IMC?

[PPLvirgin]

Hi all,

anyone have any idea when IMC will be available to train for? is it being taken out?
is it worth gaining or is it better to wait for the possibility of a new restricted IR course?

how useful is it? although its said not legal to use imc abroad unless you have permission what is the likelyhood of getting permission?

regards

T-Dog!

[Johnm]

Do a search on the topic then you will get the JFDI message

[wb9999]

There are many threads explaining the current status of the IMC rating, or IR (restricted) as it is now called.

The rating is only valid in the UK. It cannot be used abroad under any circumstances.

[18greens]

It might not be valid abroad but if Harry clampers gets you it works just fine in any country ( the alternative being to ignore all of the instrument messages and crash). You just cant rely on it for nav when abroad. But why would you want to go abroad when we have such lovely imc weather here. Also I've used it lots when it's technically vmc but in effect imc ( crossing the channel on a really hazy day)

The jfdi message is the one you have to take. You won't regret it.

[Fuji Abound]

wb9999 There are many threads explaining the current status of the IMC rating, or IR (restricted) as it is now called.

The rating is only valid in the UK. It cannot be used abroad under any circumstances.


I suspect still not strictly true.

For holders of non easa licences ( not yet converted) it lifts the vfr limits and on top restriction any where and can be used any where with the consent of the national authority.

Of course under easa it becomes an irr to which easa restrictions apply.

[wb9999]

I suspect still not strictly true.

For holders of non easa licences ( not yet converted) it lifts the vfr limits and on top restriction any where and can be used any where with the consent of the national authority.

Increased VFR limits and VFR on top for non-EASA licences does not mean the IMC rating is valid outside of UK airspace and CI. The CAA alter your PPL privileges, and these are applicable worldwide.

Legally, the IMC rating can be used outside of UK airspace with the consent of the national authority, but in practical terms no other country has given that consent or is likely to do so.
(CI & IoM excepted)

[Fuji Abound]

Increased VFR limits and VFR on top for non-EASA licences does not mean the IMC rating is valid outside of UK airspace and CI. The CAA alter your PPL privileges, and these are applicable worldwide.

Semantics. It is because you have an IMC rating that you have these additional privileges, which are very useful, and historically another important reason for the IMC rating. In other words not mentioning this element fails to give the entire picture. :)


Legally, the IMC rating can be used outside of UK airspace with the consent of the national authority, but in practical terms no other country has given that consent or is likely to do so.

I know of cases where another country has given consent.

[wb9999]

Semantics. It is because you have an IMC rating that you have these additional privileges, which are very useful, and historically another important reason for the IMC rating. In other words not mentioning this element fails to give the entire picture.

It's an important distinction though. Some people can take it to mean that the IMC rating is therefore recognised in other other countries, when that is not correct at all.

I know of cases where another country has given consent.

Can you provide more info? That would be very useful to know for everyone with an IMC or contemplating obtaining an IMC.

[Fuji Abound]

It's an important distinction though. Some people can take it to mean that the IMC rating is therefore recognised in other other countries, when that is not correct at all.

I agree. I wasnt being pedantic, but it is an important benefit which can be overlooked if one assumes the rating has no relevance abroad. Until the EIR there is every relevance to be able to fly over an under cast to your VMC destination. Climbing out of the UK IMC and routing across the channel en route south is a classic example.

I know of three cases where DGAC has given written confirmation that the IMC rating is valid in France.

[wb9999]

I know of three cases where DGAC has given written confirmation that the IMC rating is valid in France.

Was this on an individual case basis, or were DGAC saying that it is valid for everyone with an IMCr?

[Whopity]

I know of three cases where DGAC has given written confirmation that the IMC rating is valid in France. In contravention of UK law which the pilot of a G Reg has to comply with.

How valid is a note from a policeman saying you can speed?

[BackPacker]

In contravention of UK law which the pilot of a G Reg has to comply with.

But probably legal if it was an F-reg. Then it's the DGAC which sets all the rules, including the privileges and restrictions that apply to the validation of your UK-issued PPL by the DGAC. (At least, pre-EASA.)

But I agree with the sentiment here: I'd like to see the exact wording of the DGAC (in French if you don't mind) regarding what exactly was accepted.

