per hour actually reduces that risk and works out to be the cheaper option. What's more failing CPLs and IRs is a very expensive business, so I'm all for minimising that risk as much as possible - and an IMC would do this.

PS. I agree the system is ridiculous. Why shouldn't you get an exemption with an IMC rating? Anyway, you don't; so ask around and see what the general view is.

[SimJock]

Don't just think about the IMC, do it ! it is well worth the time and money and the experience. You've got to build hours anyway and what better way than getting an extra rating and in my opinion more relevant experience. The IMC will give you a good indication of how well you will be able to hack the instrument rating when it comes along and any areas where you need to read up on or do a little extra work.

Add to this the small bonus that it could save your life one dull day in the UK and it speaks for itself. Did mine last year and no regrets. used it twice since.

[flyer4life]

Doghouse has said exactly what I haven't got round to saying yet!

I'd forgotten about the CPL instrument flying which would be tough without any previous experience. Best to get the basic instrument skills earlier than burning big money on a complex type with a CPL level instructor.

As an aside, the old UK CPL gave IMC rating privileges, even if you'd never done the rating before. That's why the the CPL test here still includes some instrument flying. However, the JAA CPL gives no such privileges. Pay more, get less... good eh? An examiner told me a change to the CPL test is planned to remove the instrument requirement. No idea when though.

Another thought to consider: if you took your JAA IR before the CPL then you're credited with 10 hours CPL instruction, reducing the CPL training to a minimum 15 hours visual flying.

[Julian]

If you have some spare time I would not bother with the IMC rating but go over to the US for a holiday and do the FAA IR, you will get an IMC issued for FREE (yes free apart from £64 CAA fee), anyway on successful completion so dont really see the point of paying for something twice!

The course will cost you between $3500-4000 for what I have seen ( or £2190-2500 in real money :) ). Also you WONT be charged any landing or approach fees which can soon tot up on an instrument co the UK if they are not included. I have seen prices for the IMC in the UK between £2000-3000 without extras!!!!

Obviously at the end of the day this wont suit everyone as some people cant get the time off, I would advise at least 3 wks if you want to do the IR, 4 would be more comfortable though. Its a lot of flying and a lot to take in. And my standrad piece of advice - get the writtens done before you even think of leaving the UK!

Julian.

[FlyingForFun]

flyer4life,

Thanks for filling in the bits I couldn't quite remember! Agree with everything you say, except for one bit:Your JAA licence will be the same as one gained from a £60k integrated courseThis isn't quite true, unfortunately. If you have a JAR IR which was converted from an ICAO IR, your license will state this fact. And, unlike all other JAR ratings, JAR-compliant countries other than the one which issued the conversion are not obliged to recognise a converted IR.

I have not yet heard any stories about anyone who's gone this route, so I don't know whether it would be an issue in practice. But in theory, if you get an FAA IR and then convert it in the UK, France (for example) would not be obliged to recognise your converted IR - and if they choose not to, this would prevent you from getting a job in a French airline.

This is the only example I know of where a JAR license/rating isn't required to be recognised by other JAR states.

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

[GJB]

Having got my PPL, going on to do the IMC course has been the best thing I've done since.

Cannot reccomend it enough.

[flyer4life]

FlyingForFun,If you have a JAR IR which was converted from an ICAO IR, your license will state this fact.Spot on, I just found this rule in JAR-FCL 1.015(c)(1).

I wonder what someone would need to do to remove this from their licence? Let's say you have such a licence, and have since built up 100 hours P1 instrument time. Would you be required to go back to school a take a whole modular IR for £12k??

Crazy system, makes you wonder what if anything we have achieved with JAA... but let's not start that topic again!

Now, where's that US greencard application gone...