I have started this thread as an extension of another thread which has developed into a debate on the IMCR and the desire for a easely obtainable PPL IR? I have placed it here under its own thread for discussion as I feel and hope it warrants more attention.
There are a number of pilots in that thread who are dedicated to maintaining the PPL IMCR and who are frustrated by the lack of movement by EASA towards a European acceptance of the IMCR.
Sometimes it is easier to see the wood for the trees If you are not deeply and emotionally involved in a cause.
knowing the History of Europe and its Burocracy and makeup I question the present direction in achieving anything worthwhile.
I also fear that trying to "save" the IMCR might be a bullet in the foot and counterproductive to the goal that posters are trying to achieve.
Infact saving the IMCR might just give EASA the way out it desires on a plate.
I will explain why!
Europe has always been different politically to the USA.
We border Russia and there has always been a more socialist burocratic tendency within Europe.
Call it state control, big brother intervention or whatever, but the Europeans have always been uncomfortable with the lack of control and freedom that GA has.
Europeans would much rather have all flying relegated to people carriers and all pilots trained to what they see as a "professional standard".
As in any profession they would like to structure the training around a university degree in aviation related matters and that is the big difference to the USA which takes a broader more practicle view of pilot licencing.
There was a major study on JAA V FAA pilots right up to ATP level.
The conclusion? That neither was better or safer than the other and both achieved the same goal of quality of ATP but following different routes.
The big problem with the IMCR is not the IMCR which can be proved by comparison with french VFR accident rates to save lives, but with what IMCR pilots have made it to be.
It has been made to be from its initial conception of a "get out of trouble" rating into a Mini Uk IR for getting around the UK in IMC conditions. Pilots who do not have the time or work allowance to spend months or years studying and passing mainly irrelevant exams to achieve a JAA IR use the IMCR for that end although it could never be promoted as an IR. Who Blames them as they have no real realistic other choice!
I have no doubt that if the CAA push hard enough we will get an EASA IMCR and give them a way out of ever offering the real deal of a EASA PPL IR.
Safety is the only guiding force which will achieve anything either in maintaining the IMCR or in getting a new PPL IR.
The safety statistics make the IMCR benefits indisputable but not in achieving what most want here.
I could easely see a situation where EASA might use the IMCR as a way of avoiding forming any Easely obtainable new PPL IR.
This is where the shooting in the foot bit comes.
10540 begged the answer to how you would define inadvertant flight into IMC conditions? That is EASY.
Inadvertant flight into IMC conditions is any flight by a pilot where for whatever reason he can no longer maintain VMC and hence navigation by sight and is forced into IMC where he can no longer navigate by sight or control the aircraft with visual reference to the ground or a horizon.
By that defininition any instrument training and nav aid training cannot be argued against and is a positive benefit to flight safety.
EASA could with little difficulty accept the IMCR on the grounds of safety but NOT in the way people want and by doing so eliminate any safety based arguement for a new JAA PPL IR.
They could accept it in its original form as a get out of trouble rating for VFR pilots and make it more restrictive than we have at present in the UK.
ie you can only use the rating in inadvertant entry into IMC conditions whereapon after the declaration of a mayday you will be radar vectored onto an ILS. But not to be used as a mini IR as is the case in the UK and what most want.
Agreeing to this new IMCR rating EASA could happily say we have allowed what you want and keep the status quo regarding any changes to the IR.
Hence my STRONG instincts would be to ditch saving the IMCR and put all my efforts through the European Courts on the creation of a more easely achievable PPL IR for NON professional pilots.
The grounds for that would be that EASA are putting pilots and their families/friends at risk by not allowing pilots who fly for business or pleasure the ability to achieve an IR in a practical way. They are dragging their heels motivated by internal political reasons rather than safety concerns which can be proved by statistical data and JAA V FAA comparison data. By doing so they are endangering pilots forced to attempt to fly VFR.
There is Loads of evidence both through VFR accident statistics in Europe and licence quality comparisons between FAA and JAA to make a successful challenge through the courts rather than the mindless ways through EASA.
EASA would then be forced to do something rather than empty promises, buying time and endless cups of tea and biscuits in a set in rock burocracy.
The Courts in my eyes are the only way forward without out chasing a dream for years ahead which will probably never materialise
Pace