CAA anounce New IR Course
Thread Starter
CAA anounce New IR Course
Normally new courses are announced to Industry by AIC however LASORS 2010, a mere guidance document, contains details of an entirely new IR Course that has not been notified officially anywhere else!
Where are the approval requirements for this course? What qualifications do instructors need? Why has the CAA failed to notify Industry of this new course?
This 10 hours clearly equates to the 10 hours of IF in the CPL Course, an ICAO requirement. It also forms a mandatory requirement for the FI Course, so why is there no credit for PPL FIs, who will have completed this training long before a BIFM completion certificate had been dreamt up, and who are qualified to teach it.
Approved Modular Flying Training Course
The IR(A) modular flying training course consists of two
modules, which may be taken separately or combined.
The two modules of approved training are:
(a) Basic Instrument Flight Module (BIFM) comprising
10 hours of instrument time under instruction, of
which up to 5 hours can be instrument ground time
in a BITD, FNPT I or II, or a flight simulator. Upon
satisfactorily completing the BIFM as a separate
course the applicant is issued with a BIFM course
completion certificate.
(b) Procedural Instrument Flight Module (PIFM)
comprising the remainder of the training syllabus for
the IR(A), i.e. 40 hours single-engine or 45 hours
multi-engine instrument time under instruction, and
the theoretical knowledge course for the IR (A).
The IR(A) modular flying training course consists of two
modules, which may be taken separately or combined.
The two modules of approved training are:
(a) Basic Instrument Flight Module (BIFM) comprising
10 hours of instrument time under instruction, of
which up to 5 hours can be instrument ground time
in a BITD, FNPT I or II, or a flight simulator. Upon
satisfactorily completing the BIFM as a separate
course the applicant is issued with a BIFM course
completion certificate.
(b) Procedural Instrument Flight Module (PIFM)
comprising the remainder of the training syllabus for
the IR(A), i.e. 40 hours single-engine or 45 hours
multi-engine instrument time under instruction, and
the theoretical knowledge course for the IR (A).
An applicant for the PIFM who does not hold a CPL
(A) must be the holder of a BIFM course completion
certificate.
(A) must be the holder of a BIFM course completion
certificate.
The amended IR course arrangements were introduced in Amendment 7 to JAR-FCL 1. ISTR that it was mentioned at a CAA seminar in 2007 but was not particularly well received by the assembled company. It would appear that, after its previous bungled attempts to implement Amendments 6 and 7 properly, the Authority has now decided to implement them by stealth (and are also bungling that).
Thread Starter
There is further bungling in H6.2 FI(A) (Sea) In LASORS 2008 this section made perfect sense, yet in the 2010 version it has been amended for no good reason and is now is a shambles. It has totally removed the requirement for any training at all, whilst adding an irrelevant CRI experience requirement to an FI rating!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Basingstoke
Age: 48
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just been examing Lasors 2010. I note the following (in Section D) regarding the modular CPL course.
So it seems if you get the BIFM, you need only do the 15 hours for the CPL.
An applicant holding a Course Completion Certificate for
the Basic Instrument Flight module, as set out in Appendix
1 to JAR FCL 1.205, may be credited up to 10 hours
towards the required instrument instruction time in the
modular course.the Basic Instrument Flight module, as set out in Appendix
1 to JAR FCL 1.205, may be credited up to 10 hours
towards the required instrument instruction time in the
So it seems if you get the BIFM, you need only do the 15 hours for the CPL.
Thread Starter
Correct, this is the 10 hours of basic IF that is integral in the CPL course which pre 1999 was also credited for holding an IMC rating. It is also the basis of the En Route IR proposed by EASA.
The course must be longer than 10 hours as TAININGCOM 2/2010 notified an increase in the length of all IR courses as " time taxiing cannot be counted towards any IR training time". They have not lengthened the 25 hour CPL course so nobody is going to want to do a separate IR course that's longer than 10 hours and only be credited with 10 hours towards the CPL training.
JAR-FCL1 allowed a 5 hour credit towards the IR however LASORS has now aligned with AL7 which allows a 10 hour credit for the CPL. This is now a better deal than taking 10 hours + taxi time from the IR and having it credited as 10 hours towards the CPL!
The course must be longer than 10 hours as TAININGCOM 2/2010 notified an increase in the length of all IR courses as " time taxiing cannot be counted towards any IR training time". They have not lengthened the 25 hour CPL course so nobody is going to want to do a separate IR course that's longer than 10 hours and only be credited with 10 hours towards the CPL training.
JAR-FCL1 allowed a 5 hour credit towards the IR however LASORS has now aligned with AL7 which allows a 10 hour credit for the CPL. This is now a better deal than taking 10 hours + taxi time from the IR and having it credited as 10 hours towards the CPL!
Last edited by Whopity; 13th Feb 2011 at 19:01.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Basingstoke
Age: 48
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I'm not clear on is are there any differences in the syllabus of the BIFM and the IMC and are there any differences in the privileges afforded? If not, then surely this is the death knell of the IMC rating as who would do it in preference to the BIFM?
Thread Starter
Big differences, there are no instrument approaches in the BIFM. The IMC is dead as of 8 April 2012 in any case unless you already have one. EASA have said that they will grant grandfather rights to existing holders. The BIFM will supposedly grant the holder the privileges of the En-route IR with no privilege to fly an instrument approach. All about as much use as a concrete parachute.
