IMC rating in the Uk

[spitfire_sl]

Hello,

I'm looking for a bit of advice form the GA pilot community.

I'm well aware that a good pilot is always learning, and Ive always taken that on board. I have a PPL, and I fly as often as I can.

Recently I have been thinking about investing in an IMC rating to go along with my PPL. My question to the GA community is; is an IMC rating worth getting in the UK? And for those of you who have an IMC rating, how has it helped you?


thanks,

[Genghis the Engineer]

Yes, absolutely. It's the single course that I learned the most from and tightened my flying up with post my first PPL.

And, in the UK, you have most of the privileges of a full IR. SO long trips in IMC finishing with an instrument approach are entirely feasible.

Yes, do it.

G

[The Ancient Geek]

Wot Gengis said.
UK weather is not VFR friendly, the ability to legally fly on iffy days is a big advantage.

[alexbrett]

+1

I had one of my most enjoyable flights recently using my IMC - it was a short hop from Cranfield (where I'd been staying nearby for a few days) back home to Cambridge. It was a miserable day, with the cloudbase at Cranfield being 6-700 feet or so - did an IFR departure into that, popping out at around 3000 feet into a clear sky with glorious sunshine, followed by an RNAV (GPS) approach onto 05 at Cambridge, popping back out the bottom at around 900' with the runway dead ahead of me.

It doesn't seem much when written down, but it left me on quite a buzz for the rest of the day as it was one of the first times I've done an approach 'for real' as opposed to for practice.

Even ignoring trips like that which would have been impossible without the IMC, the number of flights where I've been going to a VFR airfield, but gone through bits of cloud en route rather than having to avoid them or descend lower than would be ideal etc makes the rating worthwhile on its own.

[A le Ron]

Go for it. It has benefitted my flying more than anything else.

[londonblue]

alexbrett. Thanks also for that. The IR(R) is something that I too am considering, and all of that makes me want to even more.

I have one question though. I'm based at Elstree which doesn't have instrument approaches, so how would I get back if the weather isn't too great? If I've understood previous discussions correctly you can use, say Southend to come out of cloud, and then fly below it to Elstree. However, carrying on from your example flight, popping out the bottom at 900', isn't feasible because you would then have to fly that low all the way from Southend to Elstree.

What am I missing?

[alexbrett]

I'm based at Elstree which doesn't have instrument approaches, so how would I get back if the weather isn't too great? If I've understood previous discussions correctly you can use, say Southend to come out of cloud, and then fly below it to Elstree. However, carrying on from your example flight, popping out the bottom at 900', isn't feasible

True - I have the benefit of being based at a field with an approach, had this been you heading to Elstree you probably wouldn't have been able to do it, but you could always land at Southend and then do the short hop to Elstree at a later point when the weather clears while still allowing you to get 'close', particularly if coming from further afield.

[londonblue]

Thanks alexbrett. At least I haven't missed anything!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Several answers to that, which include that...

(1) With an IMC rating, your VMC minima are actually lower.
(2) Shoot an approach somewhere nearby and do the last bit low level.
(3) Land off an approach somewhere else. You're then safe, on the ground, with a simple logistic problem to solve once the weather improves.

G

[Jetblu]

I agree 100% with Genghis and others. Not only will you enjoy it, it will sharpen your flying skills no end. Landing off the back of a procedure and ILS will give you an awesome sense of achievement which is just not doable with a vanilla ppl.

Go for it!

[alex90]

I loved doing my IMC rating (well IR(r)). I have used it extensively over the last couple of years, it has made me much more confident of my own ability as well as given me many more options, especially for longer flights.

To have the option to depart from the UK in solid IMC, pop out on top before reaching the border to the continent, and fly VFR on top to your VFR destination on the continent suddenly greatly increases your options.

Remember however that you won't be able to fly "in any weather" there are certain factors that may sway your go / no-go. Such as fog, CB, thunderstorms, lightning, strong winds... etc... But otherwise it definitely opens up your options!

With regards to Elstree, I have read and heard of people using Northolt's ILS to break the cloud-base, and if they have sufficient height & visibility breaking off to go back to Elstree low level. Seems much closer than Southend! Even if Southend does have a train station right there.

