The IMC

[chrisbonfield]

Just interested to see who thinks the IMC is a good rating to go for and who thinks its a waste of time..

[The Highlander]

It depends on the type of flying you wish to do and also if you want to restrict yourself to nice weather flying.ie Cavok. But even if you have the rating with no intention of using it, it may come to your rescue if you get caught out by the ever changing British weather. If you have ever been in Scotland you will know what i mean . It is not uncommon to experience more than 1 seasons weather in one day regardless of what season you are actually in.
Happy flying

[SuperOwl]

I think it depends on how often you want to go flying. I believe that as a basic PPL you cannot take off or land if the visibilty is less than 3 km. If you had an IMC rating this is reduced to 1.8 km. Also, if you were needing to fly SVFR the minimum visibility is 10km for basic PPL but with IMC this is reduced to 3km.

If you find that visibility is one of the main reasons that you sometimes don't get to fly then it may well be worth considering. Don't forget though, if you hire aircraft and find that you often can't get an aircraft when you would ideally like it, if on a particular day the conditions are IMC, any pilots that have booked a plane who do not have the IMC rating won't be able to fly. That may make an aircraft available to you that without the rating you would not even be able to consider flying.

I also think you get to fly instrument approaches as well but the decision height is much greater than for a full instrument rating. Having said that, as I stated earlier, even with an IMC rating the take off/ landing visibility has to be 1.8km minimum anyway. But at least you should be able to line up before you have even seen the runway. I think it is something everybody should take because you may need the skills it teaches when you least expect it. Weather forecast aren't always correct are they? It may very well be 16.5 (or however many it is ) hours of training that save your life.

I for one will take it. Someday.

:)

[Whirlybird]

I think the choice of wording here is slightly unfortunate. ALL aviation training is worthwhile, even if you don't use it directly. To take an example, as some of you know I've been intermittently learning to fly a flexwing microlight, damaged my shoulder on a less-than-perfect landing, and have put the whole thing on indefinite hold. But I learned a huge amount about weather and aircraft responses, flying non-radio, and other stuff that I hadn't known before - all of it useful no matter what you fly. Perhaps more directly related, the few hours of instrument flying that I did for my CPL(H) has been very helpful when flying either helos or f/w aircraft in poor visibility or over water, where you need to use the instruments more than usual. I haven't done an IMC - been trying to fit it in for the last four years - but I plan to someday.

Now as to whether you should do it if you don't have the time and money, or would rather spend them on something else; that's a different question and comes down to priorities.

[What a Loop]

Being about 4 hours into my IMC I am in favour of this. But have to agree with other posters. The skills you learn not only allow you to fly in IMC, but they improve your overall flying skills, and general ability.

IMHO flying is a road where we are constatantly learning, the IMC is good way of increasing your flying skills without the cost of the full IR.


Happy Flying ( Chance would be a fine thing given the recent weather) :confused: :confused:


WAL

[maggioneato]

Still thinking about doing a third renewal next Nov, FM immunity being the problem. Don't know anyone who has an aircraft that is FM immune, so if you can't legally fly an ILS IFR, what is the point? Understand practise approaches VFR are OK. Having said that, the course is well worth while, once I was on the ground in one piece I would argue about the legality of it then. So how are flying Schools getting round the FM immunity problem. Anyone know? I don't belong to a Flying School now, prefer grass strips.:confused:

[troddenmasses]

I have a current IMC, and will be renewing it in Jan. I do not enjoy flying when the weather is poor, and therefore choose not to. In the last 2 years (since I have had my IMC) I have flown in true IMC conditions only 3 or 4 times, but I use the nav and radio skills learnt in it every time I fly. I realise that it is NOT an IR, so don't set off flying when I will have to fly in cloud. One huge danger with it is that instrument skills degrade rapidly when not used, and so need to be practiced regularly - not just used when we unexpectedly find ourselves surrounded by bad weather.

[martinbakerfanclub]

Am i the only one out here in the ether of the 'net who feels that the IMC should actually be PART of the PPl; a combination of the two, in my opinion, is the real private licence.

British weaher is just to changable to rely on vfr at all times. Four seasons in one day and all.

On that note, dont even get me started on this NPPL malarky!!:eek: :eek:

Just my thoughts; i'll prepare for a flaming now!;)

[SuperOwl]

Martinbakerfanclub.

I agree with you about PPL + IMC as I said in my above post. The British weather is just too changeable and I would not consider a cross country flight especially around this time of year without the rating.

As for the NPPL, I believe you can't even fly to another airfield. You might as well just practice circuits.

