No more IMC rating
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me remind you of your previous answer:
The Arguments for Adopting the IMC Rating throughout Europe
• The IMC Rating has been a key element in the UK’s programme to improve safety standards amongst General Aviation (GA) private pilots, instructors and even CPL holders who do not hold an Instrument Rating, through the additional training for more than 30 years.
• The IMC Rating, which has been held by 18,000 UK GA pilots, is considered to be one of the reasons why the UK has achieved one of the best GA safety records in Europe.
• A number of pilots from mainland Europe are prepared to come to the UK each year to train for the IMC Rating, even though they may only exercise its privileges in UK airspace, as it gives them additional experience and confidence in their flying.
• The incidence of controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) and loss of control accidents are thought to have been significantly reduced as a result of the UK’s IMC training programme. These accidents are almost always fatal and it is thought that large numbers of lives have been saved.
• At mixed GA and CAT airports it is generally safer and simpler to have as many approaching and departing aircraft as possible following a single set of procedures. The IMC Rating makes this possible.
• In the interests of safety and utility almost all manufacturers of light aircraft now equip their aircraft with instruments required for IFR flight. A European flight crew licensing system, which does not provide for private pilots to be trained in the use of these safety enhancing instruments, is inappropriate and contrary to the interests of safety.
• No European Agency should be introducing legislation, which prohibits the use of safety enhancing equipment.
• For pilots wishing to progress to a full Instrument Rating the IMC Rating is a natural stepping stone.
• Any attempt to introduce European licensing laws, which remove the privileges of UK IMC Rating holders is likely to produce a very hostile reaction from large numbers of general aviation pilots, with well funded legal challenges to EASA.
The Arguments for Adopting the IMC Rating throughout Europe
• The IMC Rating has been a key element in the UK’s programme to improve safety standards amongst General Aviation (GA) private pilots, instructors and even CPL holders who do not hold an Instrument Rating, through the additional training for more than 30 years.
• The IMC Rating, which has been held by 18,000 UK GA pilots, is considered to be one of the reasons why the UK has achieved one of the best GA safety records in Europe.
• A number of pilots from mainland Europe are prepared to come to the UK each year to train for the IMC Rating, even though they may only exercise its privileges in UK airspace, as it gives them additional experience and confidence in their flying.
• The incidence of controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) and loss of control accidents are thought to have been significantly reduced as a result of the UK’s IMC training programme. These accidents are almost always fatal and it is thought that large numbers of lives have been saved.
• At mixed GA and CAT airports it is generally safer and simpler to have as many approaching and departing aircraft as possible following a single set of procedures. The IMC Rating makes this possible.
• In the interests of safety and utility almost all manufacturers of light aircraft now equip their aircraft with instruments required for IFR flight. A European flight crew licensing system, which does not provide for private pilots to be trained in the use of these safety enhancing instruments, is inappropriate and contrary to the interests of safety.
• No European Agency should be introducing legislation, which prohibits the use of safety enhancing equipment.
• For pilots wishing to progress to a full Instrument Rating the IMC Rating is a natural stepping stone.
• Any attempt to introduce European licensing laws, which remove the privileges of UK IMC Rating holders is likely to produce a very hostile reaction from large numbers of general aviation pilots, with well funded legal challenges to EASA.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't need reminding of my previous answers Fuji. Unlike some I am not a mindless retard and have good retention, especially when recalling the AOPA submission to save the IMCR.
I would like to see other peoples answers not plagiarism off our case.
I would like to see other peoples answers not plagiarism off our case.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you find this position reasonable, or should we turn back at the first sign of reduced visibility?
No No No......you must press on and get their money today! today! not tomorrow. While grabbing their money you ensure that they get a good dose of your press-on itis and they will probably be faced with their first ever retreat from bad weather after they get their licence.
Do as I say not as I do is alive and well in UK instruction.
---------
Another problem with the whole.........you can not tour widely unless you have an IMC rating or the IO540 version of I would not have toured so widely without the IMC prior to getting the IR -
If the IMC is only valid in the UK then how did those who had it and found it so valuable for touring the far flung corners of Europe get value from something that they could not use.