As you can now also do the CB-IR course, some if not all the hours during your training are transferable for the full IR rating I think its even more relevant to do!!

Hope this helps!
Alex

[Baikonour]

Depending on the cloud base and if you do not need to go down to an IAP MDH/MDA equivalent, you could let down to 1,500ft on e.g. the 120 radial from BNN. NB - this is not an instrument approach to Elstree but just a way of getting below cloud.

I'm not sure how easy it would be to use the Northolt ILS inside the London CTR for this? Cranfield and Oxford (or even Luton, but same comment re. CAS) are also alternatives.

But, ultimately, if the cloudbase is forecast/reported to be below 1,500 (or possibly 1,000 if you feel courageous), you should probably not be trying to get into Elstree that day...

As an aside, even with an IAP and full ILS, airfields may be below weather minima - assuming you do not have a CatII or III equipped aircraft :-)

B.

[londonblue]

Cheers guys. This is definitely food for thought.

[BEagle]

G-t-E wrote: (1) With an IMC rating, your VMC minima are actually lower.

That is no longer the case for pilots holding Part-FCL or JAR-FCL licences, who may now fly to SERA VFR limits without being required to hold any instrument qualification.

The old restrictions still apply to those who still haven't converted their UK national licences.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Thanks for that correction.

Although, in reality, still perhaps true as an IR(R) rating holder is going to be rather more competent down to VFR minima than somebody without that training.

G

[Fly-by-Wife]

I would add that an IMC rating is also very valuable for flying over water or in very hazy conditions, where there may be very limited horizon - even in VMC - which occurs quite frequently in the UK.

FBW

[Local Variation]

The IMCR showed me how to accurately fly height and heading.

Up until then, I thought I was a decent pilot at PPL level. I wasn't as good as I thought I was and the rating showed me that. It also improved my confidence in taking further my ability in handling an aircraft outside my comfort zone.

Whether you choose to fly in cloud or not, the rating will make you a better pilot and you will enjoy your new found competency and associated confidence.

On top of that, I have hand flown an approach from 30 odd track miles in heavy cloud (snow) down to the point of breaking out at absolute minimums at circa 2DME bang on the money at an airfield that can not accept noddy levels of performance. Hugely satisfying, but not to be repeated.

There is a downside to the training and it's called the NDB hold. The way the beacons are disappearing, there is hope that it will be consigned to the realms of history. To this day, I am still bewildered about gates.

Do it and enjoy it.

[300hrWannaB]

Ah yes, Fly by Wife has a very good point. I managed to get half way through an IMC rating but even that was beneficial when confronted with a full VFR flight that was totally IMC, ie the golden goldfish bowl of a glorious autumnal afternoon over the Channel, returning from Le Touquet. Plenty of visibility, but not a thing to reference at all. Oh for a puffy white cloud in the distance.

Here's another question.

Is it worth me finishing (repeating?) the IMC rating? The plane has now got nothing left that works as a nav tool.

[Level Attitude]

Several answers to that, which include that...

(1) With an IMC rating, your VMC minima are actually lower
For EASA Licence holders this is not correct. VMC minimum (<3,000', <140Kt, In sight of the Surface, etc) is 1,500m for all pilots.

[alex90]

But let's be honest here.... 1500m is NOT VMC.... It may be in writing somewhere in the mystical mind of the EASA but if you've ever landed at 2000m vis cloudbase at 600ft you realise that even that isn't VMC!

Mind you - it is useful to get a VFR departure out of an airport that doesn't have a SID to your preferred outbound routing!

[tmmorris]

Early in my IMCR training a wise man pointed out to me that if I stuck to the 600ft MDH on the IMCR (which with the amount of flying I do, I think is wise), then there was no point attempting an approach with less than 3000m visibility, as otherwise when I popped out at 600ft I still wouldn't be able to see the runway...

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Early in my IMCR training a wise man pointed out to me that if I stuck to the 600ft MDH on the IMCR (which with the amount of flying I do, I think is wise), then there was no point attempting an approach with less than 3000m visibility, as otherwise when I popped out at 600ft I still wouldn't be able to see the runway...
You don't need to be able to see the runway, seeing some of the lights is good enough.

[BEagle]

Which unwise man made that comment, tmmorris?

