Shock Horror (PPL-IR in UK)

[RVR800]

I knew that the number of IRs issued in the UK per year to PPLs were small but its actually miniscule - about 20!

Its on SRG web site.

More FAA IR's are issued I bet by a long way.

No wonder people say that the effect of JAR is to export jobs offshore

[S-Works]

easily understandable when you see how monstrously difficult and time consuming it is. Not to mention expensive.

Why does a PPL need to have airline pilot levels of knowledge to operate a light aircraft in the airways. For example what is the requirement to understand change of latitude between hemispheres or how to convert between a lambert and polar sterographic projection position.

Trigonometry etc.

:O

[distaff_beancounter]

Why does a PPL need to have airline pilot levels of knowledge to operate a light aircraft in the airways I am not sure if it is still the case, but I seem to recall that the PPL/IR exams used to include such questions as "How many megaphones must be carried in a Boeing 747?"

Obviously such knowledge is really useful to a PPL/IR who just wants to do the odd airways trip to France in a Seneca :mad:

[High Wing Drifter]

Maybe the the best thing would be to do the FAA IR , then upgrade it to a JAA with another 15 hrs flying training.

Am I right in thinking that you get an hours reduction on your FAA IR if you have a UK IMC? I know that you don't get a JAA IR hours reduction. Stranger than fiction if true :ugh:

[S-Works]

Yes, you get a reduction for the IMC you also get a reduction for all IMC hours flown. Minimum of 15hrs dual to be flown. Total time is required to be 45hrs. Basically the FAA recognises the experianced candidate and despite non ICAO compliance of the IMC the training given and gives credit accordingly.

If you then convert from an FAA IR to a JAA IR you have to do a min of 15hrs dual.

The problem is not the flying as despite what people may insinuate the FAA IR flight skills and tests are just as exacting as the JAA one and the oral exam is a killer. You can either fly in IMC and do an approach to appropriate standards or not. JAA does not make you special over any other Instrument rated pilot. The FAA IR is not an IMC equivalent it is a full ICAO compliant licence.

The probem with JAA is the complexity and volume of the ground school. Far to in depth and time consuming for the average PPL as is demonstrated by the number of IR's actually issued.

Remember the FAA is about flying, promoting flying and flight safety, JAA is about revenue generation and protectionism of the great European country which non of us actually want to be part of.

[Dusty_B]

I knew that the number of IRs issued in the UK per year to PPLs were small but its actually miniscule - about 20!

It is probably smaller than that, if you consider that some schools (like Bristol) encourage students to do the IR before the CPL. Then, at the end of the CAA's stats year, you have some IR graduates still waiting for their CPL...

[2Donkeys]

I couldn't agree more strongly with the sentiments expressed within this thread, although the examples of things that purport to be included in the JAA IR ground exams get more whacky each time somebody comes up with an example. Megaphone counts are not included, yet! :D

The more I think about this topic the more I agree that the primary issue is protectionism towards the European Flight Training Industry. The unquestioning acceptance of FAA qualifications in Europe would essentially kill that business stone dead overnight.

2D

[IO540]

I think it's a job creation scheme, just like so many others e.g. ISO9000.

If you set up an organisation to do something, fill it up with people, they are hardly likely to reduce the scope of their work.

I also think that far less than 20 genuine PPLs do an IR. I recall looking at the CAA license data website about 2 years ago and the figure was shown as just 2 that year.

Most non-FAA PPL/IR pilots today did their IR years ago, on the old UK PPL.

JAA also have some ludicrous medical requirements like the Class 1 audiogram specifications (applicable to a PPL/IR or a CPL/IR). I bet a lot of ageing airline pilots wouldn't pass it, but it is required only on the initial test.

[Kyprianos Biris]

I just came back from Naples (http://naples-air-center.com/) Florida where I completed my FAA PPL ME IR.

I already had the UK PPL ME with IMC and by flying with an Angloamercian school I revalidated my UK PPL ME there as well.

Having had the IMC and doing the Part 61 (not 141) FAA IR enabled me to use the experience I had logged on Instruments (hours logged as well as the knowledge). The training was done by UK instructor and I doubt the quality is better in Europe (judging from my personnal experience).

I took the full FAA PPL (not restricted on the UK PPLvalidity) since revalidating the FAA IR for PPL is much simpler then JAR IR and in my country we have FAA CFII's available.

