FREDAcheck. I'm afraid your reasoning doesn't explain all the vitriol aimed at Jim Thorpe. We must look elsewhere for that and find it in ignorance, misunderstanding, and perhaps guilt. Yes, guilt by those who have been caught unaware by their lack of attention and diligence. I'm not in the aviation business and pretty busy with my work and family, and yet have not been surprised by much of what I read the last few weeks at all. How can that be? Glad I'm not in the AOPA UK. I respect what you have said, and maybe Mr. Thorpes' judgement can be debated. I am very grateful for his decision to share insight and comments on the process he took part in though, else we would have no news whatsoever.
Utfart, please don't assume false and insulting motives by others. I'm not doing that about you, even if I think your comments wrong.
This has been a constant theme: those opposing IMCR use terms like ignorance, guilt, lack of diligence... and on other threads: "die-hards", "stubbornly defending", or referring them as too lazy or too stupid to get a "proper" IR.
Why are people so threatened by the IMCR? You may not think it has any chance of being agreed by EASA, in which case, just smile quietly and ignore people pressing for it. I don't think anyone is trying to impose IMCR on other countries (though I think it might be a good idea). No one is trying to make anyone else do anything they don't want to. We're just trying to persuade people to let the UK continue with a rating that is wanted and serves a useful purpose. I think there's evidence that it improves safety, but there's certainly no evidence that it causes harm.
So what's the problem?