No more IMC rating
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They don't intend to use it every day - or at least that's what I know from the pilots I know who have it. It's to give you confidence and get you out of trouble should you be unfortunate enough to get caught out.
How much of this keep the IMC is fueled by the RTFs who charge you £150 per hour for a beat up old C172 non-FM immune, non-mode S PPL VFR training aircraft and then charge you £180 for the same aircraft with the same instructor in the same airspace doing simulated IMC flying.........the only extra being a $5 pair of foggles that do not block the view completely anyway?
Have a look outside the UK and you can get an JAA IR for OK more than the IMC costs but far less than the cheapest UK based FTO.
Not meeting the ICAO hearing requirements, not meeting the ICAO sight requirements - watch out for people with their own agenda's.
All of the things I have posted on this topic may seem negative but they are only 5% of what is going to have to be rebuffed in order to convince a country that has never allowed a UK IMC holder to exercise the IFR privileges in their airspace to swallow the idea.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well my personal view is that it is probably already a done deal. A year ago when I tried to warn you would have been better to mobilize resistance.
I don't want to see it go, as I have said before I think it would be a catastrophe for flight safety.
But as much as it pisses me off to agree with DFC, trying to get MEP support along with the fighting power of the AOPA and PPLIR crowds might make the EASA bods sit up and listen enough.
As has been pointed out, the UK is a small part of Europe and the europeans don't understand the IMC or how it fits into our unique environment.
The problem with politicians is they steal your wallet while kissing your baby and it's only when you get to the pub to buy a beer you realise it's gone......
I don't want to see it go, as I have said before I think it would be a catastrophe for flight safety.
But as much as it pisses me off to agree with DFC, trying to get MEP support along with the fighting power of the AOPA and PPLIR crowds might make the EASA bods sit up and listen enough.
As has been pointed out, the UK is a small part of Europe and the europeans don't understand the IMC or how it fits into our unique environment.
The problem with politicians is they steal your wallet while kissing your baby and it's only when you get to the pub to buy a beer you realise it's gone......
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
If you are happy to see the demise of these priviliges I am equally happy to respect your opinion - I dont agree with it, but I wouldnt boast about how clever I had been either.
I am, however, "clever" enough to realise that national [only] ratings are likely to be gone in a fairly short time frame.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.. .. .. and the night rating?
Or am I talking c$$p?
Or am I talking c$$p?
The UK requires all night flight to be IFR or SVFR. JAR-FCL permits non-IR holders to fly IFR in such a case subject to airspace limitations i.e. outside controlled airspace..........which is exactly what the UK situation is.
The debate there is if the UK is right to have such a limitation.
Perhaps EASA will agree but change the wording to something along the lines of "VFR flights at night will also comply with the IFR rules".
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps EASA will agree but change the wording to something along the lines of "VFR flights at night will also comply with the IFR rules".
.. .. .. and what do pilots do in Europe at the moment at night, without an IR?
.. .. .. as apparently the Europeans dont understand what we do.
I've never once said getting rid of the IMC rating is a good idea, nor have I implied it and I'd appreciate it if you didn't imply that I had. Thanks.
If you are happy to see the demise of these priviliges
.. .. .. but no offence taken as I didnt imply it.
Please do try not to be so sensitive though -
I would rather debate the issues, not get dragged into the minuteau of the wording. I do that all day long when it is important - and most of the time I cant spell and my grammar is dreadful.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The UK is not such a small part of Europe economically. It just accepts European regs without question and with enthusiastic enforcement, whereas the French and the Italians sign the treaties, pick the bits they like and informally ignore the rest.
The UK does have the biggest GA scene in Europe, and (judging from how much activity one sees flying around Europe) by probably a big margin.
There is some GA in Germany, a bit in France, and the rest of Europe is more or less dead - except for ultralight "pure sports" activity operating close to the ground. That is probably the real reason why the UK gets sidelined in Europe on GA issues. Most of the national reps on the committees (being ex air force or ex national airline ATP types) have not seen any domestic GA pressure.
The UK does have the biggest GA scene in Europe, and (judging from how much activity one sees flying around Europe) by probably a big margin.
There is some GA in Germany, a bit in France, and the rest of Europe is more or less dead - except for ultralight "pure sports" activity operating close to the ground. That is probably the real reason why the UK gets sidelined in Europe on GA issues. Most of the national reps on the committees (being ex air force or ex national airline ATP types) have not seen any domestic GA pressure.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose
Here is what I would do:
1. Write to Diamond and the other GA manufacturers in Europe - there are a few. I would point out that they shouldn’t bother making any IFR equipped aircraft because other than the few schools teaching the IR and the even fewer PP with an IR the market will die. They charge a lot more for an IFR fit, and guess what, that translates into profit downstream. They are very influential.