It took me 5 hours for the FAA PPL, 24 hours for the FAA IR and 6 hours for the Multi.

I spent 4 weeks and about 7,500 Euros incl. travel & accomodation.

In my country CAA recognizes FAA licenses for private flying (non commercial) and we can fly national reg. aircraft without further requirements ;)

[RodgerF]

Quote:

JAA also have some ludicrous medical requirements like the Class 1 audiogram specifications (applicable to a PPL/IR or a CPL/IR). I bet a lot of ageing airline pilots wouldn't pass it, but it is required only on the initial test.

Sorry!. The ageing airline pilots you refer to have audiograms every 2 years.

[dublinpilot]

RogerF,

That maybe the case, but the point that IO540 was trying to make, I believe, was that the initial audiogram test is more stringent than subsequent ones.

The ageing airline pilots he is refering to, maybe able to pass the renewal audiograms, but possibly not the initial issue ones.

dp

[Aim Far]

Has anyone on the forum actually done the PPL IR ground school recently? I've heard and read all these stories about useless content but I just wonder what percentage is actually useless?

I'm sure there are the odd stupid questions about megaphones on BA jets and the like. There are a few sillies in the FAA question bank too. You just learn the answer by rote and recite if they come up. But to what extent are the silly questions really representative of the JAA course as a whole?

[High Wing Drifter]

I have just finished the ATPLs. The IR subjects are a subset with the following:


Air Law
Aircraft General Knowledge
Flight Planning
Human Factors
Meterology
General Navigation
IFR Comms

Those subjects are related to airline flying in as much as airline flying is in the airways, across borders, trans-polar, etc, etc. There are elements of airline knowledge in AGK that maybe regarded as irrelevant just as Jet Engines and number of oxygen masks, axes and fire extinguishers for 100+ cabins. On the whole, the whole lot is relevant to the scope of the privileges of the IR. Met and Gen Nav are unfortunately considered the hardest subjects.

[On the Spot]

I understood that the good old CAA granted an IMC to FAA IR without further instruction or test ? At least that is what I am hoping when I go for mine next year.

And Kyprianos - Don't you have to do 40 hours flight/instruction for an FAA IR ?

[omcaree]

with regards to the whole eurocontrol argument, surely the charging for GA for using navigation services could be justified (and maybe even accepted by the GA comunity) if these navigation services included the use of airways.

basically if airways are made available to the vast majority of PPL's (either by making the IR easier/cheaper or increasing the privilages of the IMC) then the PPL's who go and use them will be paying to do so, which would generate the revanue which eurocontrol are demanding.

as far as i can see (and i have made my views known to eurocontrol) there is no justification for charging PPL's who may actually not be using any services, so why not offer them the service before chargind them for it ?

[Spitoon]

Why does a PPL need to have airline pilot levels of knowledge to operate a light aircraft in the airwaysBecause you're going to be able to fly in the same airspace. The consequences of a PPL holder doing something wrong are much the same as an airline pilot in those circumstances.

[Kyprianos Biris]

I understood that the good old CAA granted an IMC to FAA IR without further instruction or test ? At least that is what I am hoping when I go for mine next year.

And Kyprianos - Don't you have to do 40 hours flight/instruction for an FAA IR ?

As soon as you receive your FAA IFR license you can send it off to UK CAA with your IMC and they will renew it for the next two years and send them all back to you.

If you do Part 61 FAA IFR the actual training time spent in the course can be less provided you have instrument hours from the past. I had instrument hours from the past both from my IMC training and from various flights the last 14 years I've been flying. What you are refering to is the part 141 FAA IFR course qhich is a structured course for 0 hours instrument training experience.

[S-Works]

spitoon, sorry but have to disagree in part with your comment.

There is no need for a PL flying the airways to understand aircon and AC power system or to understand CHLat and CHlong etc to the same depth. I cant see a GA aircraft flying from CapeTown to New York in a single hit!

The FAA content is perfectly appropriate to Airways flight. JAA could take a lead from that content.

As someone currently undertaking the conversion and doing the dedicated JAA PPL IR exams I can assure you there is a huge amount of pretty useless information in the there. 90% of which will be forgotten straight after the exams. Why not have people learn relevant sensible content and maybe more of it will be retained which may enhance safety?

[slim_slag]

The FAA lets student pilots fly solo in airways. That bit of air belongs to them just as much as the airline pilot.

