Changes to IRI Requirements

[Whopity]

AIC W 013/2112 announces changes to the qualification requirements to become an IRI, or to have the outdated "No Applied Instruments" limitation removed from a FI rating.

In 1999 the CAA realised that the JAA requirement of 200 hours experience in accordance with IFR could was not verifiable, as there was no requirement to log such information, and consequently introduced a more realistic, measureable requirement of 50 hours by sole reference to instruments as an alternative. The 1:4 rule was born. This AIC notifies industry that this rule may no longer be applied and that applicants will be required to comply with the new EASA requirement from 1 July 2012

EASA Part FCL.905 FI lists this requirement as:(1) at least 200 hours of flight time under IFR, of which up to 50 hours may be instrument ground time in an FFS, an FTD 2/3 or FNPT II;

The AIC however lists the requirement quite differently: 3.2 Applications from 1 July 2012 for privileges granted under Part-FCL requiring the individual to have completed a minimum number
of flying hours in an aircraft in accordance with IFR will only be accepted where the required experience has been gained in flight in
circumstances requiring compliance with IFR. So it is more stringent than EASA Part FCL by requiring all of the experience to have been obtained in flight, and in circumstances requiring compliance with IFR i.e. In controlled airspace or at night.

Clearly nobody at the CAA checks AICs for accuracy any more before releasing them!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Interesting.

I've only ever logged time by sole reference to instruments - should we all now be logging IFR time separately, in case we every want to be IRIs?

Does EASA actually appreciate that they are different?

Should I fly all my long VMC trips under instrument flight rules to make my logbook look better?

I'm also aware that I have a little under 50 hours of "sole reference to instruments" logged, and don't feel even faintly close to competent enough an instrument pilot to teach more than PPL level "what if I accidentally enter cloud". Is it genuinely realistic for anybody with that little instrument time to safely teach instrument procedures?

G

[blagger]

Genghis - I think that is what the CAA are getting at with their compliance bit, so that people can't just Parker pen all their VMC navexs as flown under IFR

So under EASA an IRI course for an FI holder requires 200hrs IFR - so the only people who will be able to get it are ex-airlines in reality, commercial instructing as a career just died!

I don't know how the reval for it works either - it says you must have 10hrs instructing for the IR in the last 12 months, I don't know what happens if you have done the course but don't do these hours? How does it get renewed?

I have asked the CAA how they will be grandfathering those of us that have removed the restriction now, if we are not currently instructing for the IR don't know how this will pan out though?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Raises an interesting question of what is an appropriate benchmark?

My instinct would be a minimum sitting somewhere around 100-200 hrs by sole reference to instruments before doing the IRI course, then maintaining currency of your own qualifications to practice. IMCR to teach IMCR, IR to teach IT. (EIR... ?)

G

[S-Works]

When I did the IRI I had it added to my licence as a stand alone rating as well as being used to remove the instrument restriction. This really only has an impact on the IMCr only guys and its a UK annomly as the rest of Europe you can only have an IRI if you have an IR. If you have an IR you don't have any problem gaining the experience. I had somewhere around a thousand hours of IFR time with 400 plus by sole reference to instruments when I did mine as most of my flying is done airways.

[blagger]

Bose - out of interest, how do you reval yours? Are you teaching people for the IR? or do you do a flight test?

[S-Works]

teaching for the IR so that will probably cover me next time. otherwise I would just do a flight test as its quick and easy.

[BillieBob]

I think there is a misunderstanding here. The AIC relates to the requirements for the IRI Certificate (FCL.915.IRI) and not to the requirements for the extension of FI privileges to instruction for the IR.

It is true that the 1:4 rule will not be available to FIs after 1 July but the requirement for flight under IFR will continue to include the option of up to 50 hours of instrument ground time. Although unlikely in practice, the ridiculous fact remains, however, that the required flight time under IFR, for either qualification, may include no instrument flight time.

If the holder of an FI or IRI Certificate does not meet the experience requirements for revalidation, then he will have to attend a seminar and pass an assessment of competence, just as now. The revalidation experience requirements under Part-FCL are, in fact, less than under JAR-FCL (100 hours of flight instruction down to 50 and no requirement for 30 hours in the last 12 months).

[Aware]

I am assuming that an IMC holder not an IR holder with the instrument restriction removed, can until 2014 or whatever the date will be, still teach for the IMC issue or revalidations, after the eurocrats have taken over in July.

And an IR holder now that has the restriction removed , can continue to teach IR without the 200 hrs of IF post July.

Am I also getting myself confused, as the IRI can be seperate qualification, in its own right, requiring the hours to renew it, but the applied restricted removed FI has a different criteria.

IMC only instruction on the back of an FI didn't if I recall correctly, require any actual hours of teaching to retain the right to teach it ?

Simple answers please due to head starting to hurt with all this analysis of recent rules.

[blagger]

BillieBob - what is your point? There is no misunderstanding I can see - previously an FI who had an IR = 50hrs could do the IRI course as 50 x 4 = 200. Now the FI has to build another 150hrs of IFR time to do the course. They could of done this teaching for the IMC but of course that is going to disappear isn't it!

[blagger]

Aware - I think the CAA will have to give FIs with an IMC a UK-CPL with IMC rating and their FI on it so they can continue to teach until the 2014 deadline. If we get the IR(Restricted) route for grandfathering of IMC onto a EASA licence then there might have to be an IRI(Restricted) as well.

[BillieBob]

The original post suggested that the AIC applied to requirements for both the IRI and FI certificates and had, therefore, removed from the latter the option of claiming 50 hours of the IFR requirement as instrument ground time in an FFS, an FTD 2/3 or FNPT II. This is not the case, the AIC refers only to the requirements for the IRI certificate.

The only change is that the UK is now forced to comply with the same experience requirement that has been in place in Europe for the last 13 years.

[BEagle]

The CAA is already working on a conversion report to grant appropriate IRI privileges to existing FIs who have had the 'No Applied Instrument' restriction removed.

[Mickey Kaye]

BEagle

Any idea what it contains or when its findings will be reported?

[BEagle]

I imagine it'll be included in CAP 804.