FAA IR with IMC
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: South Manchester, UK
FAA IR with IMC
If the talked about restrictions on N-Reg aircraft are introduced, could an economical solution to flying IFR in the UK be to obtain an IMC rating on top of an FAA/IR, albeit restricted?
The FAA/IR provides the full training required for a planned IFR flight, and the IMC provides the licence to exercise it.
For around £5K you could in theory fly IR legally and safely in the UK, provided you stay out of class A airspace and are happy with the slightly higher minimas. It would be more restricted to the current scenario, but surely a cost effective compromise.
The FAA/IR provides the full training required for a planned IFR flight, and the IMC provides the licence to exercise it.
For around £5K you could in theory fly IR legally and safely in the UK, provided you stay out of class A airspace and are happy with the slightly higher minimas. It would be more restricted to the current scenario, but surely a cost effective compromise.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
From: Dublin
If I understand it correctly, the proposed restrictions are mainly centered around stopping you having an N reg aircraft in the UK for anything other than short periods.
I don't believe there's any proposal to change licence privileges.
dp
I don't believe there's any proposal to change licence privileges.
dp
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
From: Anywhere
You'll find many FAA IR holders had IMC's beforehand.
And that's the rub - These people have gone through the proocess of getting the IR, and getting the aircraft that is capable so they can fly SAFE IFR throughout Europe, rather than the restrictions (UK IFR only, non-airways) that the IMC would give them.
What you're talking to many people would be a retrograde step.
Dublin - no 'N' reg means no exercise of FAA IR privileges - it would be JAA only
And that's the rub - These people have gone through the proocess of getting the IR, and getting the aircraft that is capable so they can fly SAFE IFR throughout Europe, rather than the restrictions (UK IFR only, non-airways) that the IMC would give them.
What you're talking to many people would be a retrograde step.
Dublin - no 'N' reg means no exercise of FAA IR privileges - it would be JAA only
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
From: Dublin
Dublin - no 'N' reg means no exercise of FAA IR privileges - it would be JAA only
If they change their aircraft to the G reg, then an IMC rating would be better than nothing in the UK. But once outside the UK then their FAA IR would be useless along with their IMC rating.
I suspect most of thoe with an N reg aircraft in the UK, use their FAA-IR + N reg aircraft combination for international travel.
dp
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
From: Dublin
If the talked about restrictions on N-Reg aircraft are introduced, could an economical solution to flying IFR in the UK be to obtain an IMC rating on top of an FAA/IR, albeit restricted?
The way picky phrased his question, sounded to me like he believes the proposed changes are to restrict the use of an FAA IR. It's not. As I understand it, the proposals are to restrict the basing of N reg aircraft in the uk. That's my point.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
From: Witnesham, Suffolk
... and if you have a CAA/JAA/EASA PPL, the CAA will issue you an IMC rating on the basis of your FAA IR (for the payment of a fee).
I'd prefer an N-reg aircraft and the freedom to use the FAA IR to its full extent. But democracy doesn't mean that - it means bureaucrats can change the rules to prevent us using our N-reg aircraft
Call me a cynical old man...
I'd prefer an N-reg aircraft and the freedom to use the FAA IR to its full extent. But democracy doesn't mean that - it means bureaucrats can change the rules to prevent us using our N-reg aircraft
Call me a cynical old man...
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: South Manchester, UK
Just noticed in the classifieds of the lastest copy of 'Pilot' that a training school in Ireland is offering FAA to JAA instrument rating conversion for £270 all inclusive.
Surely it can't be that cheap and easy?
Surely it can't be that cheap and easy?
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Just to clarify one point: the UK IMC Rating is valid in an N-reg and I have this in writing from both the CAA and the FAA.
However, as stated, this is of little use. Difficult certification issues (non-JAA certified airframe/avionics) aside, the reason for being N-reg is to get worldwide IFR privileges.