[High Wing Drifter]

The FAA lets student pilots fly solo in airways. That bit of air belongs to them just as much as the airline pilot.
I think the Victor Airways (upto 18,000') are Class E, so an IR is not required.

The FAA lets student pilots fly solo in airways. That bit of air belongs to them just as much as the airline pilot.
I think the Victor Airways (upto the 18,000\' transition altitude) are Class E, so an IR is not required.

[Kyprianos Biris]

I think the Victor Airways (upto the 18,000' transition altitude) are Class E, so an IR is not required.

They are but to fly under IFR you need to submit IFR FP and have an IFR license as everywhere in the world. Flying VFR in an V airway is different from the above and has all the restrictions of VFR flying (weather minima etc.)

If what you meant was that they let VFR flights into V airways (at VFR altitudes), yes up to 18000 they do. Above it its Class A.

[rustle]

slim_slag wrote:

The FAA lets student pilots fly solo in airways. That bit of air belongs to them just as much as the airline pilot.

Ah, but do the FAA let solo students into Class A airspace, for that is what nearly all airways in the UK are.

[slim_slag]

Nope, but this bit of the discussion came about when spitoon said that light aircraft pilots need to understand all sorts of IR nonsense to fly in airways because they are mixing it with the jets. Jets in the US happily mix it with student pilots all the time, in all classes except A.

And to be pedantic, which is a habit of mine :), its class E in airways up to 17,999 :ok:

Actually rustle, having thought about it, there is a mechanism to fly in Class A under VFR in FAA land. And not some SVFR workaround for stupid airspace classifications in the first place :) I have no idea whether a student pilot could use this. It\'s more of an ATC regulation I think, probably in their handbook....

[rustle]

And to be pedantic, which is a habit of mine

Pedantic, you (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79321), never... ;)

[High Wing Drifter]

Actually rustle, having thought about it, there is a mechanism to fly in Class A under VFR in FAA land.
Do you mean this: The pilot can ask for visual seperation with other a/c so long at ATC agree and, I think, so long as the other a/c agrees too; this is still IFR. As far as I have been taught, there is no VFR in Class A except in a CTR under SVFR. However, it is possible, with ATC permission, to transit Class A VFR so long as you submit your request four days in advance. So only the most exceptional circumstances I would imagine.

As for the IR qualfication, I still think that if the ground school were much less than it is for the JAA IR, then the pilot would have a license permitting use beyond the scope of that pilot's knowledge. We need an IR that is between the IMC and IR to allow use of low level airways and within certain limits of endurance or duration from a suitable airfield...prehaps.

[IO540]

within certain limits of endurance or duration from a suitable airfield...prehaps.

Why have such a limit? Example: I fly a new plane, fully airways, with more (and better) nav kit than a not-all-that-old 747, with 7hrs endurance at 140kt ias and a FL200 ceiling at MTOW. It doesn't have anti-ice, but could have.

Maybe this is one of the reasons why the Euros insist on a gold plated IR over here - out of reach for almost anyone who has to work for a living in the meantime. They think that everybody is flying old junk with one clapped out VOR receiver, and they want to keep them away from airline traffic :O

It is no wonder that nearly all the people who do manage to get their hands on decent aircraft, and fly enough hours IFR to have reasonable currency, are going to the FAA.

[rustle]

Does anyone know the requirements and/or availability of an instrument rating for private pilots in any other JAA state pre-JAA?

We know that the UK-CAA did one, and it was a simpler exam regime than now but the flight test was the same (or very similar) -- what about other JAA states? Could you get an IR on a PPL in, say, Germany/France/Spain/Italy before JAA and if so were the exams the same as our (CAA) ones or closer to the FAA model?

Maybe some JAA folk are actually better off since the advent of JAA PPL-IRs because prior to JAA the only way to get an IR was to do a commercial course or somesuch.

Anyone?

The problem is not the flying as despite what people may insinuate the FAA IR flight skills and tests are just as exacting as the JAA one...

That is not quite the case AFAIK. The private (PPL) IR under FAA regs is not the same exacting standard as the CAA/JAA IRT -- think about deflection allowances on the ILS/VOR.

Maybe a tad pedantic :O , but if we are doing comparisons we should do so openly.

The FAA ATP I believe is a different test again and has a tighter tolerance (intolerance?) for needle deflection than the (J)CAA IRT...

Here there is one IRT -- whether that attaches to a PPL, CPL or ATPL.

