The EASA Enroute Instrument Rating

[ATPMBA]

Hello,


I have an FAA Helicopter IR.
Could I go for the EASA Enroute Instrument Rating? Could that IR be added onto a PPL(H) or a CPL(H)?

Is the EASA Enroute Instrument Rating a full IR rating without restrictions?

Thanks Guys/Gals.

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by ATPMBA

Could the IR be added onto a PPL(H) or a CPL(H)?

No. It's for (A) licences only.

[ATPMBA]

Thanks for the quick reply!

Guess I'll have to hit the books.

[GoodGrief]

Since it's an 'enroute' ifr you cannot do ifr take offs or approaches.

[Reely340]

No. It's for (A) licences only.

Apparently this might change, according to a quick response I got from EASA:

Thanks for your mail to EASA and your query related to EASA SIB 2011-01R2.
EASA confirm that, for the time being, this SIB is only applicable for aeroplanes (not rotorcraft).
Please note however that EASA is in contact with the different rotorcraft
Design Approval Holders to verify whether this SIB can be extended to
their respective rotorcrafts.
When conclusions are made, if possible, EASA should amend the SIB to
extend its scope.

[Reely340]

Since it's an 'enroute' ifr you cannot do ifr take offs or approaches.

True, but VMC for helicopters (in austria) in airspace G means

• Clear of cloud and

• in sight of surface and

• less than 1500m flight visibility when speed is low enough to avoid collisions.

Therefore helicopters in airspace G might be in a type of VMC whose parameters render it IMC for airplanes. E.g. only helicopters among themselves.

So for helicopters in 'G' the enroute IMC could reach down to as low as 500ft AGL, with a much higher probability for "helicopter VMC", of which a small patch right above the airfield would suffice.

In the current definition enroute-IR ist of much more use to helicopters than aeroplanes, as the latter are constraint to >1500m flight visibility at both the departure and arrival airfield.

[jymil]

Not really convinced an EIR rating actually makes sense for helicopters. It would make more sense the other way around: making IFR departures and approaches and then VFR for the cruise (e.g. on top). Especially this time of the year, we frequently encounter inversions which means you can't get in and out of the airport, but otherwise the weather is perfectly flyable. And if the weather is IMC for cruise, it is most likely IMC too at the airport you want to land, since distances flown with a chopper are usually shorter.

In Switzerland there is still a national license for a so-called "cloud breaking procedure" which allows you to do an IFR departure in a single turbine with IFR-like instrumentation, but only without pax and no approaches.

[Reely340]

Not really convinced an EIR rating actually makes sense for helicopters. It would make more sense the other way around: making IFR departures and approaches and then VFR for the cruise (e.g. on top). Especially this time of the year, we frequently encounter inversions which means you can't get in and out of the airport, but otherwise the weather is perfectly flyable.

Hmm. In the flatlandish section of Austria we frequently have very low cloud/fog bases like 100ft AGL. So the departure would be helicopter VMC, turing into IMC while still above the 3000ft runway, still in uncontrolled airspace.

And if the weather is IMC for cruise, it is most likely IMC too at the airport you want to land, since distances flown with a chopper are usually shorter.

In Switzerland there is still a national license for a so-called "cloud breaking procedure" which allows you to do an IFR departure in a single turbine with IFR-like instrumentation, but only without pax and no approaches.

On an uncontrolled airfield in class 'G'? nice!

Maybe I'm just wrong regarding what part of the flight path is considered takeoff or landing (both should be VMC) and what part is the en-route part.
Given the very low speed of a helicopter I'd be okay with a departure or arrival clouds base of as low as 100ft AGL.
Judging from the pattern planes are flying at my home field I'd say that certainly is not enough for them to safely find their final approach.

Coming to think of it in a more general way:
Who is separating "en-route IMC" traffic in uncontrolled airspace right now as we speak, and how is it done?
I don't think separation is "decentralized" by mandating PowerFLARM + Mode-S + ADBS-in/out for enroute-IMC.

As the name "enroute IFR" implies I presume one will be ATC controlled, following the requested heights and courses and at the latest when leaving controlled airspace one has to cancel IFR. This mandates see-and-avoid capability at the bottom of IFR airspace, which in many cases will be way above our typical winter cloud blanket.

What you are suggesting - while convenient - would place pilots (plural!) in IMC departure in non-IFR airspace, understandably a no-no

So how do the Swiss do that "cloud breaking thing", what conditions airspace / ATC wise are to be met ? They are way more relaxed than over here regarding PPL off airfield landings, maybe they've sorted out other things too, that our bossy Austrian gvmt. is denying us.

