IMC RATING

[Aware]

Latest news from CAA on the IMC rating is now on CAA website under the EASA news section:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/Interim%20Statement%20UK%20IMC%20RATING%20February%202012%20 V1.pdf

[BEagle]

There are still some items remaining to be resolved though.....:\

[Genghis the Engineer]

It is paragraph 7 that's the killer.

The fact is that most of who fly in IMC conditions, most of the time, fly EASA aeroplanes (which includes all CofA Pipers, Cessnas and Grummans for example). So, unless that CAA proposal is resolved in the way they hope, then the de-facto shelf life of the IMC rating is until 2014, after which it is nearly but not quite useless, for the vast majority of pilots.

G

[S-Works]

So, unless that CAA proposal is resolved in the way they hope, then the de-facto shelf life of the IMC rating is until 2014, after which it is nearly but not quite useless, for the vast majority of pilots.

Yep. I said that weeks ago on the last thread discussing it.

[Fuji Abound]

but every indication is that they will resolve it in the way they hope.

If I were considering an IMCr I certainly wouldnt be put off for this reason alone.

[peterh337]

A basic PPL is almost useless, and is pretty unsafe in reality, without a capability to (a) navigate using radio nav (GPS/VOR/DME) and (b) control an aircraft in IMC.

(a) is useful anyway and is fully compatible with VFR flight.

The ability to do (b) legally is a bonus, but safety is vastly improved even if you just have the capability.

I would thus recommend everybody to do the IMCR.

Just make sure you get an instructor who flies for real.

[late-joiner]

I am doing an IMC course at the moment. Is there any reason to rush to finish by the end of March 2012 rather than 30th June 2012. I am just concious that paragraph 7 talks about an [arbitary] date and I am not clear whether that could in principle be earlier than 30 Jun 2012?

[mmgreve]

A basic PPL is almost useless, and is pretty unsafe in reality, without a capability to (a) navigate using radio nav (GPS/VOR/DME) and (b) control an aircraft in IMC.

Unless you stay close to the circuits, which is what a surprising number of PPLs are doing.

In fairnes, there is a little bit of radio nav in the ppl training, but the magic box that says Garmin 430 on it, is best kept off :)

The really astonishing part is that you can do a night rating without an IMC. The likelyhood of getting lost as pretty high trying to navigate by map and stop watch is pretty high.

[peterh337]

Yeah, this whole business needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century, and getting the IMCR is the most achievable legit way of getting the capability.

I have the JAA IR also, and have had the FAA IR since 2006, and there is almost nothing of practical relevance that you learn doing those two, over a competently taught and absorbed IMCR. But it's a lot more work.

The IMCR is technically easy - what makes it nontrivial is the fact that most people are going into it with zero instrument experience and are doing it in aircraft in which barely anything works.

[soaringhigh650]

without a capability to (a) navigate using radio nav (GPS/VOR/DME) and

Errr... Radio nav is standard as part of the PPL. I use it all the time.

[Aware]

The IMCR is technically easy - what makes it nontrivial is the fact that most people are going into it with zero instrument experience and are doing it in aircraft in which barely anything works.

You want to try teaching it then, 152 ADF approach can be interesting, with a good wind.

I would agree with Peter, some people find the rating quite tough, however Ive put them in fairly capable faster aircraft with HSI RMI GPS etc and then find it much easier, however most cannot afford such training, unfortunately.

I was clearing out some old files yesterday, and my old school in 2003 was doing IMCs for £1500.00. Now nearer 4.5K I would think.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I'm just wondering how, in spite of Peter's authoritative statement, I managed to do so much flying as a microlight pilot for 9 years, then another 10 years as a VFR PPL, and briefly VFR CPL before I finally got around to my (admittedly very useful) IMC rating.

G

[peterh337]

Radio nav is standard as part of the PPL. I use it all the time.Not here in the UK. In the FAA PPL, yes (did the FAA PPL 2004, FAA CPL 2007). Here, you do a little bit... VOR/VOR position fixing basically. Progressive schools teach GPS too, but most think it's illegal.

You want to try teaching it then, 152 ADF approach can be interesting, with a good wind.Well, yes, if you want to teach somebody to fly for real, you do the minimum of NDB stuff and teach them VOR/DME/ILS properly. The bulk of the JAA IR is spent on NDB stuff and it is of almost no use. NDB procedures are flown with a GPS.

I'm just wondering how, in spite of Peter's authoritative statement, I managed to do so much flying as a microlight pilot for 9 years, then another 10 years as a VFR PPL, and briefly VFR CPL before I finally got around to my (admittedly very useful) IMC rating.I bet you almost wrote that in your 10 years as a VFR PPL you never entered IMC ;)

Nowadays, a VFR CPL is as useful as a chocolate teapot. It is just a passport to getting paid for flying or instructing.

Microlighters won't be interested in an IMCR. You cannot legally fly in IMC in anything like that and, looking at the build quality of 99% of the stuff which fills out 4 of the 5 hangars at Friedrichshafen (http://www.aero-expo.com/aero-en/visitors/news.php), I would not want to :)

[Whopity]

Not here in the UK.Yes it is and has been since 1999. Ex 18C. That's not to say that its taught very well.AMC-FCL 1.125 Exercise 18C Radio navigation
Use of VHF Omni Range
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– selection and identification
– omni bearing selector (OBS)
- to/from indications, orientation
– course deviation indicator (CDI)
– determination of radial
– intercepting and maintaining a radial
– VOR passage
– obtaining a fix from two VORs
Use of automatic direction finding equipment (ADF) – non-directional beacons (NDBs)
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– selection and identification
– orientation relative to the beacon
– homing
Use of VHF direction finding (VHF/DF)
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– R/T procedures and ATC liaison
– obtaining a QDM and homing
Use of en-route/terminal radar
– availability, AIP
– procedures and ATC liaison
– pilot’s responsibilities
– secondary surveillance radar
– transponders
– code selection
– interrogation and reply
Use of distance measuring equipment (DME)
– station selection and identification
– modes of operation
– distance, groundspeed, time to run

[peterh337]

Interesting.... never saw ADF or DME in the PPL; in fact I was specifically told they are not to be taught.

[BEagle]

That's not to say that its taught very well.

Bit of a sweeping statement that, Whopity.

When, as CFI, I redesigned the PPL course for the Club at which I flew, we integrated all aspects of Ex 18C into the navigation phase - including VDF, radar, VOR, DME and ADF. I also included the requirement for students to have passed the Navigation, Meteorology and Flight Performance and Planning exams before their first 'real' navigation exercise.

All our aircraft had panel-mounted GPS, so I also included a note stating:

NOTE: Before Ex 18 is flown solo, students should be able to read their present position from the GPS.

Not for navigation, but to assist if they became uncertain of position when solo - at least they could then report their lat/long to an ATS unit or London Centre.

[peterh337]

at least they could then report their lat/long to an ATS unit or London Centre.

Lemme get this right...

You have a GPS but can't use it.

You get lost.

You start up the GPS and read off the lat/long numbers (you pretend the moving map doesn't exist).

You pass them to D&D to help you.

What century is this?

[Twiddle]

You're assuming it had a moving map, I used to fly a knackered old club aircraft that had a GPS that only gave LAT/LONG and a bearing to another LAT/LONG

[BEagle]

The GPS switch-on sequence was included in the after start procedures; in 2 aircraft it was a GNC250 and was part of COM2 and on the other 2 it was a standalone GPS150. None of the aircraft had moving map GPS, so the basic information was position plus bearing/range from home aerodrome.

Students have to learn to walk before they can run, peter. The GPS systems were not 'moving map' and it was mandatory for students to learn the basics first - which they were also required to demonstrate during the PPL Skill Test.

If a student knew how to use the GPS correctly to navigate to a diversion, I would allow them to do so on the PPL Skill Test after first estimating heading and distance conventonally. It boosted their confidence considerably when they found how accurate their estimates were.

Remember that we train and test for a generic class rating and that not all rental wreckage has GPS. But they all have windows out of which to look and methods of assessing heading and time!

