IMC for choppers coming at last
Thread Starter
IMC for choppers coming at last
More accessible Instrument Rating is now a reality.....I have argued for this for years and put off my own full IR for years waiting to do a sensible course without 500 hrs of study of complete nonsense !!
Next stop will be to make EIR legal in singles subject to certain equipment and well overdue ...but better late than never .
This will save lives ......I am certain .
The long-awaited new regulation for a more accessible instrument rating is now a reality. The regulation, EU No 245/2014, comes bundled with several other other significant improvements for GA. Jacob Pedersen of AOPA Denmark reports that the new package contains:
1) The introduction of the new Enroute Instrument Rating (EIR)
2) Theoretical knowledge requirements for the IR adapted to what is relevant for flying non-complex aircraft with a PPL
3) A competency-based path to earn a full instrument rating
4) Holders of a third country ICAO compliant IR can be credited IN FULL for both the theoretical knowledge course and the practical training requirements
5) Possibility for third country license holders with residence in the EU to continue flying till April 8 2015 before an EASA license is mandatory
6) The privileges of PPL and LAPL licenses are extended so it is clear that the holder can make use of the new rules for cost-sharing for up to six individuals
7) The UK IMC rating can continue to be issued until at least 2019
The Enroute Instrument Rating (EIR), as the name suggests, allows the pilot to fly IFR during the enroute phase of the flight. It only requires a minimum of 15 hours of instrument flight instruction, but comes with significant limitations compared to the full IR. It has no approach privileges, and both the take-off and arrival must be flown VFR. The transition must take place et the minimum IFR enroute altitude which is typically 1,000 ft above the highest obstacle within 5nm. In other words, it is not a rating that will get you in or out of an airport in marginal conditions – you will be better off arriving VFR. The EIR can, however, allows you to enter class A airspace.
The theoretical knowledge curriculum has been reduced significantly and the required number of hours has been cut from 200 to 80, of which most can be done as distance learning. Physical classroom presence can be as little as eight hours if you are good at home study. The items that have been removed from the curriculum relate to flying high-performance aircraft at high altitudes. Should you later want to fly such an aircraft you will need to cover these subjects, but for a PPL holder wishing to fly a typical GA aircraft the new theoretical course will make the path to the instrument rating more simple.
The new competency-based route to the full instrument rating is another opening especially for the PPL holder who might already have some instrument experience or training from either the enroute instrument rating or from flying IFR on an instrument rating issued outside the EU. The competency-based path to the instrument rating requires 40 hours of instrument instruction. Of these, up to 30 hours can be credited based on prior experience and training.
Holders of an FAA issued instrument rating, or other ICAO-compliant third-country rating, with a minimum of 50 hours of IFR/PIC time will find that their rating can give them full credit for both the theoretical knowledge course and the practical training requirements. If they can pass an instrument skill test and during this test demonstrate that their theoretical knowledge is adequate, they can have the European full IR issued.
Third country license holders can also fly for another year. As part of the new regulation every European member state now has the option to postpone the deadline of the new rules that requires residents in the EU holding a third country license to convert to an EASA license. They can now continue flying within the EU until April 8, 2015 if the individual member state so decides after April 3 but before April 8 this year.
Many of the affected pilots hold an FAA license and use their FAA instrument rating to fly N-registered aircraft in Europe. These pilots now have a year to use the new competency-based path to pass an IR skill test and get a full European instrument rating. Alternatively they can hope that the bilateral safety agreement (BASA) between Europe and the US will be extended in time to allow them to keep flying in Europe. An effort is certainly being made, and there is pressure from IAOPA in both Europe and the US, but no guarantees for this strategy.
The UK IMC rating can continue to be issued till 2019. This rating, which follows a 15-hour minimum flying course and has a rigorous revalidation schedule which is designed to give pilots the ability to save their own lives in IMC by maintaining control of an aircraft and returning it to the ground by whatever instrument landing system is available, has been obtained by tens of thousands of British pilots despite conferring no additional access privileges – and in 40 years, only one IMC rating holder has been killed in actual IMC. The UK has fought hard to keep the IMC rating, the case for which it believes to be self-evident, and is likely to pursue its continuation before the five-year stay of execution. As always, the IMC rating will continue to be valid only in UK territory.
