No more IMC rating

[dublinpilot]

DFC,

I'm well aware that a UK IMC rating can't be used in an EI Reg aircraft. But as I understand this, EASA is not deciding whether to keep the UK IMC rating or not, in the UK. They are decideing to adopt it across Europe, or wipe it out totally. I would love to see it retained, and adopted across Europe. Then I could fly IFR in my EI reg, with my EASA IMC rating

Kevin, is the obvious default choice. But I would much prefer to address my comments directly to the person sitting at the table. Having a friend at the table would no doubt help the CAA's position.

dp

[Fuji Abound]

Actually one other thing .. .. ..

GA pilots are a community - through out Europe I might add

.. .. we pay for EASA, we pay for AOPA, we pay the regulator and those that are meant to represent us, but they dont.

Where is the petition from AOPA to every pilot in Europe asking whether they support these changes? Where is the petition from AOPA standing up for the rights to keep our life time licenses? Where is the consultation? Where is the regulatory impact assessment. Where are the pilots prepared to stand up?

Bose (aka the Princess) warned us, months ago, and yet (and I did rejoin AOPA) I have received no petitions from them - in fact I have had nothing asking for by views.

Petitions, the voice of the people change policy.

These organisations are utterly useless.

I have to say it would not happen in America - I am a memebr of AOPA US as well and I can tell you how hard they campaign for their members.

IO540 - well said, I am glad some one else has a bit of passion about what is taking place.

[S-Works]

I just wish IO would take his passion and do something useful with it rather than arguing with those who are actually involved and dealing with the issues directly.

I know first hand what is being said by the rule makers as I am involved in fighting it, he is just surmising. Just because he tuoes in bold and exerts his opinion does not make him well informed.

However I do agree that the loss of the IMC will be one of the greatest disasters to BRITISH aviation and I am determined to fight to the last for it.

I am also pragmatic enough to express realistic views on the subject. Just as I did last year when I said it was under threat and you all told me I was wrong.....

So feel free to tell me I am wrong now. Someone will be able to say I told you so won't they........

As for AOPA, they do ilicit opinions from the membership, it is done through the AOPA MWG and EVERY AOPA member is free to contact any member of the MWG or MArtin directly and tell him/them what they think.

[Fuji Abound]

However I do agree that the loss of the IMC will be one of the greatest disasters to BRITISH aviation and I am determined to fight to the last for it.

I have the greatest of respect for you for that comment.

As for AOPA, they do ilicit opinions from the membership, it is done through the AOPA MWG and EVERY AOPA member is free to contact any member of the MWG or MArtin directly and tell him/them what they think.

I suspect you know as well as I that people are on the whole apathetic - unTIL it is too late. That is why organisations like AOPA exist - their job is to remind us why we should not be apathetic and encourage - nay provoke comment and support. Expecting members to contact them is not good enough.

IN FACT I THINK EVERYONE ON PPRUNE SHOULD START A PETITION - WHAT ABOUT IT - THERE MUST BE A FAIR FEW HERE THAT WOULD SIGN?

[englishal]

IN FACT I THINK EVERYONE ON PPRUNE SHOULD START A PETITION

Actually you know what, Pprune and Flyer probably have a bigger audience and more clout than any of the "GA" organisations. And rumour has it that the CAA browse these pages

Join The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association UK (AOPA UK) today along with over 400,000 members in 50 countries, it is the largest association for pilots in the world

Seems I am already affiliated with AOPA UK then

[Slopey]

Granted I'm not up on the intended changes to the structure in 2010 or whenever, but why do they need to scrap the rating?

It's a UK only rating, so presumably it's not going to impact on any other member states at all - and possibly pilots in those states might welcome such a rating.

The question should surely be "does anyone want a UK style IMCR in their country - if so, fine, if not, fine" rather than "the UK have something we don't - BAN IT!"

I don't see the rationale behind scrapping something useful which no other country currently implements - what's wrong with us continuing to do it?

[David Roberts]

The time to 'protest' is when the EASA draft Implementing Rules for EU licences are published for formal public consultation, probably towards the end of Q1/08. This is a requirement of the EU process of law making. And having worked inside EASA as an 'industry' expert (representing Europe Air Sports) for the last three years I know that the response process culminating in a Comment Response Document, is taken seriously. Responses have to be rational and constructive to be 'registered' and have impact. Emotional stuff is ignored. Just as petitions are by and large.
Being on EASA MDM.032 group I am trying to get the UK views over but I am not on the FCL group where the professional pilots unions seem to have some sway.
DGR

[BEagle]

I too have been having 'robust discussions' with the so-called UK reps who are just bringing back Uriah Heap style hand-wringing tales of woe from their cosy Cologne sessions.....