I know most UK PPLs have not done any significant flying abroad and it is not until this is done that one begins to appreciate the pressing need for a full IR when abroad. The UK is a piece of cake: in Class G (which is most places) just take off "VFR" and vanish into a cloud. It's illegal, but nobody cares. You can even call yourself "IFR" as a PPL provided you are in VMC, so being "IFR" won't be questioned by ATC, since nobody can prove you aren't in VMC en-route. The only way to get into trouble is to have an incident where questions are asked, and making a mess of an instrument approach is just one way to do that. With the IMC Rating and a suitable aircraft, one can do IFR legally. One just can't go into Class A.
Abroad, it's very different. No IFR without an IFR flight plan, IFR clearance, and it's all got to be done properly. Flight plans all go through the Eurocontrol computer and have to be validated. IFR is also really needed in some places because VFR isn't really supported by the ATS/airspace system. Try flying along the west coast of Italy - Class A down to 1000ft for 100s of miles and well away from shore so no radio contact (I've done it).
Nobody would spend the thousands to put a plane on N just to fly it with the IMC Rating!
For the UK only, flying a typical piston non-deiced aircraft, the IMC Rating has practically the IFR privileges of the full IR.
I suspect that if the UK Govt kills off UK-based long term parking (under ICAO, they cannot prevent visitation) of N-reg planes, most of the owners will NOT get the JAA IR (**). They will revert their planes to G, revert to their UK IMC Ratings, lose their European IFR privileges in the process and basically stick to VFR when abroad. This makes flying abroad for any real purpose (e.g. a business trip) impractical, as I know only too well myself.
The reason these people will not do the JAA IR is that the ground school takes too long. Most regular IFR pilots are business and professional types (you have to be; one cannot be IFR current on the UK PPL average of about 10-20 hours/year, flying a self fly hire spamcan which is not only unsuitable for IFR but almost certainly illegal for IFR in CAS never mind airways) and they can't set aside the time to do the silly airline pilot exams.
Many, with types that have certification issues, will be forced to sell the plane to the USA at a knockdown price, or strip out the extra equipment (which is a very poor safety case, but there we go...)
The UK Govt cannot do anything to void licenses/ratings issued by another authority e.g. the FAA. "All" they can do, in theory, is prevent long term parking of the planes, and by doing so they could make the corresponding licenses/ratings useless. In practice the issues are very complex and it would create one hell of a mess, kicking out all the business jets and all sorts of larger stuff like that.
(**) I am 100% sure that a lot of the long term pressure to kick out N-reg planes comes from certain flying schools, who are hoping (in vain, for reasons given above) that they will suddenly get a whole lot of JAA IR students.
As for FAA IR to JAA IR, it can be done in 15 hours of flying but one has to sit all the JAA PPL/IR exams (a subset of the JAA ATPL exams). I suspect the figure mentioned was a conversion from an FAA PPL to a JAA PPL, which is entirely plausible provided you sit the JAA exams in your own time. One can do a JAA PPL to a FAA PPL conversion similarly, £300 in the USA. Or some £3000 for the same thing if done by certain FAA training outfits in the UK, with visiting FAA DPE examiners....
However, as stated, this is of little use. Difficult certification issues (non-JAA certified airframe/avionics) aside, the reason for being N-reg is to get worldwide IFR privileges.
I know most UK PPLs have not done any significant flying abroad and it is not until this is done that one begins to appreciate the pressing need for a full IR when abroad. The UK is a piece of cake: in Class G (which is most places) just take off "VFR" and vanish into a cloud. It's illegal, but nobody cares. You can even call yourself "IFR" as a PPL provided you are in VMC, so being "IFR" won't be questioned by ATC, since nobody can prove you aren't in VMC en-route. The only way to get into trouble is to have an incident where questions are asked, and making a mess of an instrument approach is just one way to do that. With the IMC Rating and a suitable aircraft, one can do IFR legally. One just can't go into Class A.
Abroad, it's very different. No IFR without an IFR flight plan, IFR clearance, and it's all got to be done properly. Flight plans all go through the Eurocontrol computer and have to be validated. IFR is also really needed in some places because VFR isn't really supported by the ATS/airspace system. Try flying along the west coast of Italy - Class A down to 1000ft for 100s of miles and well away from shore so no radio contact (I've done it).
Nobody would spend the thousands to put a plane on N just to fly it with the IMC Rating!