Altogether the new regulation opens up a future for GA where an instrument rating is now realistically achievable for the typical private pilot. Until now less than two percent of European private pilots have obtained a European instrument rating. In the US, the level is well over 40 percent. With the new more achievable path to a European instrument rating the hope is that we will start to see more instrument proficient private pilots getting more benefits from their license and with skills allowing them to fly even safer.
Next stop will be to make EIR legal in singles subject to certain equipment and well overdue ...but better late than never .
This will save lives ......I am certain .
The long-awaited new regulation for a more accessible instrument rating is now a reality. The regulation, EU No 245/2014, comes bundled with several other other significant improvements for GA. Jacob Pedersen of AOPA Denmark reports that the new package contains:
1) The introduction of the new Enroute Instrument Rating (EIR)
2) Theoretical knowledge requirements for the IR adapted to what is relevant for flying non-complex aircraft with a PPL
3) A competency-based path to earn a full instrument rating
4) Holders of a third country ICAO compliant IR can be credited IN FULL for both the theoretical knowledge course and the practical training requirements
5) Possibility for third country license holders with residence in the EU to continue flying till April 8 2015 before an EASA license is mandatory
6) The privileges of PPL and LAPL licenses are extended so it is clear that the holder can make use of the new rules for cost-sharing for up to six individuals
7) The UK IMC rating can continue to be issued until at least 2019
The Enroute Instrument Rating (EIR), as the name suggests, allows the pilot to fly IFR during the enroute phase of the flight. It only requires a minimum of 15 hours of instrument flight instruction, but comes with significant limitations compared to the full IR. It has no approach privileges, and both the take-off and arrival must be flown VFR. The transition must take place et the minimum IFR enroute altitude which is typically 1,000 ft above the highest obstacle within 5nm. In other words, it is not a rating that will get you in or out of an airport in marginal conditions – you will be better off arriving VFR. The EIR can, however, allows you to enter class A airspace.
The theoretical knowledge curriculum has been reduced significantly and the required number of hours has been cut from 200 to 80, of which most can be done as distance learning. Physical classroom presence can be as little as eight hours if you are good at home study. The items that have been removed from the curriculum relate to flying high-performance aircraft at high altitudes. Should you later want to fly such an aircraft you will need to cover these subjects, but for a PPL holder wishing to fly a typical GA aircraft the new theoretical course will make the path to the instrument rating more simple.
The new competency-based route to the full instrument rating is another opening especially for the PPL holder who might already have some instrument experience or training from either the enroute instrument rating or from flying IFR on an instrument rating issued outside the EU. The competency-based path to the instrument rating requires 40 hours of instrument instruction. Of these, up to 30 hours can be credited based on prior experience and training.
Holders of an FAA issued instrument rating, or other ICAO-compliant third-country rating, with a minimum of 50 hours of IFR/PIC time will find that their rating can give them full credit for both the theoretical knowledge course and the practical training requirements. If they can pass an instrument skill test and during this test demonstrate that their theoretical knowledge is adequate, they can have the European full IR issued.
Third country license holders can also fly for another year. As part of the new regulation every European member state now has the option to postpone the deadline of the new rules that requires residents in the EU holding a third country license to convert to an EASA license. They can now continue flying within the EU until April 8, 2015 if the individual member state so decides after April 3 but before April 8 this year.
Many of the affected pilots hold an FAA license and use their FAA instrument rating to fly N-registered aircraft in Europe. These pilots now have a year to use the new competency-based path to pass an IR skill test and get a full European instrument rating. Alternatively they can hope that the bilateral safety agreement (BASA) between Europe and the US will be extended in time to allow them to keep flying in Europe. An effort is certainly being made, and there is pressure from IAOPA in both Europe and the US, but no guarantees for this strategy.
The UK IMC rating can continue to be issued till 2019. This rating, which follows a 15-hour minimum flying course and has a rigorous revalidation schedule which is designed to give pilots the ability to save their own lives in IMC by maintaining control of an aircraft and returning it to the ground by whatever instrument landing system is available, has been obtained by tens of thousands of British pilots despite conferring no additional access privileges – and in 40 years, only one IMC rating holder has been killed in actual IMC. The UK has fought hard to keep the IMC rating, the case for which it believes to be self-evident, and is likely to pursue its continuation before the five-year stay of execution. As always, the IMC rating will continue to be valid only in UK territory.