At 600 ft MDH, you fly level until you see the visual criteria. With currently 1800m as the minimum visibility for the IR(R), this should occur at around 0.97 nm from the threshold, from which point you can continue a visual approach and landing.

[tmmorris]

To be fair he may have been talking about precision approaches, in which case a decision to go around would have been required.

[Fly4Business]

Which instrument rating do we talk, national UK-IMC or Part.FCL EIR/CBIR? I was a long time supporter of the UK-IMC until I recently met the first students finishing EIR on the CBIR route. I have to admit, EASA did a pretty good job on it and the UK-IMC may be obsolete now.

And yes, IFR training will make every pilot more aware on how to perform procedures and fly more precisely.

Two thing to keep in mind, first, you need to have frequent access to an IFR equipped aircraft and second, you have to fly frequent IFR to keep your skills current and actual. Do not underestimate these two requirements, as an IR will also be a bigger license to kill yourself.

[alex90]

until I recently met the first students finishing EIR on the CBIR route. I have to admit, EASA did a pretty good job on it and the UK-IMC may be obsolete now.

Although I do agree that the CBIR is a fantastic course, I don't believe that it will make the old IMC obsolete. In order to get a CBIR you need

7 Ground Exams
Class 1 medical
Validate it every year


That's 6 more ground exams (may I also say that they are very involved in my mind as compared to the IMC MCQ. It requires a certain number of hours of ground school done in an approved training centre which is both time consuming and expensive.

That's a medical that (at least for me, being under 40) I would need to do 5 times more often, and would cost more per examination than my class 2.

The retest is every single year, as opposed to every 2 years (which is probably a good thing), but the renewal fees are excruciatingly expensive.

I have been quoted £800 for renewal on a SEP! To be fair it did include approach fees, landings, fuel surcharges, rental of a complex SEP and CAA fees, but it does mean that you would need to spend a minimum of £1000 per year just to sit the test, and redo your medical. (in addition to actually doing some training to be up to test standards).

So yes, hassle, time and costs would be a barrier to most people I think! Yet - it DOES allow you to fly IFR all over the world which would be nice as opposed to be restricted to UK airspace.

[alexbrett]

Although I do agree that the CBIR is a fantastic course, I don't believe that it will make the old IMC obsolete. In order to get a CBIR you need
1. 7 Ground Exams
2. Class 1 medical
3. Validate it every year


AIUI you don't need a class 1 medical for the CBIR, just the class 1 audiogram (which can be appended to a class 2 medical)...

[Fly4Business]

7 Ground Exams
Class 1 medical
Validate it every year


It really does not hurt to learn the exams and after EASA clean-up it is even useful in reality.
Class 2 medical is ok for non-commercial, you only have to add the Class 1 audiogram.
I did not hear somebody complaining of costs yet, but most combine that with a flight they do anyways and the fellow pilots are 50+, so annual medical is independent of IR.

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can use the revalidation test (either IR(R) or IR ) as your EASA Biennial*

G


* so long as you pass !

[Natstrackalpha]

Do it - you won`t be sorry. It is a whole new world of training and flying.

When we have finally left Europe it will last a long time too! But don`t shout in glee, or they`ll put the prices up to European levels of EASA increases. That's what EASA stands for: E.A.S.A: Increase in the cost of everything.

[BEagle]

tmmorris, a Minimum Descent Height does not apply to a 3D approach such as an ILS.

[Dont Hang Up]

In the above discussions on IMC ratings there is just one thing that has been concerning me.

Genghis the Engineer suggested...
And, in the UK, you have most of the privileges of a full IR. SO long trips in IMC finishing with an instrument approach are entirely feasible.

With a shiny new IMC rating one may have demonstrated the technical ability for instrument flying. That does not equate to a full proficiency. The idea of the IMC rating is that it allows the flexibility to plan trips in something less than perfect VMC. It also provides the ability and confidence to get out of trouble if conditions do deteriorate to full IMC.

However I would strongly recommend against deliberately planning IMC trips, especially not deliberately planning to require a procedural approach at the end of it. If that is what you want then an IR is what you need.

Or was Genghis indulging in a little mischievous sarcasm that I completely failed to pick up on? :hmm:

[BEagle]

The use of the IR(R) is at the pilot's discretion and there is no presumption of intent.