[Fuji Abound]

AMC-FCL 1.125 Exercise 18C Radio navigation
Use of VHF Omni Range
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– selection and identification
– omni bearing selector (OBS)
- to/from indications, orientation
– course deviation indicator (CDI)
– determination of radial
– intercepting and maintaining a radial
– VOR passage
– obtaining a fix from two VORs
Use of automatic direction finding equipment (ADF) – non-directional beacons (NDBs)
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– selection and identification
– orientation relative to the beacon
– homing
Use of VHF direction finding (VHF/DF)
– availability, AIP, frequencies
– R/T procedures and ATC liaison
– obtaining a QDM and homing
Use of en-route/terminal radar
– availability, AIP
– procedures and ATC liaison
– pilot’s responsibilities
– secondary surveillance radar
– transponders
– code selection
– interrogation and reply
Use of distance measuring equipment (DME)
– station selection and identification
– modes of operation
– distance, groundspeed, time to run

and that is just one excercise - not surprising it is not taught very well - good luck!

It is surprising how many pilots still fly without a GPS for one reason or another, so its not a bad idea to be able navigate by some other means, moreover it is also surprising how many pilots use slightly suspect GPSs and are surprised when the batteries run out at the most inconvenient moments or the bluetooth receiver dies on them.

[BEagle]

It is not taught as 'one exercise' any more than Ex12/13 are!

I recall the early days of RAIM ALERT warnings which often occurred at inopportune moments and froze the GPS. I gather that Garmin later tweaked the firmware though.

[thing]

Ive put them in fairly capable faster aircraft with HSI RMI GPS etc and then find it much easier

Indeed, I did my IMCR in an HSI/RMI equipped a/c. How people manage to do an NDB approach with a non rotating ADF card is beyond me, and full marks to those that do.

[RTN11]

Radio nav should be taught as much as possible, tracking a beacon or getting a position fix should not be a difficult task in VMC.

However, many training aircraft are not fitted with these instruments, some might only have one functioning VOR with no DME, or the kit might not even be installed, so position fixing is more of a handful. And for an aircraft which is only used for day VFR flying, there is no real incentive to spend the money to get the kit fitted, or fixed when it goes wrong.

[betterfromabove]

Peter - As much as many of us VFR only PPL's would love to take up an IMCR and clearly see the benefits of it, there are some wider considerations here:

- Not all of us fly a/c with IF kit or capability. VFR only it is.
- The cost of simply maintaining VFR currency.
- The cost of an IMCR....that will also need renewing/refreshing.

While it is not anywhere near the extent of an IMCR, have flown from quite a few schools and find any experienced instructor more than happy to do IF work over and beyond the syllabus, including ILS/DME and VOR. GPS is certainly not an anathema either these days. But they will want to see that you can get home with DR, as you should....

This point is more the issue of what use the IMC training is without a suitable a/c in which to practice or do it for real. Would be interesting to see what % of clubs have an IMC-capable tourer worthy of the name.

[thing]

We have two at our club, never any problem to get hold of them.

[peregrineh]

As usual the CAA display their inability to write in plain english - I am still confused by their statement.

I am meant to be doing the IMC test next week. Why am I doing it? I view it a bit like an advanced PPL. It certainly has helped my flying, my radio work, my overall understanding of the skies and my confidence.

I have no desire to fly in bad weather - I do want to have half an idea what to do if the sht hits the fan re the weather and I have made a bad call and should not have been up there in the first place. For example - I would have had NO CLUE what a SRA was for example before doing the IMC.

So useful skills to have been taught.

PS Plan to keep pretty current on it as well as one thing I have learnt in IMC flying - currency keeps you sharp - amazing how quick you loose these skills!

[Whopity]

and that is just one excercise - not surprising it is not taught very well - good luck!They did add 5 hours to the total time as well as removing 3 hours of IF to fit it in.

[riverrock83]

Of the aircraft that I've been learning on - one has no working nav aids, the other doesn't have any installed. There are aircraft in groups connected to the club with full IFR kit but not normally available for Ab Inito training although I've sat in the back.

Most club members have portable GPS units they bring with them for longer journeys which I'm familiar with (Skydemon / MD, Skydemon / IPad, Airnav Pro / IPad, Aware GPS) but I've not been taught their use as primary Nav.

I've done a practice SRA (with some of the bells and whistles removed) as part of the basic PPL Instrument awareness stuff and practised using a QDM. Can't do much more without the kit...

[peterh337]

Students have to learn to walk before they can run, peterSure, but a GPS which just shows lat/long is almost totally useless. Plotting the numbers on a map is very error prone.

- Not all of us fly a/c with IF kit or capability. VFR only it is.
- The cost of simply maintaining VFR currency.
- The cost of an IMCR....that will also need renewing/refreshing.Of course, but then you won't be doing an IMCR.

An IMCR is a great help even for VFR (e.g. poor vis, or just knowing for sure where you are) but if you haven't got the kit, it's not much good to you. I hate to sound elitist but every level of capability has a certain entry level cost. It doesn't matter whether it is flying or mountain biking.

I suppose it is a problem for those who want to get the IMCR in the bag (in case it goes away) but cannot find a suitable plane.

I have no desire to fly in bad weatherNobody actually wants to fly in bad wx. The IMCR enables you do do so however, and land with an instrument approach. Pure 100% guaranteed legit "VFR" is very restrictive and a lot of flights get cancelled when actually they would have been fine on the day.

but I've not been taught their use as primary Nav.It should not be hard to switch on a GPS and look at the moving map. For VFR, that is all I do, usually. I tend to program the route into the panel mounted GPS but that is mainly so I can drive the autopilot from it. If flying with a handheld, one flies the plog and uses the moving map to show you that you are on the planned route.

If you get your own GPS, then you can get the manual out and learn how to enter a route into it, etc.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I bet you almost wrote that in your 10 years as a VFR PPL you never entered IMC ;)

Nowadays, a VFR CPL is as useful as a chocolate teapot. It is just a passport to getting paid for flying or instructing.

Microlighters won't be interested in an IMCR. You cannot legally fly in IMC in anything like that and, looking at the build quality of 99% of the stuff which fills out 4 of the 5 hangars at Friedrichshafen (http://www.aero-expo.com/aero-en/visitors/news.php), I would not want to :)

Actually no, I got caught in IMC afew times, and did a lot of dodging around cloud, and made a fair number of weather diversions or unscheduled night stops - both in group A and in microlights. Since I still (also) fly microlights - which don't have the instrumentation to fly for any period in IMC, I still do on occasion.

On occasion, it was a real embuggerance. On the whole however, it was just part of the game and I accepted it.

My point really being that a VFR PPL is useable, and does allow you to do a lot of fun flying - including long distance touring.


Yes, absolutely, an IMC capability gives you a lot of options that a VFR-only pilot doesn't have, substantially reduces the embuggerance factor, and makes using a light aeroplane for work much more feasible. But a great deal of fun, and with a bit of flexibility, touring, is do-able VFR only.

Not quite all - C170, PA-22, PA-23 Apache (not Aztec)

Some are still on a CofA I believe and some of those may have IFR panels ... I must admit I am fuzzy on whether they are *IMC-certified* but imagine they have grandfather rights to later legislation on IFR/IMC compliance?

Fair point - yes those appear to be Annex II with UK Cs of A, so should be able to be continuously flown on an IMCR so long as the instruments are fitted and serviceable, ditto all Stinsons, most Bulldogs, some Chipmunks.... But these remain a small minority of CofA flying machines sadly.

G

[fwjc]

Fingers crossed for the continued UK recognition on all relevant aircraft types.

Saying that, I've managed over 10 years of daytime VFR flying, having a jolly good time, without the need, ability, or aircraft capability for IMC flight. Not as much as others on here, but still it shows that it doesn't have to be the be all and end all.

Not everyone can afford fancy instruments (and I'll include radios and transponders in this category on an optional basis). Not everyone can afford the training and continuity to keep such a rating. And not everyone can afford to make the long flights that are more likely to result in the necessity of exercising such privileges. The weather planning for a local bimble, or aerobatic fix, tends to reduce the risk of running into yuck. Plus if it is a bit marginal, there's always the option of retreating to the bar. Here many hours of flying can be experienced at much less cost albeit somewhat embroidered with extra testosterone...

Fact is there are plenty of different ways to get your kicks in the air; touring is one of them but it is not the only way. Vive la difference!

[Whopity]

Sure, but a GPS which just shows lat/long is almost totally useless. Plotting the numbers on a map is very error prone.In exactly the same way as entering those numbers as a Waypoint! In fact its easier to check the Lat and Long read off a GPS for accuracy, by looking out of the window, than if entered as a Waypoint, because very few people cross check the waypoints.

[peterh337]

I avoid user waypoints like the plague, but in general one has more time to do those because one is doing them when on the ground.

Position fixing in flight by reading off lat/long and plotting them on a map, while hand flying, perhaps in bumpy air, is bonkers.

