I'm trying not to post again too
But........
conversion/bridging provisions.
This is the BIG BIG deal as far as I and many other's here are concerned. For example, a high hours IMCr holder would be forced to do the entire JAA IR course, despite being highly experienced. An ICAO IR holder is required to do a minimum of a 15 hour course - which has always been the case.
While we're at it - re-designing the IR for the 21st centuary -, why not completely get rid of these requirements. What is wrong with "training as required" for previous experienced IR/IMC holders.
Don't think we're bitching to be difficult
. I just believe that if the IR is going to be re-designed, then lets do it properly first time around rather than compromise before we even start.
If we had an IR which had more realistic ground exams, and gave credit for previous instrument time, then I think we *may* see current IMCr holders flocking to get an IR. I still don't think an annual examiner flight is
nescessary myself for an experienced pilot, especially as it only includes a hold / ILS etc...but I could probably live with it. I would have thought that an "instructional flight of at least one hour duration " along with logged experience or "a flight with an examiner once every 12 months"would be a more appropriate option for the PPL/IR - it seems ok to revalidate SEP privileges afterall.
If all these things were taken into account, I think that it could convince many people not to keep their planes on the N register, and we'd see far less people bothering to go and do the FAA IR.