[S-Works]

HighWingDrifter. No No No..... Go and do an FA IR and tell me that afterwards youa re inferior to a JAA IR holder. The FAA is not an IMC equivalant is is a FULL ICAO compliant licence and covers verything that is required for a pilot operate safely under IFR anywhere in the world.

I can plan and execute an airways flight safely, understanding the rules and regulations.

What I dont need to know is pythagorus theorum and formaule do this when a perfectly good look-up table exists. I dont need to know about converting grid refs between map projectstions and ai dont need to understand how aircon units and AC systems work. I am also doubtfull if I really need to know the exact inner workings of every instrument.

I dont need to use the CRP computer when an electronic version is more accurate. Dont give me the tosh about flat batteries because you NEVER do flight planning in the air and anyone who claims they an operate a CRP while maintaining an instrument scan is a liar and probably unsafe to fly!

I have so far trawled through half of the JAA IR and can henestly say that I have read nothing yet that would enhance my IFR flying over the FAA IR or provide better safety from me of jets.

Blimey rustle, that is more than a tad pedantic! And designed to allow for inacuracies in the instrument!

[tmmorris]

nor, apparently, the English language... ;)

Tim

[High Wing Drifter]

IO540,
Why have such a limit? Example: I fly a new plane, fully airways, with more (and better) nav kit than a not-all-that-old 747, with 7hrs endurance at 140kt ias and a FL200 ceiling at MTOW. It doesn't have anti-ice, but could have?
I see your point, but my point is without the knowledge you may not be. Also, better nav kit than a 747? In what way? However, that is a good point as unless you are RNP5 capable you won't be in the same airspace anyway.

BoseX,
HighWingDrifter. No No No..... Go and do an FA IR and tell me that afterwards youa re inferior to a JAA IR holder. The FAA is not an IMC equivalant is is a FULL ICAO compliant licence and covers verything that is required for a pilot operate safely under IFR anywhere in the world.
I didn't day it was...did I :confused:

[slim_slag]

High Wing Drifter,

Sure I mean it, how do glider pilots soar on mountain waves thrown off by the Rockies or Sierras? They aren't instrument rated.. A controller would know a lot more than I would.

Rustle,

Glad to see you remember a safety related post, and also in these days when all are complaining about duplicate threads, an original one! I am honoured :) But hardly a pedantic post, if you want pedantic you would have pointed out to me that airways in Hawaii are Class E to the stars (which is probably something the US goverment claims jurisdiction over) :ok:

The correct time to demonstrate you know how to fly a jet is when you take your type rating, not when you have a couple of hundred hours in SEPS and a few in a multi.

[RVR800]

My impression is that the effect of the JAA PPL IR regulations
has been to:

1. Increase cost
2. Increase time
3. Increase difficulty
4. Export EU jobs to the US & Reduce GA sector activity in the EU
5. Reinforce allegations of job protection based legislation in EU
6. Use IRT as a quasi-ATPL flight test (cos there isnt a JAA one)
7. Pushes more people to fly FAA IR in EU airspace (like Delta)

Summary:The whole JAA thing is overregulated and bureaucratic. Vested interest dressed up as safety. If the EU had any problems with the FAA IR they would have stopped Delta American and the rest from flying to Heathrow, Franfukfurt etc..

Of course the Single Crew ME-IR will be no longer be required when the ICAO Multi Pilot Licence is introduced. The JAA may then reassess the JAA IR and it may become a licence to fly GA aircraft under IFR in controlled airspace and not the quasi-ATPL rating that it currently is........

[High Wing Drifter]

Slim,

I was asking for clarification :( I think I found it, have a read of this :) http://soar.boulder.co.us/ssb_wave_project.htm

RVR800,

I don't undserstand which bits of the JAA IR skills test are specifically related to Airline flying? Also, the multi-pilot license already exists in JAA land, it is the training that ICAO have proposed. You get a multi pilot license if you do your skills test on a multi crew a/c. I have noticed a couple of posts in the Wannabes are from pilots of have them. The multi crew training will only be relevant to Airline cadet and sponsorship schemes for whome it will be cheaper to train, for self funders it would be hideoulsy expensive and woul mean that they are only licensed for the Aircraft of the sim they trained on. Not much cop if you are a Seneca, Partenavia, Navajo or King Air pilot.

Another thing that puzzles me is why 45% of candidates fail their JAA IRs first time with a 50/55hr ME/IR course when the FAA one is 40hrs and I can see nothing in the flight training that looks unreasonable. What is the first time pass rate in FAA land?