[GoodGrief]

What you are suggesting - while convenient - would place pilots (plural!) in IMC departure in non-IFR airspace, understandably a no-no

There are countries doing IFR in uncontrolled airspace and quite successfully so.
Europe is a nanny state and screw EASA.

[spinwing]

Mmmmm ...

IFR in Class G .... Australia is another that allows it ...


(of course one must not start confusing IFR in VMC with IFR flight in IMC ??? and often 'Helicopter VFR' permits flight in conditions which theoretically exclude aeroplanes from legally being in the same area .... be vewy vewy carefwul !!).

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by Reely340

Hmm. In the flatlandish section of Austria we frequently have very low cloud/fog bases like 100ft AGL. So the departure would be helicopter VMC, turing into IMC while still above the 3000ft runway, still in uncontrolled airspace.

Originally Posted by Reely340

Maybe I'm just wrong regarding what part of the flight path is considered takeoff or landing (both should be VMC) and what part is the en-route part.
Given the very low speed of a helicopter I'd be okay with a departure or arrival clouds base of as low as 100ft AGL.

A 100ft cloud base is below the minima for most ILSs.

Please don't go flying around in IMC until you are a) properly trained, b) properly licenced and c) in a properly equipped helicopter. Otherwise, you might well end up as a statistic of the worse kind.

[212man]

There are countries doing IFR in uncontrolled airspace and quite successfully so. Europe is a nanny state and screw EASA.

European countries being amongst them! Classes F and G are not controlled airspace and IFR operations - including departures and arrivals, as well as enroute - are commonplace, so it's hard to see your point

[Reely340]

A 100ft cloud base is below the minima for most ILSs.

True. But if my enroute IMC flight section would exactly there, the rest would be an approach in helicopter VMC

But according to what I've learned today on pprune.org (an invaluable source of knowledge)
this won't work for die EASA E-IR, as there normally won't be controlled airspace (for IFR) that low.

Had the UK guys an IMCr(H) + Austrian VMC rules, they might be able to leaglly land with cloud base at 100AGL (way below ILS minima) as they are flying IMC VFR, not the EASA en-route IFR.

Please don't go flying around in IMC until you are a) properly trained, b) properly licenced and c) in a properly equipped helicopter. Otherwise, you might well end up as a statistic of the worse kind.

No worries, I'm way too intimidated by the shear thought of an SPL darting through clouds on his way to the other valley to find some thermals.

[Hot_LZ]

An interesting topic that Is really quite serious.

To me an Enroute IR just wouldn't work in helicopters. As has been previously mentioned to do IFR in IMC requires proper training and a capable approved machine. It's a different story in aeroplanes because they are naturally stable platforms compared to helicopters. And why would you want to do IFR in VMC? Just go VFR!

It's all very well getting VFR on top but if it's a broken or overcast day how would you get back down? You need to have proper cloud break procedures (App Aid/offshore let down) that would need to conform to MSA, you'd want radalt to be safe and radar to see what's ahead. Then you're in the territory of an IFR machine (£££). Although FAA machines can do IFR with single engine Robbins etc there's a reason they stay out of cloud.

lZ

[Reely340]

It's all very well getting VFR on top but if it's a broken or overcast day how would you get back down?

That is the only part of an E-IR(H) that I would be interested in.
As a PPL I won't waste my precious spare time sitting two hours inside a white cloud, watching my instruments and following ATC orders, boring.

The reason I'd love to get me an E-IR(H) is best outlined by an example:

• I'd make sure (webcam, phone), that the destination airfield has >100 ft AGL cloud base,

• prepare some nagivation aids (VOR, NDB, RNAV..)

• departure is a piece of cake in a heli, breaking through doing 45knots @1500ft/min

• fly OCAS over the beautiful, fluffy white blanket in winter sunshine to my destination.

• There I'd call out on airfield freq. to check for similar people in the clouds below

• Then comes the IMC part, where I'd cautiously (rad alt?, GPS alt, regional QNH, airfield QNH) srcatch the rim of the H-V Curve until I'm below clouds.

• At 100 ft AGL doing 50 knots I'd need only the airspace right above the runway to be obstacle free

That way most if not any day in winter would not only be a flying day but one could catch some sunshine, too.


Problem is, above depicts an UK IMCr flight.
EASA E-IR mandates an IFR (e.g. ATC controlled, non 'G' space) IMC flight.

