A 'new' PPL-IR on the horizon
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 'new' PPL-IR on the horizon
IR(A) Being Reviewed (updated)
http://www.iaopa-eur.org/wstore/con...?detail=1001705
JAA Reviews Instrument Rating Requirements
JAA is now setting up a working group to undertake a full review of the IR(A), with particular reference to the theoretical knowledge requirements and testing. JAA has recognised that the current requirements for the JAA Instrument Rating are "over the top", and in practice unobtainable for a private pilot.
IAOPA Europe recently pointed out to JAA that the current situation is highly undesirable, since virtually no Instrument Ratings are issued to holders of PPL licenses.
Clearly, this is not in the interest of safety. Accident statistics prove that a large majority of GA accidents in Europe are weather related, and therefore, it follows that a private pilot holding an instrument rating will always be a safer pilot.
On this background, IAOPA higly support the new initiative from JAA, and will be participating actively in the review of the current requirements
> well only 20 PPL/IRS issued in 2004 out of 60,000 pilots is a tad low.....
http://www.iaopa-eur.org/wstore/con...?detail=1001705
JAA Reviews Instrument Rating Requirements
JAA is now setting up a working group to undertake a full review of the IR(A), with particular reference to the theoretical knowledge requirements and testing. JAA has recognised that the current requirements for the JAA Instrument Rating are "over the top", and in practice unobtainable for a private pilot.
IAOPA Europe recently pointed out to JAA that the current situation is highly undesirable, since virtually no Instrument Ratings are issued to holders of PPL licenses.
Clearly, this is not in the interest of safety. Accident statistics prove that a large majority of GA accidents in Europe are weather related, and therefore, it follows that a private pilot holding an instrument rating will always be a safer pilot.
On this background, IAOPA higly support the new initiative from JAA, and will be participating actively in the review of the current requirements
> well only 20 PPL/IRS issued in 2004 out of 60,000 pilots is a tad low.....
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To do this properly they will also need to address
a) equipment certification
b) medical requirements
Unless they address a) few N-reg owners will move back to G. After one has been on N for a few years, going back to G tends to get hard because of equipment fitted, work done, etc.
The b) bit relates to the JAA Class 1 audiogram, which is mandated even on a Class 2 medical if an IR is done. I know several people who would not pass this now. Some would not pass the initial limits, and some would not pass the renewal limits because they have one ear "out of spec". Yet none of this affects airborne communication.
However, a sensible (FAA-type) ground school would stop most new people going N. Placing a plane on N is a huge and expensive hassle.
a) equipment certification
b) medical requirements
Unless they address a) few N-reg owners will move back to G. After one has been on N for a few years, going back to G tends to get hard because of equipment fitted, work done, etc.
The b) bit relates to the JAA Class 1 audiogram, which is mandated even on a Class 2 medical if an IR is done. I know several people who would not pass this now. Some would not pass the initial limits, and some would not pass the renewal limits because they have one ear "out of spec". Yet none of this affects airborne communication.
However, a sensible (FAA-type) ground school would stop most new people going N. Placing a plane on N is a huge and expensive hassle.