The IMC is dead as of 8 April 2012 in any case unless you already have one.
What is now needed is an additional module (AM) which will mean that BIFM+AM=IR(Restricted), where the restrictions equate to those currently applicable to IMCR privileges.
The IMCR fight is far from over!
Thread Starter
Baegle, I am pleased to hear that, but what a performance to retain something with such positive safety benefits. It appears that "Safety" is no longer part of the regulatory equation because most of the participating bureaucrats don't understand WHY!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK, Paris, Peckham, New York
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, I notice it says in module 2 it says 40 hrs single engine or 45 me.
For the love of god please tell me I don't now need to fork out for 45 hrs me time!!!
For the love of god please tell me I don't now need to fork out for 45 hrs me time!!!
The ME IR course comprises 55 hours of which up to 40 hours may be instrument ground time in a FNPTII and at least 15 hours must be in a multi-engine aeroplane.
Take away 10 hours for the BIFM and you are left with 45 hours, of which at least 15 must be in a ME aeroplane. The remaining 30 hours may therefore be completed in a FNPTII or, with the agreement of the Authority, 20 hours in a FNPTII and 10 hours in a FNPTI.
The big difference now is that the whole of the PIFM for a MEIR must be conducted in a ME aeroplane or FNPT ("45 hours multi-engine instrument time under instruction"). Does this mean that all the FTOs that currently provide less than 45 hours ME training will have to change their syllabus? Did the CAA even consider this implication? Is there anyone left at the Belgrano who knows the first thing about the flight training industry?
Take away 10 hours for the BIFM and you are left with 45 hours, of which at least 15 must be in a ME aeroplane. The remaining 30 hours may therefore be completed in a FNPTII or, with the agreement of the Authority, 20 hours in a FNPTII and 10 hours in a FNPTI.
The big difference now is that the whole of the PIFM for a MEIR must be conducted in a ME aeroplane or FNPT ("45 hours multi-engine instrument time under instruction"). Does this mean that all the FTOs that currently provide less than 45 hours ME training will have to change their syllabus? Did the CAA even consider this implication? Is there anyone left at the Belgrano who knows the first thing about the flight training industry?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK, Paris, Peckham, New York
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Billiebob that is what concerns me, the paragraph about 45 hr me training scares me. Is it about to become a hell of a lot more expensive? Please god not, I don't think I can cope working 7 days a week anymore saving for this wretched dream!
Thread Starter
With this BIFM does it now mean that for an IR you now therefore get 10 hours off for having a CPL ?
Whopity is correct. From what I gather, this was a slip of the pen.
As to being a move to save the IMCr, it has some ramifications, but given the individual who writes the IMCr section of Lasors wasn't aware of the BIFM's separation from the CPL and IR syllabi until it had been published, the effect was unintentional.
The current best guess is that the CAA will allow the BIFM to count towards the hours requirement for an IMCr, but not the other way round, given the IMCr is not a JAR rating. Additionally, the BIFM affords no flying privileges to the holder, merely a piece of paper that can grant a 10 hour reduction on the IR (or the IMCr). It does have similarities to EASA's proposed En Route Instrument Rating however.
As to being a move to save the IMCr, it has some ramifications, but given the individual who writes the IMCr section of Lasors wasn't aware of the BIFM's separation from the CPL and IR syllabi until it had been published, the effect was unintentional.
The current best guess is that the CAA will allow the BIFM to count towards the hours requirement for an IMCr, but not the other way round, given the IMCr is not a JAR rating. Additionally, the BIFM affords no flying privileges to the holder, merely a piece of paper that can grant a 10 hour reduction on the IR (or the IMCr). It does have similarities to EASA's proposed En Route Instrument Rating however.
Before reading too much into the CAA's implementation of the BIFR and any relationship to the IMCr or En-route IR, it is worth remembering that it was introduced in NPA-FCL-32, which was published on 1 Feb 2006. The FCL.001 group did not even start drafting Part-FCL until July 2006.
Additionally, the BIFM affords no flying privileges to the holder, merely a piece of paper that can grant a 10 hour reduction on the IR (or the IMCr). It does have similarities to EASA's proposed En Route Instrument Rating however.
Thread Starter
Could this be another piece of useless junk placed in LASORS by people who have no idea what they are doing. That in itself is quite excusable but why is nobody checking this rubbish before it is allowed to be published? Slippery pens abound!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: here and there
Age: 42
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all does anyone know where people stand if they already have a CPL ?
I have A CPL & IMC and looking at doing the IR in the next few weeks would I be able to get any further reduction in hours from the 50hr IR I will be doing .
I have A CPL & IMC and looking at doing the IR in the next few weeks would I be able to get any further reduction in hours from the 50hr IR I will be doing .
would I be able to get any further reduction in hours from the 50hr IR I will be doing .
FTOs cannot just decide to adopt the new course, they would have to amend their documentation and seek approval from the CAA which, these days, will take at least 3-4 months. I doubt that there will be much interest in any case (for the MEIR at least) as the requirement for the PIFM to be conducted entirely on a ME aeroplane or FNPT would put an FTO at a commercial disadvantage compared with those that currently do most of the course on a SE aeroplane/FNPT.