I have done quite a lot of map georeferencing for non-aviation stuff (basically picking points on a map whose coordinates are read off the map) and know how error prone that business is when sitting at home...

There is also confirmation bias, where you "plot" your position on the map from lat/long, think there should be a lake there, you look out and sure enough there is a lake there (but it's the wrong lake :) ).

[Genghis the Engineer]

I agree - plotting a position in flight from lat-long is time consuming, takes your attention away from the primary task (flying the aeroplane!) and error prone. It is not a good idea to attempt in the air.

This doesn't however mean that you can't use a steam-driven GPS usefully. Take something like a Garmin 55 - classic early model GPS. It can display lat/long, but it will also display groundspeed and track, and it also has an aviation database in it. Invariably that database will be out of date - but airports don't generally move, just don't trust it for anything but fixed waypoints.

So, if you have a operational flight plan (and you should, however you navigate) the simple fact of being able to fine tune track, and check against your predicted groundspeed does a lot to enhance your navigation.

And for position - just select "go to" a convenient airport in the database, and use it like a VOR /DME with the VOR in "to" mode, and no DME slant error. Dead easy to get your position with a VOR plotter.

Even with, say, a walking GPS - just programme in a handful of known locations spread out across the chart, and magically you now have this capability without an aviation database.

Of course a moving map is much nicer, but a basic old fashioned "numbers only" GPS can still do a lot for you and if that's what's in the aeroplane, I'll use it.

G

[S-Works]

Its little wonder we have so many airspace infringments and people getting lost....

[Genghis the Engineer]

Well there's also good old fashioned ded-reckoning/PLOG, which I think everybody but Peter does still use. Just as well, not instead of GPS.

And I thought that the number of infringements was steadily going down.

G

[S-Works]

And I thought that the number of infringements was steadily going down.

Only because the number of hours being flown is dropping as well I suspect.....

I would be interested in seeing the infringements against hours flown numbers.

Use of walking GPS and Lat/Long units in this day and age is inexcusible. Cobling old crap to gether to save a couple of quid is just asking for trouble.

Plan and PLOG, use a modern moving map GPS and use blended navigation to ensure accurate navigation and situational awareness.

[peterh337]

which I think everybody but Peter does still use

Not so. As I have written many times, I fly with a printed plog.

What I don't do is sit there with a stopwatch, timing the legs. With GPS (or VOR/DME) this is pointless because you have continuous lateral guidance and the distance to the next waypoint.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Bose - for IMC flight, which is the thread title, I do agree with you. For VFR flight - what's wrong with good old fashioned map and compass? I've enjoyed microlight touring like that for years, and on occasion in light aeroplanes. Anything more than that can only be enhancing, but unnecessary.

Peter - does anybody time legs with a stopwatch? I certainly never have. I do write down the times at waypoints so that I can revise ETAs.

G

[S-Works]

Bose - for IMC flight, which is the thread title, I do agree with you. For VFR flight - what's wrong with good old fashioned map and compass?

Nothing at all. My comment is abouit using walking GPS's and other cobbled types of GPS for navigation. Use the correct tool for the job. If you are going to use a GPS, use a modern one suited for the job and blend it with your classic naviagtion.

[riverrock83]

don't do is sit there with a stopwatch, timing the legsPresumably you just record at what time you reach a way point. If horror of horror happens and someone has been hacking / jamming the GPS system, you can do the maths to work out roughly where you are?

I do this in case my stop watch runs out of batteries (but then I'm still learning nav)...

[blagger]

Whatever GPS people are using, I just wish people would integrate into their flying properly. There seems to be increasing numbers of people that spend so long faffing about with electronics that their lookout just totally degrades. Flew with someone not so long ago who spent all flight constantly messing about with two GPSs and a PCAS who never once did a proper lookout scan.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Whatever GPS people are using, I just wish people would integrate into their flying properly. There seems to be increasing numbers of people that spend so long faffing about with electronics that their lookout just totally degrades. Flew with someone not so long ago who spent all flight constantly messing about with two GPSs and a PCAS who never once did a proper lookout scan.

A fair criticism, but who is teaching that? When the PPL and CPL syllabi are hellbent on teaching pure map-and-compass DR, and electronic navaids only for lost procedures, then the IMCR and IR syllabi use solely old fashioned navaids without cross-checking against visually, and virtually nobody is teaching use of GPS - most training environments are teaching approaches that are utterly different to the best practice that you and Bose are proposing (and with which, by and large, I agree).

G

[peterh337]

Presumably you just record at what time you reach a way point. If horror of horror happens and someone has been hacking / jamming the GPS system, you can do the maths to work out roughly where you are?No; I don't do anything. I just fly the planned route. See some trip writeups on my website. You would not want to do those using dead reckoning.

There is no need to know the ETA at each waypoint. In practice one flies at a chosen power setting. 23" / 2300rpm / 11.5 USG/hr gives me 138kt IAS (at low altitudes) and that's what I fly at. I will get to where I am going when I get there :)

At high altitudes, one is limited (non turbo) by the available MP, so e.g. at FL100, best economy, I might be doing 140kt TAS on ~ 9.5 USG/hr, and I can't do any more because the motor is sucking all it can suck, and it would be stupid to fly slower. Same all the way to about FL170/180, above which one needs a higher fuel burn (and max revs).

If some ATC unit asks me for the ETA to somewhere, I read it straight off the GPS :)

If GPS got jammed, which has happened (off Italy, 2004, for a few minutes) but is exceedingly unlikely, I would fall back to VOR/DME - and fly the same route. If the GPS unit itself packed up, I have 2 others (at least) kicking around; a G496 in the yoke, and usually I run a tablet computer with a VFR moving map on it.

I can hardly believe we are still having this debate in the 21st century. But nothing suprises me in aviation. The JAA IR ground school was approx 95% totally useless garbage. Stuff tossed out by the RAF due to irrelevance back in the 1970s.

[blagger]

Well, any instructor or examiner who doesn't focus on look-out during training wants sacking, but it is mainly post PPL where people get into bad habits I suppose. I teach sensible GPS use where I can during training courses - despite the urban myths (mainly perpetuated by those who aren't instructors or in the training business) there is nothing stopping GPS use during training, but students do have to learn and demonstrate the basic principles as well. I just can't believe that anyone flying with an Ipad on their knee isn't going to spend a bad amount of time heads down. I still love my Garmin 3 pilot which velcros to the top of the coaming well within a good scan!

[peterh337]

I just can't believe that anyone flying with an Ipad on their knee isn't going to spend a bad amount of time heads down

It all depends on what app you are running.

If you are running a straight moving map app which shows the actual VFR chart, then no user interaction is required.

I think half the myths come from anti-GPS traditionalists, and half from people who saw somebody fumble around with the knobs trying to make the thing work. No way would I want to use a modern sophisticated handheld (e.g. a G695) without reading the manual and having a good play with it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

A moving map is still just a map isn't it.

There are, and always have been, plenty of pilots who will obsess with the chart, or obsess with their VOR, etc. A pilot obsessing with their GPS is just a more modern version of a bad habit.

G

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The really astonishing part is that you can do a night rating without an IMC.
Especially as you're on instruments for the climb out only a few seconds after take-off.

(Note: I've done the IMCr but not the NQ, but I did some of the IMCr lessons at night. There may be a way of keeping the aeroplane the right way up by looking out of the window when there's nothing to see, but I personally am happy knowing how to do it on instruments.)

[betterfromabove]

Is it not time for a truly layered approach to navigational training? There is no sense of well-defined modules in PPL training. This seems to go as well for VFR and IFR learning.

And no regular "evergreening" of the syllabii. This happens at the operational end of the business, in all its forms, but in terms of basic flying training up to the acquisition of the IR no-one seems To Be Watching. And in Europe at least, this after two new pan-continent organisations having supposedly reviewed the training requirements in the last decade or so.

For an industry that vaunts itself as a model in safety-driven culture, it really is amazing that it can't implement some kind of strategic best practice (followed by decent project management) over this crucial aspect of its reason for being.

European GA at least will increasingly diverge between the very select group of PPL-IR's and the rest of us who will have to migrate to VFR-only 3-axis ULM's (or lighter) over the long run. Nothing wrong with that, you might say, but it seems like a less diverse pilot ecosystem to me. And crucially, less IMC-capable pilots, since the EIR looks nothing but a route to some very scary incidents in the next few years.

Let's just hope the IMCR and/or the French equivalent get to survive for those who can afford it and get hold of the right plane.

[betterfromabove]

PS. Gertrude - you're absolutely right about the NQ vs IMCR. How you can get an NQ and use it properly without doing an IMCR is yet another hole in the non-strategic way the whole lower half of the pilot training world has become designed.

