UK IMC Instructor rating budget?

[DeltaT]

HI
Just looking for cost including test, to get the IMC (SE)endorsement on my Instructor rating.
Thanks in advance

[Bodie]

see www.maft.info

[expedite_climb]

I reckon that since the old qfi upgrade course was cancelled the imc course doesnt seem financially beneficial any more. Shame really, good experience though, and makes the IR easier when you get to it....

[BEagle]

Yes - now that the first FI revalidation must be by test, it would make sense to re-introduce the old AFI to FI upgrade test. Not 'Q'FI, by the way!!

The IRI requirements to remove the 'No applied IF instruction' limitations on a FI rating are well spelled out in LASORS Section H - go to www.srg.caa.co.uk and look for the site. Note that there are lower IF experience requirements if you just want to teach for the IMC Rating rather than the IR.

[DeltaT]

thanks for the replies

expedite_climb can you explain a bit more why you dont think its worth doing?

according to the web site it looks like 900 odd plus test, anyone know what the usual test fee is?

[juggernaut]

There are a lot less students around who seem to want to do the IMC rating for the following reasons -
1. It is no longer a requirement for a prospective CPL student to hold an IMC rating. (unlike the BCPL)
2.In these days of GPS it seems a lot of people would rather spend money on a good GPS and stay low level.
3.The IMC rating is not easy for your average PPL who only flies occasionaly, a lot of students don't complete it.
Just my own point of view, 4 years ago I did about 8 IMC's a year, last year just 1.

[mad_jock]

It seems to me that there is no point to getting the IMC instructor restriction removed. Night a different story covers you butt if your a wee bit late coming home.

The chaps already who have a IMC can and do use you for safety pilot for the renewal (well i have logged 50hrs doing it) with a normal FI rating. And teaching IR after you hold one is just an extension of your FI course so the whole thing about restriction for IR qualified pilots is bollocks. In fact I have had renewals come to me for instruction not the a IMC qualified instructor because they are talking old pish. I just teach the method taught in my IR down to the IR mins and the students always sail through the exam (and enjoy it as well). And if i get 50hrs a year teaching IMC as a safety pilot what the hell. I reckon its more than some of the chaps who have the rating. Why the hell bother spending 1.8K on a dead rating.

There is nothing for a commercial student doing the rating so they don't do it. In fact it causes problems now because it affects your solo PIC time if you are hour building trying to hit 150hrs on the dot.

MJ

[BEagle]

MJ - having a bit of difficulty understanding your post. When you wrote:"The chaps already who have a IMC can and do use you for safety pilot for the renewal (well i have logged 50hrs doing it) with a normal FI rating.", did you mean that you acted as safety pilot for someone practising IF - or that you sat in whilst they flew an IFR approach towards their IMC re-validation? Because the latter can only be done by an instructor qualified to teach applied IF - i.e. with the 'no applied IF instruction' removed.

If IMC rated pilots have not completed this requirement correctly, then the Examiner completing thier re-validation flight will have to assess 2 approaches.

I do hope you are not advocating using your IR experience to teach IF to others if you haven't had the 'no applied IF restriction' lifted. Because that's what your post reads like.

[mad_jock]

All i have done is sat as a safety pilot. NO approaches signed off etc.

And given advice if they requested it.

And yes I do think its stupid for a IR qualified Instructor to have to pay an additional 2k to teach applied instruments. And now that there is no point of having the IMC for wannabies I can see the number of instructors qualified to teach it dwindle down.

MJ

[BEagle]

Perhaps it might be time to have another look at the requirements for the removal of the 'no-applied IF' restriction for teaching up to IMC level. It is not, after all, a JAR rating...

I will bring it up at a suitable meeting.

There is no regulatory requirement for wannabes to obtain an IMC rating - but they would be well advised to. Having listened to the predicament of an unrated CPL student stuck above 8/8 cloud (weather forecast had been grossly optimistic) who managed to be talked down safely by ATC, I met him and asked him why he hadn't thought about getting an IMC rating for just such an emergency situation. He told me that he'd already decided that's what he was going to do as soon as he got back to his FTO!

Plus, with an IMC Rating, hours builders can burn their holes in the sky above 8/8 cloud without worry!

[expedite_climb]

DeltaT - I don't think it is FINANCIALLY worth doing. Unless it is as your are progressing to teach the IR, it'll take you a long long time to make back the money it costs you.

If you are currently instructing your school may sponsor you through it (mine did at the time).

If you arent looking to do it to make money / cover the cost by extra instructing, then yes it is a great course, and fun instructing. Very satisfying to see a ndb hold work, and makes the IR easier if you havent already done it.

[mad_jock]

Beagle being a bit more sober than my first post....
All we are taught in our FI course is how to teach. Not how to fly the machine.

Personally speaking and I am willing to admit I am border line taking the pish with the "no applied instruments"

At at over 50hrs( thanks to yesturday) I have proberly more than most IMC instructors for the last year. All the local examiners know I am doing it. Asked the local CAAFU he says as long as it VFR and not for intial IMC issue its OK. To be honest none of them give a toss.


But if you have your IR its exactly the same as teaching anything else which you can do yourself.

Look at the crack, Break it down, and teach it.

If you have an IR you can spot a **** approach a mile off.

MJ