Altogether the new regulation opens up a future for GA where an instrument rating is now realistically achievable for the typical private pilot. Until now less than two percent of European private pilots have obtained a European instrument rating. In the US, the level is well over 40 percent. With the new more achievable path to a European instrument rating the hope is that we will start to see more instrument proficient private pilots getting more benefits from their license and with skills allowing them to fly even safer.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Altogether the new regulation opens up a future for GA where an instrument rating is now realistically achievable for the typical private pilot. Until now less than two percent of European private pilots have obtained a European instrument rating.the US, the level is well over 40 percent. With the new more achievable path to a European instrument rating the hope is that we will start to see more instrument proficient private pilots getting more benefits from their license and with skills allowing them to fly even safer.
Thread Starter
I know its early days but still surprised at the lack of response .....This is THE BIGGEST STEP IN HELICOPTER SAFETY definitely in my lifetime !!!
I am sure that some of you who sweated and paid a fortune for an IR may be cursing but its potentially a great move forward . The IMC was a wonderful thing for the fixed wing community and they would now be utterly lost without it . Give it a few years and we will be the same . From this i guarantee to you that 90 % of singles will be able to do part of their route in cloud rather than grovelling around at 200ft ....that has got to be good .
( So long as they have ModeC Xponder on and dont take the piss trying to do ILS for a breakaway etc ). Now also it will be worth fitting new generation kit into singles such as SAS , synthetic vision etc etc and these will all plummet in price due to the new volume .
As a fairly high hr ppl flying regularly why would you NOT want an EIR ????
I just find it amazing that for once it appears that a PILOT has had some influence in the dealings of the men in white coats
I am sure that some of you who sweated and paid a fortune for an IR may be cursing but its potentially a great move forward . The IMC was a wonderful thing for the fixed wing community and they would now be utterly lost without it . Give it a few years and we will be the same . From this i guarantee to you that 90 % of singles will be able to do part of their route in cloud rather than grovelling around at 200ft ....that has got to be good .
( So long as they have ModeC Xponder on and dont take the piss trying to do ILS for a breakaway etc ). Now also it will be worth fitting new generation kit into singles such as SAS , synthetic vision etc etc and these will all plummet in price due to the new volume .
As a fairly high hr ppl flying regularly why would you NOT want an EIR ????
I just find it amazing that for once it appears that a PILOT has had some influence in the dealings of the men in white coats
...but the aircraft still has to be certificated for flight in IMC. This change applies only to licence privileges and not to the helicopter.The difference between aeroplanes and helicopters is that, whilst aeroplanes arrive with clearance to fly in IMC under normal certification, helicopters do not.
Jim
Jim
Thread Starter
Yes obviously that is the case for now , but i believe that will all change in due course .....just like the single FW flying AOC work ....it happens eventually .
I dont think a twin VFR heli will be worth much soon now it will be so simple to get an EIR .....
I dont think a twin VFR heli will be worth much soon now it will be so simple to get an EIR .....
I've tried reading through the original post but the lack of spacing is making it a bit tricky.
Can somebody please point out the bit which refers specifically to helicopter licences?
Can somebody please point out the bit which refers specifically to helicopter licences?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A while back I posted my thoughts on Single Engine Helicopter IFR.
It was in the UK Twin Mentality Thread if I recall correctly.
In essence what I opined was I supported Single Engine IFR for Helicopters provided adequate Viz and Ceiling existed to facilitate a "safe" landing in the event of an engine failure.
If one incorporates the IMC Rating limitations, VFR Take Off and Approach to Landing with just the enroute phase in actual IMC, was I not describing pretty much what Nigel posted about. Granted, I was referring to Weather Minimums while his post concerns Pilot Rating.
All we need to do now is get the Technical side to set forth a minimum standard for Single Engine Helicopters (which with the exception of a second engines and its related components would comply as well) for Enroute IFR in IMC conditions.
At a minimum I would like to see at least a basic Autopilot and Stand By Attitude Indicator.
What's the chance of that happening in the UK?
It was in the UK Twin Mentality Thread if I recall correctly.
In essence what I opined was I supported Single Engine IFR for Helicopters provided adequate Viz and Ceiling existed to facilitate a "safe" landing in the event of an engine failure.
If one incorporates the IMC Rating limitations, VFR Take Off and Approach to Landing with just the enroute phase in actual IMC, was I not describing pretty much what Nigel posted about. Granted, I was referring to Weather Minimums while his post concerns Pilot Rating.
All we need to do now is get the Technical side to set forth a minimum standard for Single Engine Helicopters (which with the exception of a second engines and its related components would comply as well) for Enroute IFR in IMC conditions.