In South Africa, a country not with best of GA Safety Records, the NQ is about the same size as our IMCR. This seems about the right amount of seriousness that should surely be attached to it. Why is it not the same for Europe (where NF on SVFR is legal in many countries)?

[Genghis the Engineer]

http://ipv6.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/arc/programs/academy/journal/pdf/Spring_2006.pdf#page=121

The data show that pilots who use GPS and moving maps, and who invest the time to take note of geographical features along their route of flight, exhibit a level of navigational awareness that is higher than pilots who make no such effort. This finding suggests two things: (1) there are practical techniques that can help mitigate the loss-of-awareness phenomenon observed among pilots who use GPS and moving maps; and (2) a more active pilot involvement in the navigation task seems to be the key to maintaining navigational awareness. What is perhaps most interesting about the result is how such a simple practice of pointing out geographical features was sufficient to make such a striking difference in pilot awareness. This suggests that navigational awareness is indeed a fragile phenomenon.

the technique of pointing out geographical features is simply not possible in all situations. For example, it is generally not possible to see geographical features when flying in instrument meteorological conditions. Even under visual meteorological conditions, other cockpit duties (e.g., scanning for traffic, configuring avionics, etc.) would often prevent pilots from performing an out-the-window search for geographical features. Hence, there is a need to discover other practical techniques that help pilots maintain navigational awareness.

Pilots, flight instructors, evaluators, and policymakers have long talked about the importance of “staying in the loop” while flying with automation. Perhaps now is a good time to make explicit proficiency standards for navigational awareness in the technically advanced cockpit.

Always good to try and bring a bit of proper research into the loop.

G

[italianjon]

I guess the important point though is that they are all tools... VOR/DME/GPS/NDB even Mk I Eyeball. When I fly I try not to rely on one thing and instead sort of cross check all the info and make sure that it makes sense to me. I did an NQ and IMC at the same time, and I can say that (although for the test I had to use one at a time) I now fly with most of them but will always consider what it is telling me.

Having now done both NQ and IMC I can say that I agree with the sentiment. I think an NQ is moderately unnecessary after an IMC, the only thing that I found odd was landing, because you have reduced reference, but a few circuits and I felt OK. The big eye opener for me was how invisible the clouds are; but as I popped into one towards the end of my IMC course I was able to use the Instruments and descend out of the cloud. I probably would have maintained altitude but it was middle of winter and probably above the freezing level.

On the subject of EIR, a thought I had... EASA seem to be making the statement that it has to be VMC-able at both departure and arrival aerodrome. But I am assuming that they will teach you how to climb and descend on instruments to adhere to the semi-circle or quadrantle rule... therefore by inference you may climb into or descend out of cloud. So how far away from the arrival aerodrome do you need to become VMC? As far as I can see if Cloudbase is high enough and above MSA, then you could just descend through the clouds, while en-route, and then arrive VMC?

[peterh337]

For example, it is generally not possible to see geographical features when flying in instrument meteorological conditionsAlways good to try and bring a bit of proper research into the loop.Indeed ;)

The problem with aviation (and probably every other human activity) is that if you have a good old dig around, you dig out some very good people, a load of average people (by definition), and some total cowboys.

And unless you have data on what the entire participating population actually does, it is difficult to apply any data collected.

In GA, and this is true in the USA too, there is not a lot of data on what the pilot population actually does in the cockpit. You will probably interview only the subset who busted CAS and, gosh what a suprise, they will be people who either (a) got lost using conventional methods, or (b) got lost using a GPS on which they didn't know what the knobs do and they spent the whole flight fiddling with it without looking out. An over-simplification, but you get the idea. Researching the whole population is a whole load of legwork which is why nobody does it. Social research tends to be like that, which is why most of it is rubbish :)

I guess the important point though is that they are all tools... VOR/DME/GPS/NDB even Mk I Eyeball:ok:

I find that the more automation, the more I look out.

So how far away from the arrival aerodrome do you need to become VMC?That's a very good Q. At which point will you have to cancel IFR? is the Q you should be asking, because you are likely to be VMC anyway on the whole route...

The way I would work this system would be to file a traditional IFR (airway) route, validated of course by Eurocontrol, using tools such as this (http://flightplanpro.eu/Home.html), but instead of the last waypoint of this route joining to the start of a STAR (which is what happens in "classical" IFR - but SIDs and STARs will be banned under the EIR), you will stick in a DCT to a waypoint picked to be a good place to do a DIY letdown if that becomes necessary, and then put the "VFR" keyword after that waypoint.

In most of Europe, DCTs can be say 50nm, so that gives you some leeway. Some airspaces have a MAX DCT = 0 so this won't work there.

I think that, like plain VFR flight, the EIR will work well to destinations with definitely good weather. Currently, VFR flight does this well because you can use the IMCR to land back in mucky UK wx. The EIR will give you that, plus the ability to fly above cloud etc enroute and with CAS being irrelevant as per standard Eurocontrol IFR practice. Like VFR, the EIR will be very safe with pilots who are "clever" and who fly to airports in low lands or on the coast, or in places with great weather. Most of my pre-IR long VFR trips used to meet all 3 of those conditions :) I wouldn't recommend it to Switzerland...

[BEagle]

I have now been advised that the CAA's Interim Statement should be considered to apply until 30th June 2012 as further developments are anticipated before then.

None of which should be considered prejudicial to anyone considering training for the IMCR - it's just that a clearer idea of the specific licensing mechanism which will apply after 30 Jun is not yet known.

You can blame this whole nonsense on the intransigence of EASA; the UK CAA is just trying to find the best way to preserve the rights and safety standards enjoyed by UK pilots.

[thing]

Interesting watching this from the sidelines as a new pilot with a whole 100 or so hours. I think in all occupations or pastimes you get martyrs for their particular cause.

I'm a professional musician and the music forums are exactly the same as this one. Just swap Piper and Cessna for Les Paul and Stratocaster or wind on the cheeks versus glass cockpit GPS for valve amp and Pod XT Live.

Peter bangs on about his GPS, others bang on about using nothing but a bar magnet and the feel of the wind on their cheeks. (Which cheeks I hear you ask). There's a guy I know who eschews GPS as white man's magic and reckons anyone who can't navigate by the way the wind blows across a field of corn shouldn't be flying. I'm being facetious about the field of corn but you get my point.

I asked him if he used a DI and he replied that of course he did. Phwaah I said, bloody techno man. I think he got my point.

I can't understand (my daughter is convinced I have Asperger's) why people can't just use whatever they feel they need to use. They are P1, Commander of the a/c. They are responsible for it's safe passage through the air, let them use whatever they feel safe using. Frankly I couldn't give a stuff how people navigate as long as they do it safely and keep a good look out.

For the record, I have everything possible switched on and tuned in, including a GPS, plus a stopwatch hanging off the yoke and a map with everything marked on it. Belt and braces? You bet.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

the way the wind blows across a field of corn
Helps you judge the wind direction for that forced landing!

(Assuming of course that it isn't a check ride, so you weren't actually expecting a forced landing, so you hadn't bugged the wind direction on the DI in advance when the instructor wasn't looking.)

[thing]

so you hadn't bugged the wind direction on the DI in advance when the instructor wasn't looking.

As if.....:)

[beatnik]

OK - some help please.

I hope to complete by IMCr and get all my paperwork to Gatwick well before the 30 June 2012 deadline - I will then presumably be issued with a replacement JAR-FCL licence which will now include the IMC rating.

Given that my PPL licence is due to expire on 29 Sep 2013 (5 years), I understand that when I send my £76 for a reissue in Sep 13, I will get a new Part-FCL licence. Am I correct in assuming that unless the IMC rating is negotiated to be added to a Part-FCL licence (as per Para 7 of the CAA statement), I will have lost the rating? So I don't even get to the 8th April 2014 because I will no longer have a JAR-FCL licence from Oct 13.

Will the CAA reissue a licence before the 5 years is up? In other words - issue it now (1.5 years early) and date it 5 years hence?

And what is a "UK non-JAR-FCL/non-Part-FCL" licence?

Thanks
Nik

[liam548]

I am doing an IMC course at the moment. Is there any reason to rush to finish by the end of March 2012 rather than 30th June 2012. I am just concious that paragraph 7 talks about an [arbitary] date and I am not clear whether that could in principle be earlier than 30 Jun 2012?


I hope to have mine completed by the end of March but the date i have been told is you need to get the application into them 10 days prior to the 30th June.

