mm_flynn wrote:
The key issue [of FCL.008] is making the IR more sensible
That's not what the Terms of Reference say. Making IR more sensible is just one objective. Considering the need for a European IMCR is another.
PACE wrote:
Europe could get around the safety angle by incorporating mandatory IFR traing into the PPL syllabus and use the arguement that some instrumenent training adds to safety FOR THE VFR PILOT.
Pace, I'm sure you're not suggesting that a bit of extra IFR training in the PPL sylabus obviates the safety benefit of IMCR (as that certainly wouldn't be true unless the IFR training were 15 or 20 hours IMCR-like training) but I'm not quite sure what your point is here.
IMCR training not only increases the poor weather ability of a PPL, but also increases the poor weather
awareness, or it has in my case, anyway. I believe this means that IMCR holders are less likely than basic VFR PPLs to fly in weather below their capability.
As Fuji says, politics is the art of the possible. Imposing an IMCR on Europe may not be possible. A long-term exception for the UK ought to be, provided UK reps on FCL.008 don't give up on us. And I really hope Jim Thorpe comes to regret ever supporting the en-route but can't land rating; as BEagle says, this is not only counter to UK interests but it's a dangerous proposal.