[spencer17]

@Reely340
And some nice ice on the blades probably also on the air intake, pitot, static ports etc. etc.
Happy suizide
Hope you don't carry passengers.

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by Reely340

True. But if my enroute IMC flight section would exactly there, the rest would be an approach in helicopter VMC

The more of your posts that I read, the more concerned that I get. At this rate, you are going to end up as that statistic sooner rather than later.

If, for a second, you think that IMC @ 100ft AGL is part of the 'enroute sector' then you are nuts. Totally nuts. YOU CANNOT EVEN DESCEND TO 100ft ON AN ILS WHILST IMC.

One of the IFR rules is that you must be at least at MEA, unless on a published procedure. MEA (Minimum Enroute Altitude) is 1000ft about the closest obstacle. So, no, you can't descend to 100ft whilst IMC then think that you can continue visually. That's how people die (by flying into something which is also in the cloud that they are in).

[paco]

The EIR is not for letdowns. Enroute means what it says - you can only take off and land under VFR in VMC, and not in Class A airspace at anytime.

People also forget that flying VMC on top also breaks the performance rules.

phil

[Reely340]

The more of your posts that I read, the more concerned that I get. At this rate, you are going to end up as that statistic sooner rather than later.

I feel flattered by your concern, but.., I don't know how I should put it, of the two disjunct off-road motorcycle rider types I am the old one, not the fast one.

Personally I've been in real IMC only twice:
- 25 yeras ago a student colleague at the university demostrated IMC, guessing attitude w/ instruments covered and "escape" per radio compass in a 4-seat Robin.
- 20 years ago as a paraglider in a 1500ft/min updraft at cloud base (bright white IMC for ~10 Secs, scared the living s*** out of me)

Rest assured, I do know that I positively don't belong there.


The very reason why I dig into that area so joyfully is, that I'd like to find out the "why" behind given rules (for instance: E-IR(A) yes, e-IR(H) no) frequently smelling injustice stemming from some bureaucrat's cheap and ignorant "solution" to a diversive problem.

If, for a second, you think that IMC @ 100ft AGL is part of the 'enroute sector' then you are nuts. Totally nuts. YOU CANNOT EVEN DESCEND TO 100ft ON AN ILS WHILST IMC.

This certainly is true from an ATPL's viewpoint, doing a minimum of 140 knots while having a U-turn radius measures in miles.

re ILS: when I picture a helicopter doing an ILS approach, pissing off everyone in the holding by doing measly 50kt, considering its excessive vertical velocity capabilities (read missed approach) and the ages, it would take him to cover the whole length of the runway I don't see real world reasons, why he shouldn't be allowed to hand fly Cat-III. Hell, he could even stop in midair 500ft AGL at the inner marker having tower confrim his trajectory is pointing towards the runway threshold before proceeding.
*bait* A helicopter is infinitely more capable of dealing with IMC (icing aside *cough*) that any plane.
To my layman's ignorance imposing ATPL IMC departure and approach requirements on helicopters is a bit as if one mandated boat fenders for a hover craft "..because ships have to have them".

But, being the nut that I am, I still don't get it how the UK IMCr guys land their C172 OCAS VFR in IMC. Do these UK IMCr airfields have to operate ILS?

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by Reely340

This certainly is true from an ATPL's viewpoint, doing a minimum of 140 knots while having a U-turn radius measures in miles.

re ILS: when I picture a helicopter doing an ILS approach, pissing off everyone in the holding by doing measly 50kt, considering its excessive vertical velocity capabilities (read missed approach) and the ages, it would take him to cover the whole length of the runway I don't see real world reasons, why he shouldn't be allowed to hand fly Cat-III. Hell, he could even stop in midair 500ft AGL at the inner marker having tower confrim his trajectory is pointing towards the runway threshold before proceeding.
*bait* A helicopter is infinitely more capable of dealing with IMC (icing aside *cough*) that any plane.
To my layman's ignorance imposing ATPL IMC departure and approach requirements on helicopters is a bit as if one mandated boat fenders for a hover craft "..because ships have to have them".

I'm beginning to get very bored of this. But this is my last attempt: rather than you telling us about how you think that a helicopter might react whilst IMC, why don't you try listening to some of us who have actually 'been there, done that'?

Is it possible to "stop in midair 500ft AGL at the inner marker" and then to "hand fly a CAT-III" approach in a helicopter? No, it's not. And to be honest, if I thought it might be worth my effort to explain to you why, I would. But I feel that I would be wasting my time because whatever I tell you, you will always know best. I'm out.