Does not mention of vast touring in areas where the IMC was not valid (Le Touquet traffic figures must provide great evidence) coupled with the monthly VFR touring stories in all the UK flying mags work against an argument that the IMC is essential for such flying?
The basic JAR-PPL can fly VFR over 8/8 cloud cover with no ground contact. It is only the UK that puts restrictions on a PPL with respect to in sight of the surface at all times etc. Do you expect a pan-european licence to have such a limitation or one that required 10K vis for special VFR?
Thus again some of the reasons for the VFR pilot having an IMC would evaporate.
------
Dublin Pilot,
Club established in the 70s. You are around for the past 3 years and you think that period is suficient to gauge the extent of VFR touring? Even you admit to having toured Spain as a VFR pilot and you sem to have made it safely back.
----------
Honnestly, I can not see how a petition to the local council along with much complaining from a few residents of Newcastle would cause much of a tremor in the Westminster parliment or the CAA............heck they even walked all the way to London to make their point on an issue some years back and were still ignored.
No replace Newcastle with UK, Westminster with European and CAA with EASA and you will see that little has changed since the Jarrow march.
Can't see that UK AOPA representative Martin what's his name walking far.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Good, it will enhance your skills as a VFR pilot.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't need reminding of my previous answers Fuji. Unlike some I am not a mindless retard and have good retention, especially when recalling the AOPA submission to save the IMCR.
Lets see what we have achieved so far:
1. Over 1,000 names on the petition,
2. Articles in Pilot, Flyer, Loop.
3. Widespread discussion
4. A wide base of support including FBOs, CFIs, GA suppliers and a number involved with the political process.
Lets see what it has cost.
No one supporting the campaign has been asked for a penny. Those behind the campaign have given of their time freely and have met the expenses incurrred so far from their own pockets.
We are going to give it our best shot.
Personally, I take my hats off to seeing so many people coming together behind a single issue.
You may disagree, you may dislike our approach, you clearly dislike me, but I shall at least stick to my guns. I agreed not to express my views about certain of the representative bodies and I agreed not to take you and Rustle on.
I shall stick to my side of the bargain.
Needless to say what you do is a matter for you.
I think it is such a shame that we cant work towards a common goal.
That alone imho is the single reason why GA in the UK is so disjointed and so poorly represented.
I repeated the reasons you previosuly set out because they were "lost" in another lengthy thread. I dont see the need to keep on reinventing the wheel. You asked the question and presumably wanted comment. Lets expand on a solid base.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: heathrow
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imagine actually teaching a student that it is good to make an early decision to turn back because of poor weather ahead and actually showing them how it can happen and how it is done.
You do all seem to be going around in circles!
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlike some I am not a mindless retard
Does anyone know if/when pubic consulations will start on this issue?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Imagine actually teaching a student that it is good to make an early decision to turn back because of poor weather ahead and actually showing them how it can happen and how it is done.
No No No......you must press on and get their money today! today! not tomorrow. While grabbing their money you ensure that they get a good dose of your press-on itis and they will probably be faced with their first ever retreat from bad weather after they get their licence.
Do as I say not as I do is alive and well in UK instruction.
No No No......you must press on and get their money today! today! not tomorrow. While grabbing their money you ensure that they get a good dose of your press-on itis and they will probably be faced with their first ever retreat from bad weather after they get their licence.
Do as I say not as I do is alive and well in UK instruction.
Yes, we DO teach turning back in IMC, instead of the 4 hours instrument flying I did for my PPL, it's now just an hour learning specifically how to do a 180 turn back to VMC. You are also supposed to get them to fly into real cloud so they can experience the real effects of disorientation so that they are more motivated to avoid it.
Getting to the training ground in the scenario I sugested isn't about 'grabbing their money today!' I cancelled a 2-hour dual x-country today (oops, yesterday already!) because the forecast was marginal. I could have perfectly well flown it myself but the student wouldn't have learned anything. He's saved his money for another day and I've earned - precisely ZERO for the day, no pay, nothing. My decision was based purely on what was best for the student, I've lost out personally, you need to accept that this is going to happen in the Winter, I guess.
So my IMCr IS useful for my job as an Instructor, but NOT for teaching 'press-on-itis'!