I suspect that all the DGAC accepted was the fact that the IMC lifted the VFR-on-top restriction, but not that the IMC would give the privilege of flying in IMC conditions, OCAS, in France.

[wb9999]

A quick check of the ANO shows that is not legal to use the IMC rating outside of the UK. It specifically states it is only valid when in the UK. There is not even a mention of the Channel Islands or IoM, but the CAA's skills test guidance notes for the IMCr state "It is only valid for flight in UK territorial airspace, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man airspace".

So even if the French say it is valid, the UK ANO does not. You have to comply with the more restrictive regulations, which means no IMCr outside of the UK, IoM and CI.

[BackPacker]

True, but the ANO is not applicable when flying an F-reg. When you fly an F-reg it's the French equivalent of the ANO that is applicable. Under JAR-FCL, there will be something in there similar to the following in the ANO:

Subject to the exceptions set out in articles 51 to 60, a person must not act as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom without holding an appropriate licence granted or rendered valid under this Order.
- and -
A JAA licence is, unless the CAA gives a direction to the contrary, a licence rendered valid under this Order.

(ANO part 6, para 50.1 and 62.5 respectively - I'm sorry but my French is not good enough to search for the actual French article.)

This means that your UK licence is now considered the equivalent of a French licence, and is thus valid for flight on an F-reg. But this also means that the DGAC rules apply, and that the DGAC can give you additional privileges and set additional restrictions if they want to. After all, you are now flying under French law, not under UK law. Normally they will simply state that all restrictions on the original licence apply, and will not confer any additional privileges, but my point is: They don't have to do that. It would be perfectly legal for them to say "Hey, you've got a UK IMC rating. Congratulations. Based on that, we'll give you a French equivalent of that, valid in France only, even though your UK IMC rating is only valid in the UK." (Well, they would be saying that in French of course.)

Now I've never heard of the situation where the French authorities actually did this. So I'm very interested in hearing about these. (The reason I find this very unlikely is that there is no French equivalent to the IMC. So embedding such a validation in the rest of the legal framework, and dealing with such a validation on a practical, day-to-day basis, would be too complex, IMHO.)

The exact same thing, by the way, happens to the UK NPPL, Dutch RPL and various other sub-ICAO sub-PPL licences. Yes, these licences are only valid in national airspace and in an aircraft registered with the national authority. But a foreign country can issue a generic or specific law or exception, to accept such a (foreign) licence as the equivalent of their local licence.

[wb9999]

BackPacker, I don't think that would work.

You are still using a UK licence in France (unless you have a French issued licence), and so the UK ANO would still be applicable. Where there are conflicts between the UK ANO (for flight crew licensing) and French ANO (for aircraft, airspace, rules of the air etc), the more restrictive apply. If the UK ANO says the IMC rating is not valid abroad then you can't get any more restrictive than that.

I don't believe there is a French equivalent of the IMCr, so even under French privileges you would need a full IR to fly IMC.

BTW It would be useful if the OP can confirm what type of licence he/she holds. I suspect an EASA/JAR licence.

[Fuji Abound]

That is not what the ANO says.

The privileges of the IMC Rating may be
exercised in UK territorial airspace. The IMC Rating may
not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless
permission to do so has been given by the appropriate
authority of that Country.

I think you may have also misunderstood para 1 of sch 7 which deals with the entitlement within the UK but because it deals with the UK you cant read that to mean it excludes elsewhere.

The letters I have seen from DGAC are quite clear and are in English - there is no room for misunderstanding. They are between DGAC and the individuals concerned so I am not about to "publish" them on an open forum as that would be entirely inappropriate. Given the changes under EASA I suspect they will not have long term validity in any event but there are further changes a foot.

[wb9999]

Fuji Abound, do you have a link to where you are getting that extract of the ANO from?

The current ANO states
Instrument meteorological conditions rating (aeroplanes)
(1) Subject to paragraph (2), within the United Kingdom an instrument meteorological
conditions rating (aeroplanes) entitles the holder of a United Kingdom Private Pilot’s
Licence (Aeroplanes) to fly as pilot in command of an aeroplane without being subject
to the restrictions contained in paragraph (2)(c) or (f) of the privileges of the United
Kingdom Private Pilot’s Licence (Aeroplanes).

(my bold)

[Fuji Abound]

Not being cheeky but as I commented before that says all that needs to be said - it doesn't say the rating is not valid outside the UK, it does say what the entitlement is within the UK.

