IMC rating in theUK?

[homeguard]

Logging

Frog

To clarify further.

The CAA require that a seperate detailed Training Record is maintained by the FTO/RTF to an acceptable format. This explains why UK instructors do not normally enter detail into the pilots logbook. Further, Revalidation Flight Test passes and routine validations are entered into the Rating Validation page of the pilots licence by the examiner. The first entry on the issue of a licence or rating is always entered by the CAA themselves. You need to see the actual licence for validity. The log book will only indicate currency as entered by the pilot themselves.

For UK flight, up-to-date Approach Plates, Airspace and Aerodrome data is always available from the ais.org.uk website for free or by subscription it is supplied on CD or in paper format. There is no excuse to have out of date data for flight within the UK. 1050 makes his points with regard to the eurocontrol/Sylvia stuff.

On another issue. What is the training and qualification process/procedure to be a Flight Instructor in France? Is there a formal course for instructors similar to the UK? Incidentally the UK Instructor course also includes 120 hours of groundschool made up of lectures/briefings and student practice. It is in this way that the UK have always complied with ICAO knowledge and skill requirements but the Instructor is not required to hold a CPL except to be paid, which is only since JAA.

[frog_ATC]

Thanks Homeguard, it helps me understand better.


///////// quick note...

So just a note for those who want their IFR experience to be valid in an FAA IR cursus : ask your instructors (or chase them, for previous flights!) to endorse each line of your logbook they flew with you.
It is the only way to make your experience valid.

Moreover, your IMC rating training maybe taken into account, as long as the instructor was an IR instructor, not an IMC instructor.
You'll have to prove that to the DPE.
Some of them do not check that point because they do not even know that IMC instructors exist, some other are touchy about that because they had bad experiences about training taken into account which was not "legal" on the FAA point of view.
So if you have a written proof (copy of license, etc) that the instructor was a legal IR instructor at the time of the training, perfect.

/////// end of note !


For info, French charts are available for free online also :
http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv....ieframeset.htm

But I prefer using Jeppview, and print charts before departure.
Jeppview has also a great option which allow you to select a list of favourite airports, and then make an "print update" : Jeppview will print only those that changed since your last print.
Useful !

I always have a printed version of my approach plate, even on airplanes equipped with Cmax, screens and Disney Chanel TVs, even on airfields where I know the approach "by heart".

I think it's more easy to concentrate on a sheet of paper, and safer.


For the Flight Instructor cursus in France, we have 2 possibilities :

- "Commercial" FI (normal JAR one)
- "Airclub" FI (maybe we'll lose this specificity)


The second one (airclub) is exactly the same as the first one, but you have a simplified written test, whereas the first one requires the JAR CPL written test.
The "airclub" CFI also has a mandatory 1-week refresher ground course.
The flight preparation and examination are exactly the same (evaluation, 5 weeks training in FTO, Checkride).

The limitations for the "airclub" instructor are :

- no compensation for instruction
- instruction only in France

Maybe the same in UK ?

Frog

[IO540]

So just a note for those who want their IFR experience to be valid in an FAA IR cursus : ask your instructors (or chase them, for previous flights!) to endorse each line of your logbook they flew with you.
It is the only way to make your experience valid.

The FAA IR needs 15hrs dual and I would agree that that time ought to be signed off. It's wise but not a requirement. However the remainder of the 40hrs is solo instrument flight which nobody else is in a position to sign off.

Moreover, your IMC rating training maybe taken into account, as long as the instructor was an IR instructor, not an IMC instructor.
You'll have to prove that to the DPE.

Do you have the FAR reference for that, Frog-ATC? That is absolutely not the practice in all FAA training I have seen, UK or USA. The FAR wording is "authorised instructor".

There are particular individuals, no names mentioned but they have been well known, outside the USA, with a history of certain practices, indeed... especially when working in association with a training establishment It isn't right. Instrument training by an IMCR instructor is fine and acceptable. Anyway, the pilot has to pass the checkride.

The scenario where an IMCR holder turns up in the USA for the FAA IR is very common. Most of them turn up with a large # of dual instrument hours - obviously more than the 15hrs min. But practically all of them need at least another 15hrs to reach the FAA IR checkride standard, which makes the original IMCR training logbook entries irrelevant because they get the 15hrs all over again.

I have totally lost count of the number of people I know who followed this route.

Re UK instructors, I don't believe they are limited to instructing in the UK. Cross channel fly-outs are common, and the school tries to maximise revenue by placing a student in the LH seat and an instructor in the RH seat. That way they get the aircraft rental plus instructor rate, and they set it up so this happens on every leg flown. The time is logged by the student as instructional flight. So I don't think there is a ban on foreign instruction here.

[frog_ATC]

It is simple : the non-FAA training has to be endorsed by an authorized IR instructor to be acceptable.

An IMC instructor is not an authorized IR instructor, as well as the IMC rating privileges do not apply outside UK.

This is obvious, and was confirmed by the IFO New York.