[Fred]

The IMC is a fantastic rating. You can wait a long time for VMC in this country – restricting yourself to VFR-only basically means you don’t fly very often (and it doesn’t seem to be any better in summer these days). This is not just annoying but pretty inconvenient if you’ve planned a trip and booked a hotel, car hire etc. With the IMC the only things that stop me flying now are:-

1. Vis < 1800m;
2. Cloudbase at destination below min. for approach;
3. Cloudbase too low for terrain plus freezing level too low (I don’t have de-ice);
4. Embedded CB (no WX radar);
5. Gale-force wind.

Not that we’re immune from this stuff, but at least it’s a bit rarer. BTW there have been quite a few threads on this recently – a search will provide lots of info/opinions.

[feet dry]

In answer to your question.....

I would strongly endorse acquiring the IMC Rating. The reasons have largely been outlined.

My comment concerns the training itself. When I started I had a bit of difficulty visualising the 3d situation and became confused as to which leg, turn etc I was on. After about 5hrs I was going to bin it as too much like hard work; it was after one particular exercise that everything came together and the realisation that I was not incompetent came as a relief. If you start, stick with it (like you did for the PPL) it will come good.

The best bit comes with applying the theory....I was blown away the first time I used the rating in anger ......the theory worked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[KCDW]

My concern is the degradation of the skills learned. I for one would not willingly fly off into pure clag for the fun of it, so suspect the opportunities for practicing IFR will be fairly minimal. That said, everybody tells me that it really sharpens up your flying skills.

What do people think of using flight simulators to keep in practice? I don’t have IMC, but have been using Flight Simulator 2002 for a year now, and have “learned” much of the drill for IFR flight, to a point where my panel scan is almost instinctive… question is… is it safe?

Richard

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi

The IMC is a great rating and as stated by others all training that enhances peoples skills and abilities is good.

But............

The standard of training is such that a lot of important issues are no taught.

If you think that with the IMC in your pocket you can blast off in cloudy skies has still a lot to learn.

It also allows 16hrs off your FAA IR requirement.

Have fun and learn a lot but beware of the limitations of your skills.

FD

[Cusco]

No question that the IMC is a must-have and I'm almost inclined to agree that it should be part of the PPL.

However having said that, its not a cheap rating to get and the average immediate post PPL would be well advised to notch up a few more post PPL hours than the minimum requirement.

Why? Well speaking from personal experience I went for the IMC rating only 25 hours post PPL when my altitude keeping and certain other aspects of my flying made getting the initial IMC a bit of a sweat.

However I did get it and have kept it up ever since.

I really wanted to do the JAA/IR but cost and other factors ruled this out.

I do fly IMC but have to be careful that Wx isnt likely to close in too much as we don't have an ILS at our airstrip and the nearest ILS is miles away.

Maneged to keep my IMC skills ./ interest up by doing the FAA/IR in Florida last Feb: also a thoroughly worthwhile exercise>

OK so I don't fly an N reg so its useless in UK. Nah: experience gained getting this (stiff) test made it all worthwhile.

Don't let anyone tell you the FAA/IR is a piece of p*ss.


Safe flying.

;)

[PhilD]

Get it and fly VFR on top. IMHO one of the great pleasures of flying is to get on top of a grey day into blue sky.

[Julian]

Its a good rating to have if its the only IR rating you can afford time/money wise.

If you have the time then get yourself an FAA IR, you will cover a lot more flying in a lot of detail and its a damn good grounding for building upon later. The other good points to remember are that

- Upon passing you get an IMC on your UK licence for free anyway!(Bar the CAAs £64 fee!)
- The IR is for life and as long you shoot the approaches, etc it self certifying.
- You therefore dont need to keep renewing your IMC as it based on your FAA IR so its cheaper and less hassle.

I went over to California and did mine as a holiday rather than sitting on a beach, I spent about 60 hours flying round as combined it with touring a bit of the US which if you talk to the instructors most are more than happy to do.

[bookworm]

- You therefore dont need to keep renewing your IMC as it based on your FAA IR so its cheaper and less hassle.

Are you sure about that bit? I thought an IMC rating issued without training or test (because the holder was an IR holder from another ICAO state) was a UK rating in its own right and had to be renewed or revalidated as such?

[englishal]

When issued an IMC rating based on the FAA IR, it does have an expiry or renewal date...However, as a current IR holder meets the requirements for issue of an IMC, then I'm guessing it could be renewed in a 'paperwork' exercise by re-applying for it?