Cheers,
TheOddOne
Well, I have certainly used the benefit of the IMCR during early instructional flights.
Rather than bouncing around in the murk below clag attempting to teach the basics of attitude flying, 5 min to VMC on top with smooth air and a ruler straight horizon was a much better option.
I have deliberately taken a weaker student on a dual cross-country in less-than-ideal conditions to prove to her that 'heading and time' flown accurately and backed up with one or two landmark fixes actually works.
DFC, your posts are becoming increasingly weak and biased. Fortunately others are taking a more constructive approach - including the CEO of AOPA UK about whom you were so rude.
Rather than bouncing around in the murk below clag attempting to teach the basics of attitude flying, 5 min to VMC on top with smooth air and a ruler straight horizon was a much better option.
I have deliberately taken a weaker student on a dual cross-country in less-than-ideal conditions to prove to her that 'heading and time' flown accurately and backed up with one or two landmark fixes actually works.
DFC, your posts are becoming increasingly weak and biased. Fortunately others are taking a more constructive approach - including the CEO of AOPA UK about whom you were so rude.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DFC
Perhaps Dublin Pilot would like to remind us just how much touring has been done in his club........Have members flown to Italy, France, Spain etc.
Originally Posted by DFC
Dublin Pilot,
Club established in the 70s. You are around for the past 3 years and you think that period is suficient to gauge the extent of VFR touring?
Club established in the 70s. You are around for the past 3 years and you think that period is suficient to gauge the extent of VFR touring?
DFC/Splash 1
You asked me a direct question about what happens in my club, and I answered it as openly and honestly as I could. Don't complain when you ask a question, and then don't like the answer.
dp
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dublin Pilot,
No, you tried to say that no one tours VFR in your club in order to try an give a reason for having an IMC rating i.e. if they had an IMC rating they could tour more widely and not have to worry about getting home if thr weather closed in a bit.
Unfortunately, as I pointed out, the club that you claim to be a member of has done plenty of touring VFR and you also claim to have done some VFR touring quite safely.
Therefore rather than being a Splash 1 or Strike 1 or whatever for you, I think that it is your argument that has crashed and burned.
The cause for the IMC rating would be better served by having some decent proposals, and not having Penelope Pitstop or people from countries that never had the IMC rating trying to re-write history.
How about BEagle explaining the rationalle behind, the operation of and the benifits of the RAF Instrument Grading system. Now there is an established system that is in use world wide and as I am sure BEagle can show has many advantages.
Regards,
DFC
No, you tried to say that no one tours VFR in your club in order to try an give a reason for having an IMC rating i.e. if they had an IMC rating they could tour more widely and not have to worry about getting home if thr weather closed in a bit.
Unfortunately, as I pointed out, the club that you claim to be a member of has done plenty of touring VFR and you also claim to have done some VFR touring quite safely.
Therefore rather than being a Splash 1 or Strike 1 or whatever for you, I think that it is your argument that has crashed and burned.
The cause for the IMC rating would be better served by having some decent proposals, and not having Penelope Pitstop or people from countries that never had the IMC rating trying to re-write history.
How about BEagle explaining the rationalle behind, the operation of and the benifits of the RAF Instrument Grading system. Now there is an established system that is in use world wide and as I am sure BEagle can show has many advantages.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, you tried to say that no one tours VFR in your club in order to try an give a reason for having an IMC rating i.e. if they had an IMC rating they could tour more widely and not have to worry about getting home if thr weather closed in a bit.
I did say that I thought having access to an IMC rating would be helpful, but
made it quite clear that it was not the only reason for the low amount of VFR touring going on in my club, our neightbours, and my former school.
Absolutely NOWHERE have I said that it's not possible to tour extensively VFR. It absolutely is possible...not as reliable, but certainly possible. I have encouraged it as much as I can amoung my club members, even going as far as organising the trip to Spain and opening it to all club members. I wouldn't be promoting it amoung our members if I didn't think it was possible!
What happened in the 70's is irrelvant to today. (Though we do get a clue to your age bracket
)You asked me a direct question, I answered it honestly, and you didn't like the answer.
dp