[thing]

I don't know Beatnik, I've just got my IMC rating, but if the worst comes to the worst (which I doubt) and the IMC rating goes for those who hold it then in all honesty, if you get caught out in clag and know you can take an ILS into your airfield are you going to say 'Gosh no, this is now illegal?' Sod that, and let them try and pin something on me.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

so you hadn't bugged the wind direction on the DI in advance when the instructor wasn't looking.
As if.....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

Well, I think I got away with it on my last flight ... I turned a corner, she asked me whether I thought I was downwind or base leg, I told her, she asked me which direction I was going to land in, I replied "into wind as per the DI bug". She didn't say anything else. I'm sure that conversation wouldn't have been necessary if she'd spotted me setting it :)

[thing]

You see, joking apart, there's the absurdity of it. We both laugh at not letting the examiner spot you setting the wind on the heading bug but in reality you would. I know I would. I always when flying normally have the wind set on one of the OBS's, which is virtually the same thing.

[beatnik]

Thanks Thing - you're absolutely correct, these are valuable skills we are learning - and when the proverbial hits the fan, one will do whatever is necessary to recover the situation. I'm sure if you request an NDB/DME approach on airfield, the controller is not going to start quizzing you on whether you have an IR or IMCr

[BEagle]

And what is a "UK non-JAR-FCL/non-Part-FCL" licence?

A licence issued before the days of JAR-FCL when the CAA stopped issuing UK PPLs. However, the CAA intend to reintroduce the UK PPL (for holders of JAR-FCL or part-FCL licences) as a supplementary licence within which any non-EASA ratings may be included.

However, there may well be yet further changes to come. Increasing concern has been expressed about the Byzantine complexity of the €urocratic nonsense coming our way soon - for example the fact that there will be some 6 different types of private licences for fixed wing aircraft alone....:\

pre-JAR-FCL lifetime UK PPL
JAR-FCL 5-year PPL
lifetime NPPL
lifetime part-FCL PPL
lifetime part-FCL LAPL
post-JAR-FCL lifetime supplementary UK PPL

Thanks, Europe.......:mad:

[Genghis the Engineer]

... UK BCPL exercising PPL privileges
UK CPL, ditto
JAR CPL, ditto
UK ATPL, ditto
JAR ARPL, ditto
ICAO licence, exercising UK PPL privileges


So that's another 6 !

Each with subtly different medical and recency requirements, each permitting you to fly the same aeroplane in the same airspace.

G

[fwjc]

I wonder if the aeroplane knows any different?
Or, for that matter, if the aeroplane knows if it's EASA, Annexe 2 or otherwise?

Perhaps Bernoulli and his mate Galileo might be influenced by all that paperwork, give up and go home...

[BEagle]

"Tell you what, Orville, let's just stick to fixing bikes"
"You betcha, Wilbur!"

[S-Works]

pre-JAR-FCL lifetime UK PPL
JAR-FCL 5-year PPL
lifetime NPPL
lifetime part-FCL PPL
lifetime part-FCL LAPL
post-JAR-FCL lifetime supplementary UK PPL

Thanks, Europe.......

All in the name of standardisation........

I was a guest speaker at an International aviation conferance last year and my presentation was on the changing face of European licencing (very dry I know) and the audiance of people from around the world were gobsmacked at the state we have gotten ourselves into!!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Galileo might be influenced by all that paperwork, give up and go home...

Actually he did - Galileo got so hacked off and threatened by the church's views on his (entirely accurate) deduction that the earth went around the sun, and the moon around the earth, that he retired to a small island and did materials research, which seemed pretty safe and uncontentious.

Much of the principles we still use for aircraft structural analysis were determined by Galileo, because it got him away from all the paperwork and politics that his astronomy was causing.

G

[fwjc]

Genghis - ridiculous bureaucracy is not a new invention, neither is an inability to listen to a different perspective... I don't know whether EASA are aware of these traits.

[BEagle]

Galileo?

I see a little silhouetto of a man
Scaramouch, scaramouch will you do the fandango
Thunderbolt and lightning - very very frightening me
Gallileo, Gallileo,
Gallileo, Gallileo,
Gallileo Figaro - magnifico


E pur si muove!

[liam548]

I am doing an IMC course at the moment. Is there any reason to rush to finish by the end of March 2012 rather than 30th June 2012. I am just concious that paragraph 7 talks about an [arbitary] date and I am not clear whether that could in principle be earlier than 30 Jun 2012?


passed my IMC today..

finally. Best get it sent off quick...

Whopppeee..
:)

[thing]

Well done that man! :D:D:D I think I was more relieved to get that out of the way than the PPL skills test.

[BillieBob]

Whilst I understand the frustration that generates the hyperbole, the fact is that, once the dust settles, we will actually have:

For EASA aircraft - LAPL, PPL, CPL, ATPL, all valid indefinitely

For non-EASA aircraft - NPPL, PPL, CPL, ATPL, all valid indefinitely

Whist the record shows that I am not exactly a supporter of EASA or the CAA, I somehow don't think the world is going to end as a result of having parallel licensing systems for EASA and non-EASA aircraft.

As for the recurring discussion about surreptitiously bugging the wind - WTF? As an examiner, I don't care what the bug(s) are set to provided that they are in accordance with any requirement of the Operations Manual and that the aircraft is flown within the declared limits. In the case of a forced landing, I cannot recall any substantive requirements regarding the heading bug and any examiner who sought to base a fail on the decision of the candidate as to where to set the heading bug would richly deserve the Reg 6 appeal that should immediately follow as well as the resulting loss of examiner privileges.

[madgav]

passed my IMC today..

finally. Best get it sent off quick...

Whopppeee..
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

Well done :ok:
got mine done last Wednesday (14th), application was with the CAA next morning :cool:

[onebounce]

Just to add to the other posts, sent my IMC paperwork off to Gatwick on 28/2 via registered mail, got it back (after a chaser phone call - they said they had a bit of a back log...) from the CAA via FedEx 21/3. All good.... now just need to keep it current....

[enq]

Here's a licence renewal / rating attachment / licence availability dilemma I have, loosely based around the IMC.

My situation is;

Currently hold a JAR-FCL PPL

2 yr revalidation by experience due 16 May, all hours achieved so will get the certificate signed off at the weekend.

I'm taking the IMC Flight Test on Saturday (24th) so should be in a position to have this rating added then.

5 Year Renewal required by 7 June.

Medical Expires end March (booked medical for 28th).

I Must be in posession of my licence by 13 April to take to US for recreational flying (Flight Review due as well, it never rains but it pours)

Also considering getting a night qualification between 29 March & 13 April.

Given the transition to EASA licencing on 8th April, anyone got any suggestions (gratefully received) on when to apply for renewal or have the IMCr added & whether or not banging in the NQ overcomplicates the timing issues?

Answers on a post card would be great - I'm tempted to just have the IMCr added pronto (although I think I need my licence for the medical so will have to check that point as it would leave very little time to have the rating added & licence back by 13 April)

enq :confused:

[24Carrot]

... go down to Gatwick to have the rating added via the counter service ...

Get there early! Everybody ahead of you as you go though that door at 8:30 will cost you an extra 30 mins waiting ...

[madgav]

I'm tempted to just have the IMCr added pronto (although I think I need my licence for the medical so will have to check that point as it would leave very little time to have the rating added & licence back by 13 April)You shouldn't have to send your (JAR-FCL) licence with the IMCR application - see last page of the application form:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG1125FF.pdf

Think I'll give them a chaser call :rolleyes:

[Sir George Cayley]

Not sure if this is the correct thread but this has just appeared.

IN-2012/052: Recognition of JAR-FCL Pilot Licences by the UK as of 8 April 2012, with the entry into Force of Commission Regulation (EU) No. 1178/2011 (The EASA Aircrew Regulation) | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=4914)

SGC

[peterh337]

Some astonishing stuff in there about Hungary, Croatia and Turkey. All becoming dead ends for paperwork. Interesting that Hungary was never JAR-FCL. I was there in 2010 and spoke to some airline pilots who said the target date was Feb 2011.

Not apparently related to the IMCR however...

[davtom.net]

I can confirm that JAR FCL licence holders do not have to send their licence in to get ratings or qualifications added. The basis for this is that I did a night qualification last November, and when I sent in the paperwork, including logbook and application form but nothing else if I recall correctly, I did not send in the licence. I received about 12 working days later a new page for my licence book that was exactly the same as the current one but with the added "The holder can exercise the privileges of this licence at night," or words to that effect.