I suppose the only alternative is the SE/IR at 50hrs which is obviously about 2/3rds of the cost.

[slim_slag]

HWD,

I would have given you clarification if I could :)

As for pass rates, I don't know the exact answer to that either, but I'm guessing it's between 80 and 90%.

80% is the magic number when the FAA comes and takes a close look at any instructor/training org who is not getting that many students through the tests first time.

90% is the magic number when the FAA comes and takes a close look at any examiner who is passing more than that percentage of applicants.

The onus is really on the instructor to make sure the applicant is going to pass before he signs the student off, the old saying is that the examiner is just rubber stamping the instructor's opinion that the applicant is competent. Just like some medical examiners have a reputation for going easy on you, so do some practical test examiners.

I think I heard somewhere that the pass rate drops to 70% when the examiner has an FAA inspector in the back of the plane :)

[Foxy2004]

Let's be fair to JAA!

The IR ground exams don't ask about fire extinguishers or Lamberts anymore, if they ever did. Nor do they cover Jet Engines and number of oxygen masks, axes and fire extinguishers for 100+ cabins.

Most of the info, esp Met, is useful, but does tend to be aimed at aspiring commercial pilots. The Law is particular gets pretty barmy in teaching the exact limits of positioning of ILS transmitters and lighting at airfields..rumoured to be traced to an overexcited Portugese ATC question-setter. However the actual papers set seem to be more sensible than the apparent width of the syllabus suggests.

The question for the CAA is whether they'd prefer private pilots with the very low level of flying training required by the IMC flying in very poor weather and how they can encourage those same to get the very strict flying training from an IR. At present, the extent of the exams does put people off.

[S-Works]

I am actually doing the JAA IR conversion at the moment and can assure you there really is a lot of superflous information in there that will never be relevant to the average PPL. The general nav stuff is way to in depth. The reliance on the whizz wheel is also to great. Air law is way to in depth.

There needs to be an IR aimed at the PPL with a single exam that covers all of the subject areas required of a PPL for safe use of airways and approaches. The flying training element should be in the region of 40/45hrs more if the candidate requires it. Recognition should be given for IMC experiance if the quality of the candidate is appropriate.

Hang on I am talking about another ICAO compliant licence here....... :O

The fact is held up by the number of JAA IR's issued to PPL's that JAR have it wrong in this respect and as long as they make it difficult for PPL's to get an IR there will be a continuing migration towards FAA and N reg aircraft in Europe.

The IR's that do get issued to the wannabees generally lapse as the avergage wannabee cant aford to keep them current and hours build. If they are lucky enough to get a job the ratings stays lapsed as they are flying outside of the SEP/MEP arena.

So in a nutshell the JAA IR is pretty worthless to most people!

[rustle]

The fact is held up by the number of JAA IR's issued to PPL's that JAR have it wrong in this respect...

Do you know what are the totals for JAA-IRs for PPLs or are you basing your comment on the published CAA stats which only relate to UK issued?

If there was no IMC rating in the UK do you think there would be a greater number of UK-PPL-IRs issued? :hmm:

How does the ratio of UK-IMC:total-UK-PPL compare to the ratio FAA-IR:FAA-PPL?

...and no-one has yet answered my question about non-UK JAA IRs either :{

[drauk]

Not sure about the UK IMC but:

FAA-IR:FAA-PPL = 1:4 (in the US, excluding CPL's, most of whom are instrumented rated)

[RVR800]

Regardless of the rest of JAA land it remains a fact that...
The UK CAA issued only 25 PPL-IRs in the UK during 2003-4

That's <0.01% of UK PPLs being issued a rating to fly to enable them to fly light aircraft single crew in controlled airspace annually.

Their IMC rating does not confer the same priviledge as the IR and a UK business man therefore cannot fly into France IFR unless he goes FAA...

Which is what happens of course...And it happens quite safely as well I might add

My comments about the ATPL are valid. The JAA are using the Single Crew IR issued on a light aircraft as a validitity tool for issue of a full ATPL. Take a look at the rules - you have to pass the exams within 36 months of taking your SINGLE crew LIGHT aircraft IR to enable your ATPL to be upgraded!

Now ICAO have implemented the MEP rating where students do not needing to take that Single Crew IR test ever. Why is this?

