Originally Posted by
BillieBob
There are schools in the UK that offer the option of completing IR solely on the aeroplane. Whether it is a good idea or not depends on the design of the course and the fidelity of the FSTD that would otherwise be used. For example, whilst it is only a procedures trainer, an FNPT II that is precisely matched to the aircraft is a better prospect than one that is configured as a different type - if the FSTD were configured as a BE-76 when the aircraft is a DA-42 it might well be better to do the whole course on the aircraft (except for limited panel UPs, of course).
Also, with the advent of PBN and the current scarcity of approved LPV approaches, it will be difficult (although not impossible) to cover the entire syllabus in the aircraft. Of course, this issue will fade as more airfields introduce PBN procedures.
ersa - I think (hope) that you meant to say that burning holes in the sky is counter-productive.
It really depends on the country, here in France, an IFR field without LPV approach is rather the exception than the norm.
I don't think a training entirely on the aircraft is fundamentally harder or that it leads to a lower level in the end.
However, it leads to a different type of learning.
Instead of learning skills one after the other, a training entirely on aircraft leads to learning everything a once, at a slower pace.
In the end, I think the level achieved is similar, but how you got there is different.
A good option, which I used, can be the CB-IR :
Instead of paying 160€ per hour to pay an instructor, find a volunteer instructor and use the money for the difference between sim and aircraft.
I ended up getting an IR qualification for 15k€, for 40-45 hours of flight. On the SR20.