The other reference originally came form LASORS 2010

LASORS 2010: the guide for pilots - Civil Aviation Authority: Personnel Licensing Department - Flight Crew - Google Books (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=exXDMwAJVHkC&pg=RA1-PA84&lpg=RA1-PA84&dq=The+IMC+Rating+may+not+be+used+in+the+airspace+of+any+oth er+Country+unless+permission+to+do+so+has+been+given+by+the+ appropriate+authority+of+that+Country.&source=bl&ots=wRZNt24nyv&sig=Wnn1vVcX3OJX2XU0ZmVNEgv8ZOI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oo7VUdnaHMnBO9i0gYAB&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=The%20IMC%20Rating%20may%20not%20be%20used%20in%20the%20ai rspace%20of%20any%20other%20Country%20unless%20permission%20 to%20do%20so%20has%20been%20given%20by%20the%20appropriate%2 0authority%20of%20that%20Country.&f=false)

but hence my earlier comment that it is the ANO that is relevant.

[BackPacker]

You are still using a UK licence in France (unless you have a French issued licence), and so the UK ANO would still be applicable.

I don't think the UK ANO would be applicable. The UK ANO can only be applicable within the territory of the UK (& IoM and such), or to a G-reg aircraft flying abroad (as established by the Chicago Convention). It can not be applicable to someone flying an F-reg in France, for instance. Laws don't work that way. In order to fly an F-reg you have to have something that is acceptable to the French authorities.

That's why there will be an article in the French laws, equivalent to the one I quoted from the ANO, that renders a UK licence valid for flight in an F-reg aircraft. It's the logical consequence of the implementation of JAR-FCL, many years ago. But since the French law renders the licence valid, from that point on it's the French law which applies, and which may grant further privileges and set further restrictions.

Now obviously the French are not that silly, and just like elsewhere there will be a further clause somewhere in French law that states that all the original UK restrictions on your licence will apply. But my point is: It's the French who decided to put that clause in, and thus the French who may grant exceptions to that clause. Not the UK authorities, as they have no jurisdiction.

By the way, this is the exact same reason why the letters that Fuji refers to, are written by the French DGAC, and not by the UK CAA.

The reason for the specific clause "within the UK" in the ANO is to prevent people from exercising their IMC privileges outside the UK in a G-reg. That's a situation where the ANO does have jurisdiction (as agreed in the Chicago Convention), and the ANO wants to prevent that. But there's no need for the ANO to prevent people from exercising the IMC privileges in an F-reg, as the ANO doesn't have jurisdiction over that situation in the first place.

Question: If you have a valid UK IMC rating, are you allowed to exercise the privileges of that rating, within the UK, in an F-reg?

(I think not, as you need a licence issued or rendered valid by the DGAC to fly in an F-reg. And the DGAC - apart from the letters that Fuji mentioned, and that were issued on an individual basis - doesn't render an IMC rating valid as there's no French equivalent.)

Anyway, it's all very hypothetical, especially now that EASA has taken over. Although I remain highly interested in the documents that Fuji has. Fuji, is there no way you can quote the relevant bits and pieces from that document, while protecting the identity/innocence/virginity/whatever of the parties?

[wb9999]

The only place in the ANO where the privileges of an IMCr is stipulated is the paragraph I quoted above - so it is only "within the United Kingdom". Outside of the UK an IMCr holder only has normal PPL privileges.

[wb9999]

In order to fly an F-reg you have to have something that is acceptable to the French authorities.

But the IMC rating is not acceptable to the French authorities. Isn't it the French who are behind EASA's reluctance to allow national ratings on EASA licences?

[Fuji Abound]

wb9999

I think you are still missing the point.

The CAA cant extend the privileges of the IMCr outside the UK because the IMCr is not an ICAO rating in the way a CAA IR is / was. Based on the FAA IR it is possible it could have been filed as such, with the relevant dispensation, but in reality even if they had wanted to, the dispensations required would have been a step so far. Most "national" ICAO IRs dont meet the ICAO requirements and that is why most national authorities have filed dispensations where their IR falls short of the ICAO standard.

That is why the ANO makes clear that the IMCr lifts certain restrictions in UK airspace.