2. I would write to the flying schools and I would ensure there were flyers with every letter. I would have a web site from which these flyers could be printed so students and members could lobby their flying schools. I would point out the significant loss of income that will ensue because there will be no IMCR to teach. (You can forget the average flying school teaching the IR if you have any idea what is involved).
3. I would write to every single one of my members if I was AOPA, PPL IR, PFA etc. I would encourage them to write to their MP, Euro MP, EASA members and the CAA and raise the matter with their flying schools, groups, clubs etc. I would make sure they knew exactly how to do so, what they should consider saying and where they should write.
4. I would write to my MP, my Euro MP and whoever I could at EASA and make a complete and utter nuisance of myself. I know a fair amount about planning. People will tell you the planners ignore all the emotional and unsubstantiated objections they receive. Well they don’t. If they come from enough people and people of influence at the very least it causes the entire application to be carefully reviewed, as much as they might like to ignore them. I am not suggesting the complaints should be emotive, avoid it if you can, but it doesn’t matter if you cant. I would do it now. Make a complete nuisance of yourself now.
5. I would prepare a well researched document about the IMCR which would deal with why it was introduced, the benefits it has brought, its safety record etc and I would ensure this is in front of every member of EASA that was relevant, and every flying school I could get hold of in Europe.
6. I would launch a wide ranging complaint about commercial operators activities in open FIR and the way in which this was encroaching on GA. My purpose would be to make it quite clear to the commercial operators that if they want our help with widening their access to airspace we had better see some reciprocation.
7. Whilst I was about it I would may sure that the risk to the night rating, life time licenses and maintenance organisations where all spelled out.
8. I would ask everyone to sign a petition - and sign they should not because they were intending to do and IMCR or had one, but because of the impact of the wider reaching changes on GA that EASA will have. On the basis of what I read be I am in no doubt whether intended or not this represents a sustained attack on the way we do GA in the UK and it should be ignored at our peril.
9. I would make sure I had the support of all the GA mags, that they really understood what we were about and why the campaign was so imprortant.
10. I would ask everyone for a tenner or whatever amount was appropriate so I was properly funded and I would be prepared to mount a legal challenge.
If sufficient people leant their support I am absolutely in no doubt even at this stage the campaign would be won!
Here is what I would do:
1. Write to Diamond and the other GA manufacturers in Europe - there are a few. I would point out that they shouldn’t bother making any IFR equipped aircraft because other than the few schools teaching the IR and the even fewer PP with an IR the market will die. They charge a lot more for an IFR fit, and guess what, that translates into profit downstream. They are very influential.
2. I would write to the flying schools and I would ensure there were flyers with every letter. I would have a web site from which these flyers could be printed so students and members could lobby their flying schools. I would point out the significant loss of income that will ensue because there will be no IMCR to teach. (You can forget the average flying school teaching the IR if you have any idea what is involved).
3. I would write to every single one of my members if I was AOPA, PPL IR, PFA etc. I would encourage them to write to their MP, Euro MP, EASA members and the CAA and raise the matter with their flying schools, groups, clubs etc. I would make sure they knew exactly how to do so, what they should consider saying and where they should write.
4. I would write to my MP, my Euro MP and whoever I could at EASA and make a complete and utter nuisance of myself. I know a fair amount about planning. People will tell you the planners ignore all the emotional and unsubstantiated objections they receive. Well they don’t. If they come from enough people and people of influence at the very least it causes the entire application to be carefully reviewed, as much as they might like to ignore them. I am not suggesting the complaints should be emotive, avoid it if you can, but it doesn’t matter if you cant. I would do it now. Make a complete nuisance of yourself now.
5. I would prepare a well researched document about the IMCR which would deal with why it was introduced, the benefits it has brought, its safety record etc and I would ensure this is in front of every member of EASA that was relevant, and every flying school I could get hold of in Europe.
6. I would launch a wide ranging complaint about commercial operators activities in open FIR and the way in which this was encroaching on GA. My purpose would be to make it quite clear to the commercial operators that if they want our help with widening their access to airspace we had better see some reciprocation.
7. Whilst I was about it I would may sure that the risk to the night rating, life time licenses and maintenance organisations where all spelled out.
8. I would ask everyone to sign a petition - and sign they should not because they were intending to do and IMCR or had one, but because of the impact of the wider reaching changes on GA that EASA will have. On the basis of what I read be I am in no doubt whether intended or not this represents a sustained attack on the way we do GA in the UK and it should be ignored at our peril.