[enq]

Happily I passed the IMC skills test on Saturday & am now banging on with a night qual before the evenings get too light.

The suggestion of visiting the PLD take away office sounds like a good one & with a window of opportunity opening for me during which I can, before 8th April, get my 5 year licence renewal, have the IMC rating added, hand in my 2 year reval by experience form, possibly have the night restriction lifted & avoid being a guinea pig for the EASA changes I think I'll go for it.

Thanks for the input all.

[madgav]

Well I gave them a call today and was (politely) informed that they endeavour to process applications within 10 working days and it's only day 7 for me...... :rolleyes:
And there is a bit of a backlog.....
I explained that I was keen to get it processed by 8th April but she said it really didn't matter about 8th April and anyway it's good enough that they received my application before 8th April :confused:
Nevertheless I would really like it processed before that date!!
She also said I could call in personally if I was in the Gatwick area but that's not likely in the near future :)

I said I would call back at the end of the week.

[abgd]

When I sent in my licence recently it took about 3 weeks to get back - not sure whether it all goes into the same pile.

[Cusco]

Last August I took my IR stuff down to Gatwick (rather than risking posting it) as it had to be in within 6 days as the exams were about to expire. (Talk about cutting it fine :rolleyes:)

I got there 11.30hrs and the foyer was empty: not a soul waiting.

The nice lady checked through all the stuff for completeness, signatures etc, and asked me if I'd like to wait as they could do it there and then, but it would include a wait over their lunch break.

As it happened I couldn't wait as I had stuff planned so left it with them: Took 10 days to return it.

[peterh337]

My IR issuance took about 3hrs, while I waited in the rather nice restaurant upstairs.

[PompeyPaul]

So is everyone of the opinion it's NOT worth starting one now? I was going to take the written exam next week and then follow up with the flying test some 12 months later. That way I'd get my IMCr until 2014?

Or have I well and truly missed the boat? As far as I could see there was only further guidance due in June / July? Not an outright "to late" ?

[VMC-on-top]

The latest (potentially positive) twist in the saga ....

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/480971-aopa-reports-easa-changes-air.html

[peterh337]

So is everyone of the opinion it's NOT worth starting one now? I was going to take the written exam next week and then follow up with the flying test some 12 months later. That way I'd get my IMCr until 2014?I don't think anybody knows, and if the CAA has a strategy (which it probably does) it is keeping its powder dry till the last minute.

There are multiple ways of looking at this, and they depend on what sort of flying you do, you plan to do, how much value you attach to a given capability (legal or otherwise) and how much time you can allocate to collecting extra privileges. A lot of it hangs on the chances of becoming an outright owner, or a member of a syndicate around something capable.

Much has been written already...

If I was now where I was in early 2002, just finished my PPL and about to finish the IMCR, I would get on with it because (excluse me for being blunt :) ) a PPL without instrument privileges is as good as a chocolate teapot. If you cannot fly on instruments you cannot even fly to the UK/JAA VFR privileges i.e. 3km vis. You cannot even pop over to Le Touquet on a typical summer hazy day because there is no horizon. You probably also cannot radio navigate (GPS/VOR/DME) so getting anywhere past the nearest cowshed is a major navigational undertaking, worthy of membership of the Royal Institute of Navigation (and you get the free sock full of sand to stuff down your trousers (http://www.costumes.org/history/stibbert/179.jpg)).

Legally, the IMCR allows you to plan a flight in reasonable wx, with the backup of being able to file an ILS airport as the main, or just the alternate.

I can hardly think of a better example than this week's wx - haze and more haze.

Even if nothing new happens, and we get the status quo, you will have the IMCR, and you will then have to re-do the 50hrs to do the JAA IR.

But we might get the CBM IR for which the IMCR training will count as a credit - not that anybody will pass the CAA IRT without some considerable training (I took > 20hrs).

You can knock off the IMCR this summer.

[Slopey]

So is everyone of the opinion it's NOT worth starting one now? I was going to take the written exam next week and then follow up with the flying test some 12 months later. That way I'd get my IMCr until 2014?

Or have I well and truly missed the boat? As far as I could see there was only further guidance due in June / July? Not an outright "to late" ?

I'm doing mine just now, and as far as I understand it, if you get it before the 30th June date, it is then valid on EASA aircraft until 2/3 years in the future - if it does get withdrawn it'll be at that point and that'll be that.

If you get it after the 30th June, you can only add it to a CAA PPL, not an EASA PPL, so you can't use it in an EASA aircraft. Which probably makes it pointless as there aren't many IFR equipped aircraft which aren't EASA.

Worth phoning PLD to check however.

[peterh337]

The training and the capability will always be with you, dramatically expanding your capability.

[peterh337]

I've just been to the CAA presentation at Shoreham this evening.

Nothing new there.

If you get your IMCR done before July 2012, it's yours "for ever". It will be added to a license as an IR (restricted). Being limited to Annex 2 aircraft (most of which can't fly IFR) it is a bit useless but the CAA said they are working on sorting this out with EASA...

The CAA seems to have produced a huge array of licenses and other papers in order to keep people flying Annex 2 stuff, in the face of the onslaught from EASA. They have reinstated the old CAA CPLs and ATPLs also, for that purpose.

[Prop swinger]

If you get your IMCR done before July 2012, it's yours "for ever". It will be added to a license as an IR (restricted). Being limited to Annex 2 aircraft (most of which can't fly IFR) it is a bit useless but the CAA said they are working on sorting this out with EASA...
Slightly fuller report:
The intention is that an IMC remains valid on a UK licence, but only for Annexe II aircraft. The man from the CAA said that anyone with an IMC rating pre-dating July 2012 would, when issued with an EASA licence, have an IR(restricted) tacked onto it enabling IMC rating privileges in UK airspace in EASA aircraft.

All subject to approval from an EASA standardisation committee, but the CAA guy seemed fairly optimistic.

[peterh337]

There was a handout (which I forgot to pick up) which might have been worth scanning...

The whole theme was that the CAA is doing all it can within its power to keep people flying, but EASA has set strict boundaries on discretion elsewhere. I am sure this is true, and historically it is very much the case that the CAA has grandfathered forward every imaginable piece of paper at every juncture (vis the "paid PPL instructor" to BCPL, etc) but of course they would say that anyway.

One interesting snippet was that while JAR-FCL papers become EASA papers automatically, non-JAR-FCL papers will all require a flight test with an examiner to get the corresponding EASA papers issued. So e.g. a NPPL to LAPL conversion (if there is one) will require a flight test. Same with a UK PPL to EASA PPL.

It thus suggests that those with non-JAR-FCL papers who can get them converted trivially to JAR-FCL before the July deadline, should do so now as this will avoid the flight with an examiner which they will get hit with after July.

On the IMCR, there are no concrete news over anything that's come out over the past year or two. Clearly Sivel has the CAA over a barrel on this and is making them sweat it out.

I hope I got that right :)

[A le Ron]

I find the ongoing confusion over the IMCr particularly worrying, having just spent my hard-earned cash on getting one - which I am keen to use and keep. This is looking less likely as I fly an "EASA" aircraft, on which a rating held on a separate UK licence (if we go down that route) would presumably not be valid - I am sceptical about the IR (restricted) until EASA actually commit to it.:sad:

[Bob Upanddown]

They will do everything to keep people flying but it will, to convert your CAA licence to EASA, cost money however you do it. CAA to JAR to EASA or CAA to EASA will cost with money going to the CAA either way. Is it written into Part FCL that converting from a national licence requires a flight test??? Not that I can find.

Are you sure this wasn't a CAA publicity stunt to fool you into thinking they are on your side when, in fact, they goldplate everything to screw you? They are driven by money, not safety anymore.

[Prop swinger]

Peter, the handout was simply a hard copy of this pdf (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2330&pagetype=90&pageid=13059) which you may already have seen.

I think you misinterpreted the "flight check for EASA papers" statement. He did say that EASA would want some sort of check flight but went on to say that a licence proficiency check would be acceptable. My interpretation is that if you're applying for an EASA licence & rating, you must already hold a valid rating in which case you will have done a flight with an instructor within the last 2 years. That flight can be considered an LPC, in which case you will get an EASA licence & rating.

The presentation is available to download here (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2330&pagetype=90&pageid=13236), the chap's 'presentation' consisted of reading out each powerpoint page to us so you get everything except the Q & A. The IMC stuff is p27.

[peterh337]

I think you misinterpreted the "flight check for EASA papers" statement.

According to a post on Flyer (http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=75919), he has retracted that statement already.