Equally that is not to say the ANO prohibits those restrictions being lifted in a G reg aircraft outside the UK BUT it is for the relevant authority to recognise the rating as having the same or any other effect in their airspace which if they wish to do so renders the pilot entitled to exercise those privileges without contravening the ANO.

I think this is relevant because potentially it gives other EASA signatories the entitlement to render the IMCr (or in fact the IRR as it will become) valid in other EASA airspace. Who knows the IMc may yet be more widely adopted if the EIR is found wanting!

Why do you think LASORS is so clear in this regard? If you have the consent of another authority, and given what LASORS has to say on the matter, do you honestly think the CAA would prosecute? Even if you do, you are not reading the ANO correctly - you think it says the privileges may NOT be excercised outside UK airspace when in fact it says they may be excercised within UK airspace, quite a different matter from they may ONLY be excercised in the UK which the legislation might have said - but doesn't.

As to whether it is the French that are reluctant to recognise national ratings I think this is debatable. They have always had an issue with their Brevet de Base and of course have their own sub ICAO IR. Moreover the IRR seems to rather dodge the concept of national ratings, rather it is an EASA rating with certain restrictions which happen to be territorial (at the moment).

Of course as we all know the whole issue is a complete mess not helped by
the utter lack of understanding of those involved with building a "better" or more comprehensive system.

[wb9999]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree then:)

It would be good if you confirm if the info you have from the DGAC applies to everyone or if a pilot requested individual permission.

[Fuji Abound]

OK, but would be interested why you think the position can be interpreted in any other way.

Happy then we agree to disagree but the words seem very clear to me. It is my job to deal with legislation and I am therefore intrigued.

The requests were individual.

[wb9999]

A few things that lead me to think the IMCr is not valid outside of the UK, IoM and CI:


CAP804 (LASORS' replacement) is not a legal document.
The ANO, which is law and overrides anything CAP804 says, doesn't mention about being able to fly in another in country with the permission of the national authority. You can be prosecuted for a breach of the ANO - not for CAP804.
The ANO specifies the privileges of a PPL - including minimum flight vis of 3km, non-IMC etc. These apply worldwide (unless there are more restrictive regulations in the country you're flying). If an IMCr privileges are only "within the UK" then the PPL privileges apply elsewhere.
The CAA's skills test guidance for the IMCr states "It is only valid for flight in UK territorial airspace, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man airspace.". This document has as much legal standing as CAP804.


Regarding the ANO, I said it allows the IMCr privileges "within the United Kingdom" (that is how it is worded in the ANO). I know it doesn't specifically forbid the IMCr outside of the UK, but it doesn't permit it either.

I suspect that "The IMC Rating may not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless permission to do so has been given by the appropriate authority of that Country" is for the benefit of the IoM and Channel Islands.

If only the CAA could make things clearer there would be no need for these discussions!

[Fuji Abound]

CAP804 (LASORS' replacement) is not a legal document.

True, but regulatory authorities will almost never prosecute where the prosecution is contrary to their own interpretation. Not much point publish legislative guidance if it is worth less. If I were the CAA barrister I wouldn't want to defend that position with the crusty judge.

The ANO, which is law and overrides anything CAP804 says, doesn't mention about being able to fly in another in country with the permission of the national authority.

and it doesn't say you cant. You will struggle to prosecute someone if you cant point to legislation which makes their action illegal.


The ANO specifies the privileges of a PPL - including minimum flight vis of 3km, non-IMC etc. These apply worldwide (unless there are more restrictive regulations in the country you're flying). If an IMCr privileges are only "within the UK" then the PPL privileges apply elsewhere.

I dont understand your point. The PPL is not limited because it was always constructed to be ICAO. The IMCr couldn't be ICAO. An ICAO member state is obliged to accept ICAO privileges, but because an IMCr is not ICAO you cant oblige another ICAO signatory to accept it, but you can leave them to make their own decision.

The CAA's skills test guidance for the IMCr states "It is only valid for flight in UK territorial airspace, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man airspace.". This document has as much legal standing as CAP804.

but the same document says more information regarding the rating can be found in LASORS.

I suspect that "The IMC Rating may not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless permission to do so has been given by the appropriate authority of that Country" is for the benefit of the IoM and Channel Islands.

Well if you accept that is the position then its going to be really tough to argue the regulator excepted the IoM and the CI without identifying them and yet, without saying so, excluded anyone else who might want to consent.