For the UK only, flying a typical piston non-deiced aircraft, the IMC Rating has practically the IFR privileges of the full IR.
I suspect that if the UK Govt kills off UK-based long term parking (under ICAO, they cannot prevent visitation) of N-reg planes, most of the owners will NOT get the JAA IR (**). They will revert their planes to G, revert to their UK IMC Ratings, lose their European IFR privileges in the process and basically stick to VFR when abroad. This makes flying abroad for any real purpose (e.g. a business trip) impractical, as I know only too well myself.
The reason these people will not do the JAA IR is that the ground school takes too long. Most regular IFR pilots are business and professional types (you have to be; one cannot be IFR current on the UK PPL average of about 10-20 hours/year, flying a self fly hire spamcan which is not only unsuitable for IFR but almost certainly illegal for IFR in CAS never mind airways) and they can't set aside the time to do the silly airline pilot exams.
Many, with types that have certification issues, will be forced to sell the plane to the USA at a knockdown price, or strip out the extra equipment (which is a very poor safety case, but there we go...)
The UK Govt cannot do anything to void licenses/ratings issued by another authority e.g. the FAA. "All" they can do, in theory, is prevent long term parking of the planes, and by doing so they could make the corresponding licenses/ratings useless. In practice the issues are very complex and it would create one hell of a mess, kicking out all the business jets and all sorts of larger stuff like that.
(**) I am 100% sure that a lot of the long term pressure to kick out N-reg planes comes from certain flying schools, who are hoping (in vain, for reasons given above) that they will suddenly get a whole lot of JAA IR students.
As for FAA IR to JAA IR, it can be done in 15 hours of flying but one has to sit all the JAA PPL/IR exams (a subset of the JAA ATPL exams). I suspect the figure mentioned was a conversion from an FAA PPL to a JAA PPL, which is entirely plausible provided you sit the JAA exams in your own time. One can do a JAA PPL to a FAA PPL conversion similarly, £300 in the USA. Or some £3000 for the same thing if done by certain FAA training outfits in the UK, with visiting FAA DPE examiners....
Last edited by IO540; 23rd September 2005 at 14:54.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
From: He's on the limb to nowhere
The UK Govt cannot do anything to void licenses/ratings issued by another authority
That's true, but they don't have to let you use a FAA rating if you live in the UK. For example, the French won't validate your FAA licence for F-reg if you are a Frenchman who lives in France, but will if you are a Frenchman who lives in the USA. Nuts, eh? Nothing in law to stop the CAA doing the same - and when EASA (or whoever it is) tell them to it might just happen.
[wrong thread!]
That's true, but they don't have to let you use a FAA rating if you live in the UK. For example, the French won't validate your FAA licence for F-reg if you are a Frenchman who lives in France, but will if you are a Frenchman who lives in the USA. Nuts, eh? Nothing in law to stop the CAA doing the same - and when EASA (or whoever it is) tell them to it might just happen.
[wrong thread!]
Last edited by slim_slag; 23rd September 2005 at 15:28.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
From: 75N 16E
Jobs for the boys????? It cannot be in the name of safety.......
Interestingly, other places like Bermuda, will formally validate your FAA ticket. I'm sure there is a back door into JAR land somewhere there, what with Bermuda being a British Dependant Territory listed in the Air Navigation Order (overseas Territories).....
Interestingly, other places like Bermuda, will formally validate your FAA ticket. I'm sure there is a back door into JAR land somewhere there, what with Bermuda being a British Dependant Territory listed in the Air Navigation Order (overseas Territories).....
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
SS
I don't think there is any way that any ICAO member state can prevent a resident of the state from flying in an aircraft registered in state X on a licence/rating issues by state X, on a casual visit.
Think of a case where an inbound B747 from some US airline has a captain who is actually a UK citizen. Quite feasible.
If you have a reference to an option under ICAO allowing a state to ban its own citizens flying aircraft registered outside it, I'd be interested.
It's only long term parking that there is control over, potentially.
I don't think there is any way that any ICAO member state can prevent a resident of the state from flying in an aircraft registered in state X on a licence/rating issues by state X, on a casual visit.