[PompeyPaul]

I find the ongoing confusion over the IMCr particularly worrying, having just spent my hard-earned cash on getting one - which I am keen to use and keep. This is looking less likely as I fly an "EASA" aircraft, on which a rating held on a separate UK licence (if we go down that route) would presumably not be valid - I am sceptical about the IR (restricted) until EASA actually commit to it.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/puppy_dog_eyes.gif

At least you have one now and stand the chance of keeping it. If you don't have an IMCr then it's likely you never will. I am going to crunch through mine next week to hopefully get it wrapped up.

[madgav]

Result of second phone call this morning.

My application was received on 15/3 (I knew that). But has not been "assessed" yet :rolleyes:.
They are currently working on applications received on 8/3. So it should be done late next week. Will phone back midweek.

I would *really* like to get this before 8/4!!!! Thought I was in good enough time but it looks like it will be running close to the mark :*:ugh::ugh:

[thing]

You did the examination and sent it off before 8/4 which is what counts, chill bro....:). Your reval will be 25 months after the date of the exam.

As I remember mine took about 15 working days, and don't make the mistake I made which is thinking they hadn't sent a new FCL back. I was just about to ring them when it slipped out of my log book where they had hidden it.

[Slopey]

madgav - why all the consternation at the 8th April date? The CAA will add an IMCr onto a JAR PPL up until the 30th June - so no worries.

[madgav]

why all the consternation at the 8th April date?

One word - uncertainty! Yes I know the CAA will be adding IMCRs to JAR-FCL licences until 30/6, no problem there. The uncertainty is regarding any future cut off date for whatever is agreed between CAA/EASA regarding the IMCR. It could be that when the dust settles the 8/4 date may have no significance at all, but for now it's the date that EASA legislation comes into effect so it could potentially be relevant (someone else earlier in this thread also recommended gettting it before this date if possible). It's the date I've been working to from the start and despite the weather, aircraft availability etc beating me on so many occasions I thought I had it done and posted off in plenty good time. Hence the frustration - I'm sure you'll understand I want to give myself the best chance of keeping it post-2014 after all the effort and £££ spent ;)

You did the examination and sent it off before 8/4 which is what counts

Interesting point. Yes I know my skills test was done before 8/4 which is what determines the revalidation date. But is that the date which will appear in my licence? Don't think so as my licence currently carries the date processed by the CAA, for both PPL and NQ.

Anyway sorry for venting a bit. End of a rather frustrating week and this just added to it I suppose..... first outing in the P2002 earlier helped a bit :}

[BEagle]

Whoever gave this brief at Shoreham seems to have been rather poorly prepared.

You should see another CAA press release in a couple of weeks concerning 'grandfathering'of the IMCR, I understand.

Meanwhile, EASA will begin to consider NPA 2011-16 responses next week. The CAA will be participating; thanks to the tenacity of AOPA, the CAA representative will now be arguing the case for retention of the IMCR under direction from the very top of the Authority.

[Slopey]

I would imagine that EASA would have serious problems in the future insisting on a cut off date of the 8th April when the rating can still be issued onto a JAR licence up to 30th June, which will be an EASA licence when re-issued - can't see how they could make that stick. Doesn't give me anything to worry about to be honest.

The original advice about the 8th April was before the CAA clarification on dates.

But if the move is to push for retention, then it won't matter anyway.

[BEagle]

As far as pilots of EASA aeroplanes are concerned, there are 2 main issues:

1. Grandfathering. The inclusion of IMC privileges in part-FCL licences for those who obtained them before an as yet unspecified date. The CAA has almost finalised proposals for this and will be putting them to EASA 'soon'.

2. Continuance. The inclusion of IMC privileges in part-FCL licences for future pilot licence holders. This is, as far as EASA is concerned, a highly contentious issue. However, AOPA(UK), CAA, IAOPA(EU) and PPL/IR have all proposed a method by which this may be achieved in their comment repsonses to EASA's NPA 2011-16. The comment review team will hold its first meeting in Köln next week; fortunately, 'over regulation' of GA is currently a hot topic at the European Commission and within national aviation authorities, which should influence EASA's rulemakers in terms of accepting the need for regulatory flexibility to take account of the individual national needs of Member States.

Lastly, THERE IS NO 8 APR 2012 CUT-OFF DATE!!!!

[late-joiner]

Is there anything that would prevent the "as yet unspecified date" being defined retrospectively on the "NO 8 APR CUT-OFF DATE" or on any other date before the day that date is promulgated?

[Slopey]

1. Grandfathering. The inclusion of IMC privileges in part-FCL licences for those who obtained them before an as yet unspecified date. The CAA has almost finalised proposals for this and will be putting them to EASA 'soon'.

One would hope that the date would be the last date the IMCr would be attainable on a JAR licence - I don't see how they could argue logically that someone who obtained the IMCr ticket in March could include it, but someone who obtained it in May could not.

[madgav]

"Continuance" is of course what we all want and hope for.
There is however a realistic chance that that may not happen, in which case we have to fall back on "grandfathering". In that case there would be a cut off date. As Slopey says if the CAA are issuing IMCRs on JAR licences until 30th June then one would hope that any cut off date would not be before that, but who knows?

[BEagle]

The as yet unspecified date will not, according to the CAA, be before 30 Jun 2012.

The 'Interim Statement' released recently made that quite clear.

The CAA has lined up its ducks and will be putting its 'conversion report' intentions to EASA any day now.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

any day now
So those of us with an IMCr on a lifetime CAA PPL still don't know what to do.

[madgav]

The as yet unspecified date will not, according to the CAA, be before 30 Jun 2012.

The 'Interim Statement' released recently made that quite clear.

BEagle could you quote where in the Interim Statement (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2330/Interim%20Statement%20UK%20IMC%20RATING%20February%202012%20 V1.pdf) it says that? Genuine question - I've re-read it and can't see that but maybe I'm missing something.

What it does say (paragraph 7) is:

It is this proposal, including the specific date - being the last date to obtain an IMC Rating that can be converted to an IR(A)(Restricted) - which is still to be agreed.

and also (paragraph 2):

There is agreement in principle that the priveliges of licence holders that are gained before Regulation (EU) 1178/2011....... ...... applies should as far as possible be preserved.

Isn't that 8th April 2012?

[madgav]

Or are you referrring to page 27 of this presentation (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2330/Transition%20to%20EASA%20March%202012.pdf) (which outlines the CAA's proposal but is subject to EASA approval)?

[S-Works]

Yes it would be illegal to fly without the rating being issued as you dont have a rating....

You could fly with an Instructor or with a safety pilot in VMC with foggles to maintain currency.

[madgav]

I was going to call again but there seemed little point, even before reading the above posts.
Like Will Knot my application was also received on 15th March. Last Friday they were processing applications received on 8th March. And I'm guessing they won't be working tomorrow?

Here and on another forum it's been stated that cut off date for any grandfathering will not be earlier than end June. However it seems that is only what the CAA are proposing, and is subject to agreement with EASA.

[BEagle]

The whole grandfathering / continuance / regulation of GA area is inextricably linked. No-one can give you any written assurances at this stage; however, the EASA has always said that they cannot remove existing privileges under part-FCL. The UK won't adopt part-FCL until 1 Jul 2012, most other Member States are using 8 Apr 2013. Thus UK IMCR privileges gained before part-FCL will, according to the Agency, be safe; however, the 'grandfathering' of those gained subsequently is being debated by the CAA and EASA presently.

The issue of 'grandfathering' v. 'continuance' will depend upon the outcome of the FCL.008 Comment Review Team's work. They should also take into account the EASA Management Board's recent meeting at which they were told emphatically (by all NAAs, the EC and industry, particularly EAS and IAOPA) that their GA regulation is disproportionate.

So those of us with an IMCr on a lifetime CAA PPL still don't know what to do.

Until 7 Apr 2014 at the latest - nothing. National ICAO-compliant PPLs, including any privileges contained therein, may be used to fly EASA aircraft until that date. By which time the outcome of the NPA 2011-16 Opinion will have become law.........probably :rolleyes:

[liam548]

[quote=Will Knot;7119400]Just to up-date you all and save you a phone call, I have spoken with the CAA today to enquire about how they're getting on with my IMC rating application.

It was received on the 15th March and is still in the 'to be assessed' pile, possibly swapping stories with madgav's.

quote]



Indeed as per my previous post I have also phoned them today.

They have had mine since the 20th march for my IMC rating adding, no money taken yet from my card.
She also said do not be concerned regarding the mentioned April 8th...