You see I think if you read the legislation carefully the ANO doesnt say the rating can only be used in the UK, it specifies how it amends your privileges in the UK - this is the key point. I don't think any barrister could successfully argue the law says the rating cannot be used outside the UK - it doesn't say that, and if it doesn't say that it cant be illegal unless there is case law to the contrary, which there isn't. However, because it is not ICAO no other ICAO authority is obliged to accept the rating any more or less than they are obliged to accept anything that is sub ICAO.

It is no different than sub cat. A aircraft (permit etc) where the CAA grant privileges in our airspace, but neither grant nor deny privileges else where, because they cant. That doesn't mean you cant exercise those privileges else where, but it does mean you need the consent of the relevant authority.

If you think about it, the only reason any privilege can be used any where else in the world is because it is ICAO, sub ICAO and the privilege is discretionary outside the remit of the granting authority.

If the CAA didn't think this was the correct interpretation then why did they say the rating may be used with the permission of another country and if they intended to refer only to the CIs and IofM then why did they refer to country when in fact I suspect they are well aware it is debatable they are countries.

I hope that is a reasoned argument and response.

I agree it could be argued the position is not crystal clear but I do think it is clear that the ANO does not say the rating cannot be used outside the UK and there is at least enough evidence elsewhere that the regulatory authority does not believe the ANO intended to place any such restriction on the rating.

[wb9999]

I dont understand your point. The PPL is not limited because it was always constructed to be ICAO. The IMCr couldn't be ICAO. An ICAO member state is obliged to accept ICAO privileges, but because an IMCr is not ICAO you cant oblige another ICAO signatory to accept it, but you can leave them to make their own decision.

My point is that the ANO says as a PPL you are restricted to flight in VMC conditions only. These restrictions apply worldwide, as the ANO applies to you wherever in the world you are flying when using a UK licence. It then goes on to say that with an IMCr within the UK some of those restrictions do not apply (ie you can fly in cloud).

To summarise:
Worldwide: normal PPL privileges with VFR only
UK: IMCr privileges, within UK only
= VFR only outside of UK.

So I'm puzzled how you can then say that the IMCr is valid outside of the UK based on the ANO. I know what you mean about CAP804 saying otherwise, but the ANO overrides CAP804.

A clever lawyer could probably argue otherwise in the unlikely event of the CAA prosecuting. But the CAA do have the legal right to revoke a licence without going to court. So if they say you can't fly on an IMCr in France, then I for one would not want to risk losing my licence for that.

If DGAC intend on the IMCr being fully accepted in France then they should do what the IoM and CI do - include it in their ANO or publish an exemption as the CI do for the NPPL. By doing neither, it doesn't look like it is official DGAC policy or their intention for it to be. More likely an administrative error by somebody who isn't sure what the IMCr is.

[Fuji Abound]

Ok, i think we nearly agree.

The ppl is vmc restricted because under icao the only icao way of lifting that restriction is an icao ir.

The restriction is lifted in the uk with an imcr because we can do what we like in our own airspace.

We cant lift that restriction outside the uk because the imcr isnt icao so even if we tried it would be illegal in say france. We can however leave any other country to lift the restriction in any way they see fit. If we chose we could say it is illegal to fly in imc without an ir outside the uk - simple, but we havent and we dont. So far as we are concerned its legal BUT in germany for example the licence would have no icao ir attached so it would be illegal without german consent.

I think you are getting bogged down in chalk and cheese. We dont say things about licences which grant icao priviliges because icao automatically extends those priviliges to all signatories, but we do say things about ratings not covered by icao and we can either say the privilige cannot be used ouside the uk or say nothing about whether or not it can. If nothing is said then it is not prohibited by us but it is another matter whether anouther country wants to accept the rating because they have no oligation to do so under icao. In other words it is not an automatic right, but discretionary. In the same way if a country had not signed up to icao they could happily say we dont accept your ir. On the other hand if the ano said you may not use the imcr outside the uk then even if another country accepted the rating it would be illegal to excercise the priviliges in a g reg. So to come full circle, the draughtsman chose not to write you may not and parliament accepted the work of the draughtsman.

As you state the ano is the solid law - show me where it says you may not use the imcr outside of the uk?

Taken to its conclusion i see nothing in easa that says france cant adopt the irr, do you?