Rgds
EA:)

[chipjockey]

What is the point?. You either go for in IR or don't bother. Private flying should be VFR only and the pros should sit in IFR - the two simply don't mix.

There are too many people pretending to be pros without the full pro training and pro operating environment.

Surely this can only lead to problems?

[excrab]

Chipjockey -

I assume that is a wind up, but anyway I couldn't disagree more.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using an IMC rating for A to B IFR flying in UK airspace, provided that you are happy to stay out of the airways/TMAs and other places that are non-IMC rating friendly.

However, it must be said that the basic 15 hour course practising on your local NDB/ILS doesn't really offer sufficient training. If anyone intends to use the rating to go from place to place I would suggest they :

1) Find an experienced instructor - not one with a shiny new CPL/IR but someone with actual experience of single crew IFR operations.

2) Having done so and reached a stage where you can pass the IMC test then do plenty of IFR cross country flying with said instructor (preferably in actual IMC and with visibility conditions approaching minimas for take-off and landing).

3) Make sure you have a good understanding of met, especially icing.

4) Don't start getting to adventurous before you are perfectly happy with what you are doing.

5) Remember that there will always be days when even the "pro" pilots mentioned by Chipjockey will not be going anywhere unless they and their aircraft are Cat 3 qualified.

6) If in doubt - don't go. Remember that once you get up there mother nature isn't going to be kind to you because you hold an IMC rating not an IR.

If you do all these things there is absolutely no reason why a PPL holder with an IMC rating cannot operate safely in aircraft like Arrows or 182s under IFR - or even light twins if you get plenty of practise at asymetric operations on instruments.

I know plenty of PPL holders who do this and operate safely - it is possible to apply a "professional" attitude to your flying without getting paid for it.

[andrewc]

So which shoulder do you have your chip mounted on
chipjockey,

-- Andrew

[englishal]

Must be the silly season again...

I am assuming that you, Chipjockey consider yourself a professional ? Don't sound like it to me......

EA

[nonradio]

He REALLY likes the AOPA (UK) magazine, though.

[Keef]

Tasty old chestnut, this one!

The IMC is an excellent rating, IF...

1. The instruction is done properly, covering the syllabus and ensuring the pilot learningIMC flight really does do so. I've heard horrible rumours about lousy instruction (not come across any, myself).

2. All the relevant procedures are taught (not just "here's how the local NDB procedure works if you get caught out").

3. The pilot is in current IFR practice when using it.

Number 3 is the killer - how many folks renew their IMC rating every two years, and don't use it between times? That's the way to get killed.

I practice IFR flight (with a safety pilot) just about every time I fly; I do the various bits necessary to keep my FAA IR current. I am perfectly happy to take off into an overcast, as long as I know the cloudbase at my destination (and alternate) is well above my minima.

But I still prefer to be flying with another pilot when in IMC - things can get very busy in the airspace round here.

[jayemm]

There's no doubt that the IMC is an excellent rating, for all the reasons already given in this thread. The issue is not whether it's good to get the IMC, but how you act once you've got it. In my experience, the skills you learn for the IMC are much more 'degradable' (I can't think of a better word) than most of those for the initial PPL. Rusty skills with an IMC are far more dangerous, so the holder of the IMC must take the approach that it is not a blanket entitlement to fly in IMC.

I find I use the NAV skills whether in IMC or VMC, so those are pretty well-honed (always learning though). I make sure that I fly in basic IMC conditions often enough to keep competent at the scan and the workload. The one thing I haven't been able to keep up are instrument landings...so I just won't do one and avoid getting into the position of having to, until I get refresher training.

Get the IMC, but it's up to you to maintain competency, keep the skills fresh and be safe.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Could I please beg for some correct terminology chaps.

I have flown microlights IFR, quite safely and legally. It is IMC I can't do.

Please bear in mind when discussing a subject like this that IFR and IMC are not the same thing, neither are VFR and VMC.

G

[24Right]

Recently got an IMC rating and really enjoyed the training. That's not to say that there weren't times when I felt my head was about to explode with the workload and I had no idea where I was, where I was going or what I was supposed to be doing. But it eventually came together.

Since then I've done a bit of practice IMC (with safety pilot) in marginal VMC but not yet used it in anger. But my flying has improved no end - I hold altitude, speed and heading so much better than before and that has to make for better and safer flying.

I'd intended to do the rating for a while, but it was after a particularly unpleasant experience with the weather coming down in the Vale of York, just on the border of the North York Moors that I resolved to get the rating. We got away with it that time by having a co-pilot who'd done the IMC course (but not yet taken the test) and the next time might not have done. I'm now confident that in similar circumstances (subject to keeping current) I'll stand a good chance of flying another day.