9. I would make sure I had the support of all the GA mags, that they really understood what we were about and why the campaign was so imprortant.
10. I would ask everyone for a tenner or whatever amount was appropriate so I was properly funded and I would be prepared to mount a legal challenge.
If sufficient people leant their support I am absolutely in no doubt even at this stage the campaign would be won!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji Abound has offered some very sensible advice, but to make it work, we all need to be absolutely clear about what the issues are. It will only confuse the message, if the officials we write to get different interpretations of what's going on and what's at stake. Hence, I'd add one extra point to Fuji's list: publish somewhere a concise explanation, with references to any supporting documentation. Ideally, it should be a PDF file with copying prohibited, to discourage the sending of identical messages, which are more likely to be ignored.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BB
Thank you.
Well 6 might just be a bit antagonistic.
The comment was made that the anti lobby at EASA are the commercial operators.
So to usual an old fashion term - lets stir it up a bit. You want to give us a hard time, we will give you one hell of a hard time when you want access to regionals which dont have CAS.
Thank you.
Well 6 might just be a bit antagonistic.
The comment was made that the anti lobby at EASA are the commercial operators.
So to usual an old fashion term - lets stir it up a bit. You want to give us a hard time, we will give you one hell of a hard time when you want access to regionals which dont have CAS.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good suggestion Fuji re writing to aircraft manufacturers.
This was done when there was that DfT thread to N-reg. Every single maker of turboprops and jets was contacted by FAX (email is usually a waste of time; most big companies dump most incoming email as spam) having first telephoned them and obtained the name of their head of marketing.
Some of them were aware of the UK move but most apparently weren't.
These people have the biggest political clout, and obviously any general measures against private IFR in general are intimately tied up with N-reg because a transfer to N-reg will be the obvious exit option. If Europe wants to screw one thing they will have to screw the whole lot.
But as David Roberts explains it may be too early to do this.
This was done when there was that DfT thread to N-reg. Every single maker of turboprops and jets was contacted by FAX (email is usually a waste of time; most big companies dump most incoming email as spam) having first telephoned them and obtained the name of their head of marketing.
Some of them were aware of the UK move but most apparently weren't.
These people have the biggest political clout, and obviously any general measures against private IFR in general are intimately tied up with N-reg because a transfer to N-reg will be the obvious exit option. If Europe wants to screw one thing they will have to screw the whole lot.
But as David Roberts explains it may be too early to do this.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you IO.
Not sure about it being too early - lets run that again.
Experience tells me it takes us Britains a time to feel passionate about something like this, but once we do we are like the proverbial Bull Dog looking for a good cuppa of English tea.
Therefore the sooner we start to get everyone going the better .. .. ..
.. .. .. leave it till the "appropriate time" and the Eurocrats will do their usual job of steam rolling it through (done deal and all that) - not dissimiliar to the sort of thing that has been going on at Daedaleus if you have followed that thread.
Brilliant!
Like to post up a list of emails or addresses (better still) so we can start gathering this information in one place?
Anyone fancy doing a bit of research on the IMCR or perhaps knows all the history, how it came about etc. Think we are after an old timer on this one?
MODS
Any chance of a sticky please - at least to see if we can get a bit of a campaign going.
Anyone from the other place.
I dont like to mention Flyer on here, but they do have a pretty active forum.
Any one fancy cross linking threads.
Not sure about it being too early - lets run that again.
Experience tells me it takes us Britains a time to feel passionate about something like this, but once we do we are like the proverbial Bull Dog looking for a good cuppa of English tea.
Therefore the sooner we start to get everyone going the better .. .. ..
.. .. .. leave it till the "appropriate time" and the Eurocrats will do their usual job of steam rolling it through (done deal and all that) - not dissimiliar to the sort of thing that has been going on at Daedaleus if you have followed that thread.
Well, I've just emailed eight of my nine MEPs on the subject... let's see if I get any replies.
Like to post up a list of emails or addresses (better still) so we can start gathering this information in one place?
Anyone fancy doing a bit of research on the IMCR or perhaps knows all the history, how it came about etc. Think we are after an old timer on this one?
MODS
Any chance of a sticky please - at least to see if we can get a bit of a campaign going.
Anyone from the other place.
I dont like to mention Flyer on here, but they do have a pretty active forum.
Any one fancy cross linking threads.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 1st Dec 2007 at 09:22.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Brighton. UK. (Via Liverpool).
Posts: 5,068
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get a new thread going with just the right information in it and I will stick it.
I am just off to the hospital right now as my daughter was taken in a few days ago but I will be back this evening. As I say, get a new thread going with the main bits on it and I will sort it when I return later.