At a minimum I would like to see at least a basic Autopilot and Stand By Attitude Indicator.
What's the chance of that happening in the UK?
Bob,
As was stated before, this has nothing to do with the UK; certification requirement for flight in IMC is contained in FAR 27/29 - it applies equally to the US as well as Europe (and anyone else who builds to that standard).
Jim
As was stated before, this has nothing to do with the UK; certification requirement for flight in IMC is contained in FAR 27/29 - it applies equally to the US as well as Europe (and anyone else who builds to that standard).
Jim
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim,
Nigel is discussing the UK and Europe.
The proposed License change affects the UK.
If the UK License changes then it does have some effect in the UK.
Our FAA is well known for giving totally accurate but totally useless responses.
Did the CAA adopt that practice as well as Part 27/29?
I repeat the question.
What is the chances we shall see Single Engine Helicopters flying IMC in the UK?
As you have posted in the past you said the Authorities can add requirements to ICAO conventions. Thus, the USA, UK, and EASA could do just that and allow Single Engine Helicopters to fly IMC.
Rub your hands over your Crystal Ball and tell us what you see?
Nigel is discussing the UK and Europe.
The proposed License change affects the UK.
If the UK License changes then it does have some effect in the UK.
Our FAA is well known for giving totally accurate but totally useless responses.
Did the CAA adopt that practice as well as Part 27/29?
I repeat the question.
What is the chances we shall see Single Engine Helicopters flying IMC in the UK?
As you have posted in the past you said the Authorities can add requirements to ICAO conventions. Thus, the USA, UK, and EASA could do just that and allow Single Engine Helicopters to fly IMC.
Rub your hands over your Crystal Ball and tell us what you see?
Thread Starter
I think Jims point is to do with the manufacturers getting the certification . That may take some time but i sometimes fly a 500 IFR with certification so its obviously not impossible !! If the demand is there it will happen .
The 109 i fly is not a good vfr machine so it makes sense to encourage pilots to get the EIR and go up !!
The 109 i fly is not a good vfr machine so it makes sense to encourage pilots to get the EIR and go up !!
I think it could be a double edged sword:
For people like you Nigel who are very experienced GA drivers, I agree - this is another string to your bow...AND...your likes would probably use it to good effect. BUT I wonder how the less blessed PPL / GA driver would see this? Will it offer them another escape route into (possibly) worse IMC conditions? Would they be tempted to get airborne in much worse weather thinking they can simply 'pop' up EIR and alls well, forgetting or not bothering to consider the prospects the other end - ie - getting down below MSA to recover?
The sticking point is and still will be configuring the cab - too cost prohibitive for the lower end of the market, so I wonder how many could take this on?
Finally BOb - UK single engine IFR - NOT in your lifetime buddy!
For people like you Nigel who are very experienced GA drivers, I agree - this is another string to your bow...AND...your likes would probably use it to good effect. BUT I wonder how the less blessed PPL / GA driver would see this? Will it offer them another escape route into (possibly) worse IMC conditions? Would they be tempted to get airborne in much worse weather thinking they can simply 'pop' up EIR and alls well, forgetting or not bothering to consider the prospects the other end - ie - getting down below MSA to recover?
The sticking point is and still will be configuring the cab - too cost prohibitive for the lower end of the market, so I wonder how many could take this on?
Finally BOb - UK single engine IFR - NOT in your lifetime buddy!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which I knew long before asking the question!
I was just trying to get some folks on record that know very well what the "Reality" is in the lofty perches in the Hallowed Halls of the House!
The Crats shall never accept the personal and career liability that would come along with making such a decision.
I was just trying to get some folks on record that know very well what the "Reality" is in the lofty perches in the Hallowed Halls of the House!
The Crats shall never accept the personal and career liability that would come along with making such a decision.
Last edited by Boudreaux Bob; 7th Apr 2014 at 15:22.
Thread Starter
TC ... For anyone like myself lucky enough to own or fly an IFR twin , but who hasnt been through the pain of getting a full IR , it is absolutely brilliant news ......although the thought of being totally legal takes some of the fun out of it !!
I also sadly think you are probably correct about singles and ifr but for the life of me i cant see a proper valid reason ....but weve been through all of that before havent we
I also sadly think you are probably correct about singles and ifr but for the life of me i cant see a proper valid reason ....but weve been through all of that before havent we
There seems to be some confusion here.