So far as FS2002 is concerned, whilst it doesn't feel anything like real blind flying, I found it a great help in the course. You can reduce the workload on instrument approaches significantly by being familiar with the profile, and FS enables you to fly your local instrument approaches as often as you like until familiar with them - a great help when you do the real thing. Don't try to fly real IMC purely on the back of FS though!

[phnuff]

I think the IMC is a good rating to have and as such have worked hard to keep it. For one thing, the accuracy demanded by my instructor/examiner is much higher than for a basic VMC PPL and this has benefited all aspects of my flying.

In the 9 years that I have had my IMC, I have used it as P1 4 or 5 times because I regard it as a 'get you home rating' rather than and excuse to get up into the cloud. I do however practice with an instructor every 4 or 5 months because I know that without practice, the standards will fall.

So from me, a big thumbs up for the IMC

[El Desperado]

Lots of very good points, but what on earth is the FM Immunity puzzle ?

Next to the glass on the 757 and 767 I fly is a warning that the ILS may not be FM Immune. I remember some years ago a discussion in 'Pilot' about it - large costs, massive replacement of avionics for light a/c pilots etc etc...

I'm not up to speed with the current legislation - just wondered if I can fly with my non-immune kit, why can't you guys ?!

[2Donkeys]

El,

Assuming for a moment that your aircraft is G-reg passenger transport, then you are not permitted to fly instrument approaches in controlled airspace using kit that is not FM immune. Off the top of my head, I can think of relatively few reasons for your placard.

a) The placard is out of date
b) The placard is warning you that ILS signals are no longer protected from FM broadcast stations
c) errr...
d) Your twin-FMS guidance is regarded as being sufficiently accurate to replace the localiser as the primary source of LNAV data.

Scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

[Final 3 Greens]

Seem to be two strands of thought here....

1 - should PPLs practice basic instrument flying skills regularly to get out trouble when necessary

2 - is the IMC rating a good rating for a PPL to hold

I'd say that number 1 is pretty much a no brainer. Yes.

Remember that (a minimum amount of) instrument appreciation is taught on the PPL for this reason. There is nothing to stop you adding to this by receiving further instruction and keeping reasonably current on basic manouevres such as a 180 to get out of IMC into VMC. As others have said, its easy to be caught out - at what stage does heavy haze become IMC and how gradual is the transition?

It's easy to fly into light cloud that was difficult to see through the haze, flying into the sun - it all looks a bit milky! If you panic due to lack of familiarity with the panel, things will become dangerous and luck will be a major factor in whether you live to tell the tale.

Number 2 must come down to a personal decision. I don't hold an IMC rating (although I have a night rating) because I have no intention of flying in marginal VMC. If something develops quickly, I'll divert and get the train home.

Now that is easy for me as (a) I have a share in an under utilised aeroplane - so no 'get hom itis' pressure, (b) I have a working lifestyle that allows me some flexibility and (c) I don't wish to push the envelope in this direction as my flying is purely recreational and what I can do now is more than enough to give me a lot of pleasure.

Of course everyone will have their own view/choice and that's exactly as it should be.

[Mobieus1]

Speaking of IMC does anyone know where to get the Approach Plates of the CAA web site? Can't seem to find them :(

[KCDW]

I get my plates from the NATS website -

http://www.ais.org.uk

It's still a bit of a hunt (these Govt websites are poorly designed IMHO). You get there by clicking:

Publications
UK AIP
The UK AIP Package
UK AIP - UK AIP - UK AIP Areodrome Data - Aerodromes Specific

You need to register.

[rustle]

Was that a deliberate typo, KCDW? ;)

[KCDW]

Lost me mate - areodrome?

[Mobieus1]

Cheers KCDW. Saves me £150. :D

[bcfc]

Yup, download these, reformat to A5, print off on a colour printer, trim to size, laminate at Office World and you have a hardy approach plate for a quid. :ok:

[24Right]

It's certainly the cheapest way to get plates, but do remember to check for updates - that new radio mast could really spoil your day in IMC!



24R:eek:

[Dan Winterland]

Back to the original topic, I tell my students that if the PPL is the 'O Level' (GCSE to you young chaps) of flying, the IMC rating is the 'A level' and that they should consider doing it in the not too distant future. My club operates from an airfield in Class D airspace with radar and instrument approaches various, so the benefits of the IMC rating are obvious.