Training and Threat and Error Management principles should encourage newly-qualified IR(R) holders not to attempt to run before they're sufficiently experienced at walking.

Some IR holders seem to be of the opinion that flight under IFR outside CAS (e.g. IMC in Class G) is something really difficult. The fact is that it isn't, provided that the flight has been properly planned.

Isn't that so, bookworm?

;)

[wsmempson]

In practical terms, experience is critical and currency is king, as I've flown with IMCR (IR/R) holders who flew like pro's, with highly polished approaches, and I've also flown with EASA IR holders who flew like pissed seaside donkeys. Experience and currency were the distinguishing factors, in 9 out of 10 cases.

[Genghis the Engineer]

No sarcasm at-all DHU, but you are quite right about the fact that a newly qualified IRR holder, whilst permitted to flying long IFR trips outside class A, will need some significant further experience, and ideally a bit of mentoring before using it that way.

But I managed to fly Cranfield to Prestwick and back a few months after first getting the qualification, IMC most of the way, and IFR all the way. I was exhausted after, but did so safely and perfectly legally.

Any such trips do want planning as such, and the instrument flying skills need keeping current. Don't do it on the hoof. Many pilots have proved that you don't need a full IR to do so however.

G

[alex90]

Last year, I half regularly flew in IMC, planning for instrument approaches at the other end, which at least a few times meant landing with 2000m visibility and OVC005. I was always dead on the runway, with lights meeting me just before MaP/MDH all with my IR(r). I was taught to use and build on what I had learnt and this meant flying regularly in IMC to keep my skills up.

The only time I was ever scared / felt out of my league was when I entered (severe) turbulence, rain and sleet just south of Thorney Island at around FL80 in a climb to FL100. When I popped out on top around FL95 I realised that I had flown straight through a beautiful (lone) CB (which wasn't in the forecast). I took a minute or five to calm down, (and a spot of tea in the thermos) before continuing over to the continent (in search of some sunshine). But then again, I am not sure anyone with an IR would have been better prepared for that experience unless they had gone through one themselves!

[BatteriesNotIncluded]

I'm still in the throws of my PPL. Part of the syllabus, of course, is instrument appreciation.

A few lessons ago we inadvertently entered IMC. My instructor is current on all ratings required to fly for any airline (type ratings aside) and so we climbed through it to find a gap to descend through. It was a heck of an experience, with him instructing but not flying, and instantly made my mind up about acquiring an IR(R) rating.

This seminar (it's long but so very very worth it) is a must watch for all VFR pilots, as far as I'm concerned:

Surviving inadvertent IMC (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9Z77YcpGZc)

[Johnm]

I would strongly recommend anyone inclined to do an IMCR, now IR(R). I hold an IR completed painfully under the old rules. Those who point out that currency is king are also dead right, It is one of the most frustrating things but I learned precisely nothing of use on my IR course that I didn't already know from using IMCR regularly.

The real irony was that I often flew IFR from my base at Kemble to take an IR lesson at Cranfield!

[thing]

I always saw the IMCR (as it was when I did it) as an essential part of the PPL anyway along with the night rating. I did mine almost straight after I'd done the PPL, I think before I even took up my first passengers. So I haven't really any experience of not having an IR(R) but I would certainly say go for it, how can it possibly be detrimental to your flying? With the caveat of course that you need to keep in practice.

[Natstrackalpha]

Sorry, just woke up (glad am not flying . . )

Having an IMC rating and forgoing the benefit of ther Approach training for an instrument approach is like making love with a gorgeous lady with no gorgeous lady. (or fella) present. The whole course and indeed the practical training is based on geared around approaches. One of the most redeeming factors - the most life saving point of the entire course is to arrive, on the ground, safely.

Duh!

So cutting out the most important, THE MOST IMPORTANT bit of the course is just plain stupid and was obviously devised by some nurd who has no idea of flying never mind flying in IMC.

We learn the Radio Aids, the frequencies, the different approach methods or, type of approach.

Resulting in the flight culminating in a safe arrival.

Look at a Driving a Car analogy "Well done Mr Bloggs, you`ve passed your driving test - minus of course, stopping and parking but you`ll soon get the hang of it - just ask EASA"