The majority of the new rules are aimed at (A) holders.
The bit that applies to helicopters is that if you hold an ICAO IR(H) then you only need to pass a skills test to gain an EASA IR(H).
This is all subject to you finding at ATO that doesn't require any training before undertaking the test.
NigelH - it's exactly the same situation you find yourself in with regards to obtaining an EASA 109 Type Rating...
The majority of the new rules are aimed at (A) holders.
The bit that applies to helicopters is that if you hold an ICAO IR(H) then you only need to pass a skills test to gain an EASA IR(H).
This is all subject to you finding at ATO that doesn't require any training before undertaking the test.
NigelH - it's exactly the same situation you find yourself in with regards to obtaining an EASA 109 Type Rating...
And how many single engine or light/medium twin helicopters actually have an icing clearance that would allow you to fly en route IFR for much of the year in UK?
Chances are we would have lots more GA pilots operating IMC below SAlt and ignoring things like quadrantals because they can't get above the zero degree isotherm.
Chances are we would have lots more GA pilots operating IMC below SAlt and ignoring things like quadrantals because they can't get above the zero degree isotherm.
Thread Starter
Crab .....i dont see your point at all !!! Effectively none of us have icing clearance regardless of what rating s we may have .
Anyway i have a horrible feeling that my reaction on hearing this " I cannot believe that CAA or EASA or whatever you are today ...have actually come up with a really sensible idea that will increase GA , making it easier for people to actually use their aircraft properly rather than not being able to do a trip just due to a narrow band of low cloud across their route . Safer also as they will pop up to MSA for a few minutes in this case and then go VFR again rather than clawing low level ( which most of us do ) knowing we have only 20 nm before it gets better ." may be premature . I think this helps people get an IR from another country which is great but i dont think the EIR is relevant to us . I was told it was but now i am not so sure , there is no mention of helicopters just aircraft ....... Sorry if i got your hopes up but you will just have to carry on illegally for the time being !!!!
I
Anyway i have a horrible feeling that my reaction on hearing this " I cannot believe that CAA or EASA or whatever you are today ...have actually come up with a really sensible idea that will increase GA , making it easier for people to actually use their aircraft properly rather than not being able to do a trip just due to a narrow band of low cloud across their route . Safer also as they will pop up to MSA for a few minutes in this case and then go VFR again rather than clawing low level ( which most of us do ) knowing we have only 20 nm before it gets better ." may be premature . I think this helps people get an IR from another country which is great but i dont think the EIR is relevant to us . I was told it was but now i am not so sure , there is no mention of helicopters just aircraft ....... Sorry if i got your hopes up but you will just have to carry on illegally for the time being !!!!
I
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea of popping up into IMC, without a capability to fly an instrument approach to sensible minima, never mind have the endurance for a diversion, isn't one that would have me cheering! In a single OR a twin.
Just keep them out of Class 'A' airspace please. That's where the professionals have every right to be safeguarded from the unqualified. Other than that, fill your boots.
Just keep them out of Class 'A' airspace please. That's where the professionals have every right to be safeguarded from the unqualified. Other than that, fill your boots.
Thread Starter
Tandem . You really are a " glass half empty " man aren't you !!!
Nobody said the planning of a flight would be any different to you
" professionals " .
There is no problem with switching from vfr to ifr if you have it as a planned option .... It's quite normal !!
Sorry to ruin your day but you may not have realised ...... The idiotic ppl brigade already swim in your waters .... And have done , virtually incident free , for quite some years . It's called an "IMC" rating and is basically the same as an EIR I guess .
Anyway don't panic , the idiot helicopter pilots are not going to be allowed to do the same as idiot FW pilots for the time being !!
Nobody said the planning of a flight would be any different to you
" professionals " .
There is no problem with switching from vfr to ifr if you have it as a planned option .... It's quite normal !!
Sorry to ruin your day but you may not have realised ...... The idiotic ppl brigade already swim in your waters .... And have done , virtually incident free , for quite some years . It's called an "IMC" rating and is basically the same as an EIR I guess .
Anyway don't panic , the idiot helicopter pilots are not going to be allowed to do the same as idiot FW pilots for the time being !!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idiotic ppl brigade already swim in your waters .... And have done , virtually incident free , for quite some years . It's called an "IMC" rating and is basically the same as an EIR I guess .
flight in IMC outside controlled airspace, (in Class G) and IFR flight in Class D or E controlled airspace with appropriate permission