Well its because the airlines cannot make the connection between LIGHT aircraft SINGLE crew OLD technology and the glass cockpit - so who will be taking this test in the fullness of time - If they carry on... pretty much nobody....

The time has come when the JAA started to adopt an FAA market based and service based mentality and get rid of the old fashioned regulate regulate regulate approach otherwise work will contine to slip out of Europe... to America...

[carbar]

So, how do PPLs in the rest of Europe cope? They must have even less scope for flying IR than we do in the UK with our IMC rating.

[rustle]

Some stats I threw together from info on the CAA website and from a couple of advertisers here on PPRuNe:

http://www.tdrs.co.uk/aviation/IMC_IR_Stats.jpg

From the grey section above it seems that not only is the PPL-IR issue count down in 2003-2004, but so is the IMC issue rate: one exam, fifteen Hrs training and a cost of a couple of thousand quid. Is that because of JAA as well or is there some other reason behind this do you think? :rolleyes:

I don't think there's much point doing the sums based on the number of valid medicals - the only other CAA stats. This is useful only if you want to "prove" that only 0.01% of the total number of medical holders were issued an IR in any particular year :hmm:


I also did some quick and dirty comparisons of the costs of a PPL and the additional ratings based on info here on PPRuNe. (The green bit above)

A US based pilot would spend 110% more for his IR than he did for his PPL

A UK based pilot would spend 127% more for his and for this extra would receive an additional 10 hrs dual training (yes, the numbers include the CAA examination fee)

IR training costs don't seem quite so skewed to me: in the UK it costs more to fly and to learn to fly -- whatever level of licence you want.

[Justiciar]

So, how do PPLs in the rest of Europe cope? They must have even less scope for flying IR than we do in the UK with our IMC rating.

They don't cope. As far as I know the number of IRs issued for what is essentially PPL flying, including private individuals who use their aircraft for business trips, is very small indeed as a proportion of total PPL holders. From what I can see, most contries of the world have a much more enlightened attitude towards PPL/IRs than in JAA land. Most, for example, only have a single exam. For an example of what could be done, look at the progressive IR qualifications available in Australia, where you can add various nav aids and approaches to your licence one at a time.

There is some hope that sport flying generally may have a lighter regulatory touch under EASA, but there is a danger that there will end up being a sharper definition between recreational VFR and commercial IFR, which could make getting and using an IR even harder.

Most people, I suspect don't particularly want to fly airways; they want exactly what the IMC rating gives, i.e. the ability to fly approaches in IMC and to climb and descend through cloud safely. If only the JAA and EASA could get their heads around that then life could become cheeper and easier for every one, and we might stop exporting business to the US.

[RVR800]

The exams are a major hurdle. Over the top compared to the
FAA IR exams

[Send Clowns]

Some people are posting under a misunderstanding. A lot of the heavy, irrelevant groundschool requirements are for the ATPL. The IR exams, if you don't want a CPL, have a lot less in the syllabus as well as fewer exams to sit. Early on in the JAA system some people may have sat ATPL courses for IR exams simply because there were no schools approved to teach the seperate IR course for a while, but you can sit the CPL or IR exams having attended the course for the relevant subjects at ATPL. There are not many schools even now (with only 20 students per annum, you can see why!)

By the way, considering the struggle some people with FAA IRs (some with many hours, others having only just come back from Florida) have to pass the JAA IR first time I cannot recommend that people get an FAA IR with the sole purpose of conversion to JAA. You may well end up spending more in the end.

[High Wing Drifter]

Send Clowns,

Thanks for your information. I know that there are fewer exams than in the ATPL group, but are the IR exams (Aircraft General Knowledge, Air Law, Met, General Navigation, etc) that have the same title as some of the individual ATPL exams, the same? Or is the content of those discrete subjects lightened for the IR?

[S-Works]

they are not significantly lighter and the questions are drawn from the same bank as the ATPL exams. The course is certainly not a "PPL" course it is just a cut down ATPL course that has is a square peg in a round hole to meet percieved demand.

I am doing the exams at the moment and finding them distinctly harder than the FAA stuff. There is far to much focus on old fashioned navigation and math. The FAA system allows the use of electronic calculators and look up tables which more representative of real flying.

Many people struggle to pass the JAA IR first time full stop. The sort of person that will fail the IR test is the sort of person that will have to spend much more anyway.

Personally I think the the FAA IR is a good place to start a JAA IR from as it makes the flight side easier to do.