Over to you..........
I am just off to the hospital right now as my daughter was taken in a few days ago but I will be back this evening. As I say, get a new thread going with the main bits on it and I will sort it when I return later.
Over to you..........
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
Any one fancy cross linking threads.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FA,
When writing to the GA manufacturers, after all the doom and gloom of withdrawing the IMC rating, we could also offer them a carrott. We could point out the huge potential increase in IFR market, if EASA does adopt the IMC rating, as it would apply all across Europe then.
There would be lots of people then able to undertake IMC flights that couldn't previously, and people who previously discounted GA as a way of making business travel across the EU, might have to reevaluate their options if they had access to an EU wide IMC rating.
dp
When writing to the GA manufacturers, after all the doom and gloom of withdrawing the IMC rating, we could also offer them a carrott. We could point out the huge potential increase in IFR market, if EASA does adopt the IMC rating, as it would apply all across Europe then.
There would be lots of people then able to undertake IMC flights that couldn't previously, and people who previously discounted GA as a way of making business travel across the EU, might have to reevaluate their options if they had access to an EU wide IMC rating.
dp
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When writing to all the airframe manufacturers, MEPs, CAA, EASA et al I would expect them to know a lot more about the airspace classification of other EASA states (i.e. non-UK), airway classifications of other non-UK EASA states, and the concept of IFR OCAS in other non-UK EASA states than seems apparent from this thread.
Taking just one example from the above (not-exhaustive) list: With the looming reclassification of airspace to N/K/U is it realistic to expect all EASA states to reclassify their airways to accomodate the new EASA-IMCR based on the UK model?
50/50?
80/20 in favour?
99/1 against?
This isn't just about little Englander's keeping a rating. National ratings are history. You need to consider EASA-wide implications before anyone is going to take this seriously.
IMHO of course
Taking just one example from the above (not-exhaustive) list: With the looming reclassification of airspace to N/K/U is it realistic to expect all EASA states to reclassify their airways to accomodate the new EASA-IMCR based on the UK model?
50/50?
80/20 in favour?
99/1 against?
This isn't just about little Englander's keeping a rating. National ratings are history. You need to consider EASA-wide implications before anyone is going to take this seriously.
IMHO of course
Last edited by rustle; 1st Dec 2007 at 10:19.
OK, let's write to people. I wonder if those in the know about how this is happening might help me complete a letter? Perhaps we could help each other at least with the factual elements of a letter. You see, if I write to my MP/MEP, what am I complaining about? Who is doing what that I object to? What do I want my MP/MEP to do? Never mind the style of this draft, I'd appreciate comments on the factual elements at the end.
Please help me stop another case of the European standard banana; excessive and unnecessary harmonisation.
In future aircraft pilot licensing is to be done on a European basis, rather then country by country. This is good. But it is being done by forcing the lowest common denominator on each country; we must all be the same. This isn’t so good.
To fly in cloud, pilots need an “instrument rating”. This greatly increases safety, even for private pilots who get caught out in bad weather. However the instrument rating is designed for commercial pilots and is both expensive and excessive as a “bad weather safety skill” for private pilots. Uniquely, the UK has an “IMC rating” – a lower qualification that is within the reach of any private pilot.
Quite simply: the IMC rating saves lives.
No other country has this rating, and for reasons that do not reflect on why the UK should – or should not – have one. So why must we lose something valuable for the sake of mindless harmonisation?
(Help needed here on: )
Please help lobby for a UK exception or opt-out. (Or what?)
This rule/regulation/order/whatever originates from EASA (which stands for…) subgroup JAA FCL 001 and is to be presented to… by… on such and such a date…
And please will you… (do what?)
In future aircraft pilot licensing is to be done on a European basis, rather then country by country. This is good. But it is being done by forcing the lowest common denominator on each country; we must all be the same. This isn’t so good.
To fly in cloud, pilots need an “instrument rating”. This greatly increases safety, even for private pilots who get caught out in bad weather. However the instrument rating is designed for commercial pilots and is both expensive and excessive as a “bad weather safety skill” for private pilots. Uniquely, the UK has an “IMC rating” – a lower qualification that is within the reach of any private pilot.
Quite simply: the IMC rating saves lives.
No other country has this rating, and for reasons that do not reflect on why the UK should – or should not – have one. So why must we lose something valuable for the sake of mindless harmonisation?
(Help needed here on: )
Please help lobby for a UK exception or opt-out. (Or what?)
This rule/regulation/order/whatever originates from EASA (which stands for…) subgroup JAA FCL 001 and is to be presented to… by… on such and such a date…
And please will you… (do what?)