If you want to keep:

The UK IMCR

Lifetime PPLs (old style) for those who still have them

Lifetime NPPLs

BCPLs and R/BCPLs for those who still have them

Embedded IMC privileges for (old stle) CAA CPLs and ATPLs

Then you must speak up and protest!

I also happen to think that the MDM032 is a complete waste of time now, after a promising begining.

[Whirlybird]

BEagle,

What is the best way in which to "speak up and protest"?

[S-Works]

Beagle is absolutely right although a bit unfair on the hand wringing. More like a balance of pragmatism. EASA is run by bureaucrats who take guidance from the airlines, GA is the unwanted cousin.

The MDM 032 has been a waste of time and the new draft of the FCL001 that I reviewing is average.

As Beagle points out we need to rise up in numbers and make noise and a lot off it. My personal view is that PPLIR and AOPA are the vehicles for this, a mass joining of both organisations will secure funding to ensure that we all get a voice with the power of two organisations that are working in unison towards common goals on the instrument issue.

[ThePirateKing]

I wonder if part of the problem here is one of perception.

As somebody said earlier, has any AOPA member (I'm not one, BTW) been canvassed for their views?

I've just been to the AOPA UK web site to see about joining and my immediate opinions are:

1) What do I get for my £71 per year + £15 joining fee? I mean really? How many of the listed benefits are actually useful? The free legal stuff might be if you get yourself in to hot water, I guess.
2) How relevant is this organisation? I notice their front page has a "poll" asking people if they think a London LARS service is a good idea. Hello?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If this stuff goes ahead, I'm taking Earsea to the European Court of Human Rights for discrimitation against me as a person suffering from colour blindness. It'd probably be cheaper to get an IR... if I were allowed to.

Ah well... the wheel keeps on turning, I suppose.

TPK

[172driver]

.....and the IR ?

Bose, on a related matter - any news re the promised IR 'light" (or whatever they call it) ?

[Justiciar]

The fact that the FAA does not also is quite a big factor since the long long long term aim is to integrate the two systems.

Which two systems are we talking about? Are we looking at the demise of a national IMCR in favour of some sort of PPLIR (light)? The impression I get from reading this is that the airlines are listened to and the others are not. What the airlines want they get, which presumably is no amateur pilots flying IFR anywhere near them! So which direction is this going? Are we going to get a general reduction in knowledge and skills requirements across the board for the IR so that it more closely resembles the FAA/IR? The need then for a separate IMCR would disappear as the rating would be much more in reach of the average PPL, as it is in the US.

[172driver]

Are we going to get a general reduction in knowledge and skills requirements across the board for the IR so that it more closely resembles the FAA/IR?

I let IO540 reply to this one

[bigbloke]

Well

How about drafting a short petition (looks like a single paragraph is the going rate).

Once it looks about right set up a petition on the Downing St E-Petitions site

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/

Then we all sign it and get everybody we know to do likewise.

Then we all Lobby MP's with snail mail.

Generally raise the profile of the issue and create merry hell until somebody pays attention.

I suspect that the various representative bodies are doing everything they can within their consultative frameworks (straight jackets) which will have been defined by the teams of beaurcrats that have been tasked with pushing the measures through.

Some grass roots activity should if nothing else support the GA lobbying community with some definite indications that their communities are ready to take a more active part than just paying their subscriptions and awaiting further developments.

BB

Probably about to be barbequeued in PP fashion.

[englishal]

Lets get one thing straight....

There is no skills reduction between the FAA IR and the JAA IR. Sure there are differences (both ways), but anyone who is mislead into thinking the FAA IR is an *easy* option should really try and do it. The FAA IR is Nothing like an IMCr, it is a full, ICAO IR - the equivalent of JAR.

The reason an FAA IR is more achievable is:

a) You don't have to wade through 6 months of irrelevant ground school
b) You can train with freelance instructors if you want
c) You can train at your own pace - not just the 1 hour per day some UK FTOs like to do
d) You don't have to have a speceal hearing test from some throw back from before the second world war
e) The requirements to keep it are less onerous - it is easy to maintain at minima cost. Anyone who actually uses it gets to keep it.