[madgav]

Thanks for the info BEagle :ok:
My feeling remains that something decent will eventually result from this mess......

I'm expecting mine to be processed probably sometime next week now.......

[madgav]

Close enough.
Received documentation today, one month and 3 days after passing the flight test.
That should give some idea of the delays at the moment........

[EGKB]

Sorry can someone care to explain to me what this whole thread means? IMC rating will no longer be running from XX date? I have researched but nothing makes sense

[Slopey]

In a nutshell:

As from 1st July, you will only be able to add an IMC rating to a CAA licence - you won't be able to add it onto an EASA licence (which a JAA PPL will become), and you won't be able to use it on EASA aircraft.

So - if you want to fly anything but permit aircraft and exercise the privileges of the IMC rating, you need to get it on your JAA/EASA licence before the 30th of June.

If you want to fly a permit aircraft on a CAA UK licence with an IMC, you can add that to your licence post 30th June.

The IMC itself will be valid until 2014 - after that, it will cease to exist. As far as EASA licences are concerned, there is talk of grandfathering/converting the rating to some form of UK only restricted IR.

[Nibbler]

Can anyone confirm that if you have already started an approved IMC course prior to 30th June that you can finish the course and have the IMCr added to your licence?

[Slopey]

As someone in the same situation, speaking with CAA PLD, you need to have the skills test passed, and the application form into the before them 30th June.

The IMC is valid for 25 months from date of test.

I'm not taking any chances, and will try and get the course, exam and test completed in early May and get it off to them with 6 weeks to spare (so I can hopefully have it in hand by the 30th June).

After the 30th June you can add it to a CAA national licence, but not an EASA one.

[EGKB]

Interesting.

When you say it will cease to exist, you mean they'll no longer being training for it. Or everyone who has an IMC won't have it after that date? That's a shame, IR is much mroe expensive than IMC.

[Slopey]

(Currently) It will cease to exist in 2014 - there will be no such thing as the IMC rating after that date.

You can still train to fly aircraft by sole reference to the instruments, and fly approaches, but you won't be able to get a rating or licence endorsement by which you can use the training except for the IR.

[SunnyDayInWiltshire]

(Currently) It will cease to exist in 2014 - there will be no such thing as the IMC rating after that date.

You can still train to fly aircraft by sole reference to the instruments, and fly approaches, but you won't be able to get a rating or licence endorsement by which you can use the training except for the IR.Slopey, I'd have to disagree somewhat with your summary - although it may be true for many pilots, training and examination of IMC ratings could still continue. My understanding of the situation today (which BEagle points out above is still under negotation with EASA) is as follows:

The position today is that if you have a JAR licence (which is now officially an EASA PPL, even if it doesn't say so on the front), you can only add an IMC rating to it before 30 June 2012. If you have one on the licence by that time, you should be able to exercise its use until 2014. It's not agreed what happens after that but is extremely likely that the privileges will be continued (grandfathered) after that date. There is likely to be some benefit in getting this added/done before end June, because grandfather rights are expected to be continued in some form while new ratings after that date may be treated differently.

Since the CAA will start printing EASA licences on July 1st, I'd err on the side of caution and try to have any JAR-PPL licence change updated and issued by 30 June just in case the transition to the new system means that JAR-PPL licences can't be physically printed after that date. Perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic, but if I were running the transition I'd want to make it binary and not have old/new systems running in parallel for any length of time. It's sure to involve more than just printing the licences on different coloured paper :)

After 1st July, new IMC ratings can continue to be trained for and examined. I don't see why this couldn't be done in EASA aircraft. But they would be added only to a UK PPL licence - so if you had only an EASA licence you would have to be issued with a parallel UK only one. If you had both an EASA and an UK licence, you could exercise the IMC (in EASA or Annex II aircraft) until April 2014.

Thereafter, the IMC could only be used after 2014 on Annex II aircraft. Hopefully, something better will be agreed in the next couple of months.

Having spent a lot of time, money and effort to get an IMC rating myself before the deadline, I do hope it's been worthwhile.

[piperarcher]

I currently have an IMCR, which will expire in October 2012. Does anyone know what might happen in October with regard to getting it re-validated ? I presume I wouldnt be able to assume grandfather rights until 2014 on a rating which had a lapsed expiry date. I wasnt sure whether I would need to get it renewed by the end of June, thinking that perhaps all the IMCR examiners may have to give up this particular line of work.

[liam548]

Close enough.
Received documentation today, one month and 3 days after passing the flight test.
That should give some idea of the delays at the moment........


Recieved my log book and IMC rating back today via FedEx from the CAA, they have had it since 20th March, so just under a month.

I now have an additional sheet for IMC rating revalidation to go with the SEP rating piece of paper.. Is this correct or should I have sent my SEP sheet in so they could have endorsed that instead with the expiry date of the rating?

[madgav]

Yes I now also have an additional Rating Revalidation sheet with just "IMC" entered on it. Don't know if this will be amalgamated with the SEP one at some point in the future.

There was no requirement to send the licence with the IMCr application form, so I expect this is all ok.

[RTN11]

They never reprint the SEP rating on your page unless you are sending the paperwork in for that purpose.

If the SEP rating is revalidated by an examiner, either by experience or proficiency check, he signs your ratings page and you send a form off to notify the CAA.

My understanding is that this is simply kept on record and not necessarily even processed unless they need to for some reason in the future. Next time you get your SEP revalidated, you could get the examiner to add it to the page with any other relevant ratings so you only have one page to worry about.

[madlandrover]

I now have an additional sheet for IMC rating revalidation to go with the SEP rating piece of paper.. Is this correct

Yes - you will note that the new page is endorsed for national ratings only.

[BEagle]

Slopey, virtually all of your post is totally incorrect:

As from 1st July, you will only be able to add an IMC rating to a CAA licence - you won't be able to add it onto an EASA licence (which a JAA PPL will become), and you won't be able to use it on EASA aircraft.

The CAA will have no physical method of being able to print JAR-FCL licences after 30 Jun, so the IMCR will have to be included in a supplementary UK licence unless the CAA has found a simpler solution by then. However, you will be able to use it on EASA aircraft until at least Apr 2014.

So - if you want to fly anything but permit aircraft and exercise the privileges of the IMC rating, you need to get it on your JAA/EASA licence before the 30th of June. If you want to fly a permit aircraft on a CAA UK licence with an IMC, you can add that to your licence post 30th June.


Wrong! The situation regarding PtoF aircraft is a separate issue and has nothing to do with EASA. LAA has made certain proposals for flying PtoF aircraft in IMC, but this is very much Work in Progress.

The IMC itself will be valid until 2014 - after that, it will cease to exist. As far as EASA licences are concerned, there is talk of grandfathering/converting the rating to some form of UK only restricted IR.

The IMCR will NOT 'cease to exist' after 2014. However, how it may be used on EASA aeroplanes after that date is under debate.

[peterh337]

I was involved in a "save the IMCR" campaign a few years ago, which was started by Fuji here.

Some people thought it was stupid and I got some phone calls suggesting I should not be involved but some good lobbying and awareness raising was done.

Reading this debate ebbing and flowing, I don't see anything has actually changed since that infamous EASA+CAA "IMCR conference" in 2008 (which I went to) at which Eric Sivel famously said to a packed hall that he is in favour of the IMCR "but don't tell anybody because it will cause me trouble" :)

At the time the IMCR was going to disappear once EASA took over, unless it became pan-European (which would obviously never happen).

The one thing which possibly has changed is the CAA realising that the IMCR can continue on non-CofA planes post-EASA, but that is a virtually useless privilege since nearly all of them cannot fly IFR legally.

We have also got the FCL008/CBM IR proposal but that will never be a direct IMCR replacement because the final test is the full UK CAA IR flight test, which takes a fair bit of training to have any chance of passing.

I think the IMCR will be saved at the last minute - largely because EASA has much less power today than in 2008 when they could just be totally arrogant - through some paperwork dodge.

[Nibbler]

This seems relevant

EASA Licensing and Training Transition | EASA Transition | Personal Licences and Training (http://www.caa.co.uk/eupilotlicensing)

[Slopey]

Thanks for the clarifications all, I was incorrect in thinking that you couldn't use an IMC on a non-EASA licence on an EASA aircraft. Apologies, and Item 5 on the interim statement clarifies that nicely.

As noted by others above, I'm going to attempt to err on the side of caution and get the IMC added to my existing JAA licence prior to the 30th June. (Although if not, I now understand I can get it added to a CAA licence post that date and use it until 2014).