Think of a case where an inbound B747 from some US airline has a captain who is actually a UK citizen. Quite feasible.
If you have a reference to an option under ICAO allowing a state to ban its own citizens flying aircraft registered outside it, I'd be interested.
It's only long term parking that there is control over, potentially.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
From: Oxford
IO540,
I don't want to start another one of those IFR rows, but...
isn't true; IMC rated pilots have no mandatory minimum cloudbase and as long as they have 1800m viz can therefore do this quite legally, assuming they comply with rule 5 &c. You have to if the airfield has no IFR departures published or you can't get a slot (e.g. Oxford!).You simply declare yourself IFR as you start the climb to MSA.
Doesn't make it a good idea, though. I remember trying to work out a departure route from Kirknewton assuming IMC, and decided that it wasn't a good idea at all - too many big granite things.
Tim
I don't want to start another one of those IFR rows, but...
The UK is a piece of cake: in Class G (which is most places) just take off "VFR" and vanish into a cloud. It's illegal, but nobody cares.
Doesn't make it a good idea, though. I remember trying to work out a departure route from Kirknewton assuming IMC, and decided that it wasn't a good idea at all - too many big granite things.
Tim
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
tmmorris
I agree - that's why I said one can do it legally with the IMCR.
I should have made it clearer (in the bit you quoted) that I was referring to a bare PPL.
Does Rule 5 apply to takeoffs and landings? I don't think it does; how can it?
As regards flight over rough terrain... it's a risk assessment like any other. Nothing in life is zero risk
I would prefer to avoid flight over rough terrain if IMC extends all the way down to ground, but in all flight (including basic PPL VFR stuff) there are periods of time, perhaps lasting only seconds, where an engine failure would be fatal.
I agree - that's why I said one can do it legally with the IMCR.
I should have made it clearer (in the bit you quoted) that I was referring to a bare PPL.
Does Rule 5 apply to takeoffs and landings? I don't think it does; how can it?
As regards flight over rough terrain... it's a risk assessment like any other. Nothing in life is zero risk
I would prefer to avoid flight over rough terrain if IMC extends all the way down to ground, but in all flight (including basic PPL VFR stuff) there are periods of time, perhaps lasting only seconds, where an engine failure would be fatal.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,648
Likes: 2
From: UK
If you have a reference to an option under ICAO allowing a state to ban its own citizens flying aircraft registered outside it, I'd be interested.
Licenses of personnel
(a) The pilot of every aircraft and the other members of the operating crew of every aircraft engaged in international navigation shall be provided with certificates of competency and licenses issued or rendered valid by the State in which the aircraft is registered.
(b) Each contracting State reserves the right to refuse to recognize, for the purpose of flight above its own territory, certificates of competency and licenses granted to any of its nationals by another contracting State.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Thank you Bookworm.
I note that your extract doesn't allow the state to ban its citizens from flying a foreign reg plane on a foreign license. It merely bans overflight rights. I should think that any country can ban overflight, arbitrarily.
But are there examples of this in the "civilised world"?
I heard that Germany was more strict than some in the maximum age of a captain, in a situation relevant to cargo operations. In reality it was not enforced because nobody knows the age of the man at FL370. But this isn't the same thing.
If so, are there examples which distinguish between AOC and non-AOC ops?
I note that your extract doesn't allow the state to ban its citizens from flying a foreign reg plane on a foreign license. It merely bans overflight rights. I should think that any country can ban overflight, arbitrarily.
But are there examples of this in the "civilised world"?
I heard that Germany was more strict than some in the maximum age of a captain, in a situation relevant to cargo operations. In reality it was not enforced because nobody knows the age of the man at FL370. But this isn't the same thing.
If so, are there examples which distinguish between AOC and non-AOC ops?
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
From: Oxford
IO540 - you are right, rule 5 doesn't apply to takeoffs & landings (hence the fact that 'home-made' IAPs are legal for private flights). You therefore need to go IFR a.s.a.p. after departure. It's scud-running VFR at less than 1000ft over built-up areas (or <500ft over houses) that's illegal, of course.
T
T