Oh and if you do train in the USA, with £ to $ at the moment, it costs very little ($150 per hour inc instructor in a brand new DA40 for example).

In the UK as soon as you mention IR instruction in the UK, the instructor costs jump to £75 per hour - they still get their £15 per hour I suppose......

AOPA UK is not run anything like the US AOPA - if it were I'd join. Their website is rubbish, it has very little useful info on there, other than listing the board of directors (an extensive list I might add), and the cost is high for what you get...Oh but you do get a funky optional Aircrew card to wave at people to show how good you are......

PPLIR on the other hand is a completely different kettle of fish and I am a member....

[IO540]

What the airlines want they get, which presumably is no amateur pilots flying IFR anywhere near them

That view, apparently held by many committee members, shows their narrow knowledge of how flying works.

You can fly IFR/airways, from the UK to say Poland, Italy, etc i.e. a ~ 800nm flight, at say FL100-FL200, and there is very little chance you will get visual with another aircraft. Not counting contrails at FL350 of course, or some 747 so far away the type can barely be made out (10-20nm?). The chances of seeing another GA aircraft are close to nil. I've done IFR trips as far as Crete and not seen anything whatsoever enroute, once having left the UK Class G free-for-all airspace.

There are 3 reasons for this: piston/turboprop GA flies in the great void below FL250 in which jets don't operate except in terminal phases; you cannot get a route out of the Eurocontrol computer which takes you close or through a busy terminal area (e.g. overhead Frankfurt at 4000ft....); ATC separate everybody with most generous distances anyway.

I would happily take anybody for such a flight, provided they buy the beer at the far end, and give them a tenner for every plane they can identify the type of, and £50 for every GA plane they spot at all

The "crowded airspace" is a myth perpetuated by the same old crowd who have never flown GA from A to B for real. Airline pilots are particularly bad at knowing anything about this because most of them are sick of IFR and if they do fly GA they fly basic rag and tube / aero types.

Are we going to get a general reduction in knowledge and skills requirements across the board for the IR so that it more closely resembles the FAA/IR?

Not in the foreseable future. EASA is taking over JAR/FCL whole, with minimal changes. They have stated that for political reasons they cannot play with stuff like the IR requirements until EASA FCL is in place and then they can do another review.

It's even possible that private IFR (i.e. a JAA/EASA PPL/IR) in CAS is in danger in the long term. Should this happen (unlikely, IMHO) then the only future-proof thing for the private pilot is a JAA/EASA CPL/IR. The JAA/EASA ATPL is the ultimate ticket but will never be achievable because of the MCC requirement.

Obviously, the above para is meaningful only if the FAA/N-reg option and the achievable FAA IR are killed off for European based pilots, and a discussion of how exactly that might be achieved (if it happens at all) is something else... I cannot see a workable enforcement method for it, within the bounds of ICAO and international politics.

"FAA" is a bit of a dirty word in EASA at present. Not because of John Wayne cowboy movies, Macdonalds, or the usual left wing European intellectuals disliking U.S. foreign policy but because of the FAA playing hardball on the big stuff e.g. airline route negotiations. The private GA stuff is unfortunately wrapped up in all the big stuff. We are just one little bit of the big picture.

[Justiciar]

anyone who is mislead into thinking the FAA IR is an *easy* option should really try and do it

Apologies if I gave that impression. One very experienced pilot I know described the FAA/IR flight test the most difficult bit of flying he had ever done. The oral alone made him sweat. Seems to me that the principle differences of note are as Englishal says, and go to make the FAA/IR achievable for the many who cannot take four weeks at a time off to do the training. I believe that the flying requirement is less at 40 hours and that previous instrument time counts. That is not to say that you will be ready for the test in 40 hours. Coming back to my point, will we see the EASA version tending toward the FAA requirements for training and theoretical knowledge? If so then the demise of the IMCR may not be the catastrophy we think - if it happens.

I would happily take anybody for such a flight, provided they buy the beer at the far end, and give them a tenner for every plane they can identify the type of, and £50 for every GA plane they spot at all

Will happily take you up on that

[hobbit1983]

BEagle,

What is the best way in which to "speak up and protest"?

Seconded - is there a contact we can write/email to? Or would a petition be the best way forward?

[dublinpilot]

I would happily take anybody for such a flight, provided they buy the beer at the far end, and give them a tenner for every plane they can identify the type of, and £50 for every GA plane they spot at all

How much beer can you drink???