Regards,

Frog

[S-Works]

You might need to differentiate here on what exactly an IMC Instructor is. A good number of Instructors teaching the IMC are actually IRI and those with a modern FI rating will have done the equivalent of the IRI to get the no Instrument Instruction restriction lifted.

It is perfectly within reason for me to teach an IMC rating using the IRI rating and that time is time with an ICAO approved Instrument Instructor.

The discussion should not be around the Instructor but rather around the Sub ICAO nature of the IMC rating.

You will find that most IRI's will be teaching Instrument flight to the same standard whether IR or IMC. It is just with the IMC there is a lot less of it.

[youngskywalker]

I can also confirm that all my IMC training hours were approved by the school and the DPE when conducting my Instrument rating in San Diego, no question at all. As long as those hours were signed off by the instructor with his licence number and expiry date. very comon practice.

[homeguard]

IR Instructors

There is no such thing in the UK as an IR Instructor. No course nor no rating. The Applied Instruments Restriction initialy entered into the Instructor Page has to be removed following an FIC Applied Instruments Course and a succesful test with an FI Examiner. Same to teach the IMC or IR.

An Instructor when teaching on a IR course needs to hold an IR and be entered into the FTO Approval following Standardisation training. I could be out of date, correct me if I'm wrong (silly to think someone wouldn't!).

[frog_ATC]

Please read again what I wrote above : I do confirm that the IMC training can count for an FAA IR.

But only if the instructor that provides the training is also an IR instructor, which means someone which can legally train for the IR.
If he is only an IMC instructor (which seems to exist in UK) then the flight hours cannot count.

Frog

[S-Works]

homeguard, can I respectfully suggest that you go away and do some research before making such a categorical statement?

H2.1 INSTRUMENT RATING INSTRUCTOR
(AEROPLANE) (IRI(A))
Privileges
The privileges of the holder of an IRI(A) rating are
limited to conduct flight instruction for:
a. The issue of an IR(A) single-engine aeroplanes;
b. The issue of an IR(A) multi-engine aeroplanes,
provided that the instructor meets the
requirements of JAR-FCL 1.380(a).
Requirements
a. The applicant for an IRI(A) shall hold a valid
IR(A).
b. Have completed at least 800 hours of flight time
under IFR of which at least 400 shall be in
aeroplanes. Where pilots have recorded flight by
sole reference to instruments and not under IFR,
then 1 hour sole reference to instruments may be
counted as 4 hours flight by IFR.
c. Successfully completed at an approved FTO and
approved course (see Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL
1.395 and AMC FCL 1.395) comprising
theoretical knowledge instruction and at least ten
hours of flight instruction on an aeroplane, flight
simulator or FNPT II; and.
d. Pass the relevant elements of a FI Skill Test in a
single pilot aeroplane with a suitably qualified
FIE(A).
e. IRI(A)’s who wish to conduct training for a ME IR
are also required to have met the qualifications
for a ME CRI. Where both courses are conducted
together, the teaching and learning element is
common to both CRI and IRI courses.
Candidates qualifying for the teaching and
learning exemption in accordance with Appendix
1 to JAR-FCL 1.395(2) who combine both ME
CRI and IRI qualifications on one course will be
required to complete a minimum of 15 hours
theoretical training before attempting the ME CRI
and IRI Skill Tests. The IRI(A) rating is designed
to train instructors to teach for the JAA IR within
an approved FTO. In the UK, the same (IRI)
qualification course is also used to qualify
instructors to teach for the UK National IMC
rating. The entry requirements for the IRI course
to teach solely for the UK IMC rating are detailed
in Section H1.4 (Removal of No Applied
Instrument Restriction). The theoretical ground
training requirements shall be the same as those
required for the IRI qualification.

[IO540]

OK guys we can digress down this road... but there is AFAIK no known case of instrument training done outside the USA (in a European reg plane) being disallowed for the award of an FAA IR, by the FAA examiner, on the basis that the instructor had an IMCR and not the full valid IR.

Well........... except as part of a blatent revenue generating scheme as run by certain UK based FAA flight training establishments in years gone by, but the FAA DPE was not involved in the refusal. I did my FAA PPL in the UK, and then spent much of 2004 trying to do the FAA IR in the UK too, in my own plane, only to find that not only was nobody able to guarantee the availability of the FAA (visiting) examiner, but also some of the merchants came out with utter tosh like "all training towards an FAA IR must be done by an FAA CFII" which "everybody" would recognise as utter crap but it was a case of quietly saying "sod it", getting one's credit card out, and doing 15hrs of flying. In the end, the examiner availability problems (which resulted in legal action by some candidates to get checkride deposits refunded) were enough and I went to the USA.

I have it in writing from the FAA that they regard the UK IMCR as equivalent to the FAA IR - within the respective legal privileges of the two ratings obviously.

My own experience is that various FAA CFII instructors hold the UK IMCR in high regard.

[homeguard]

IRI qualifications

Bose-X

I did invite responses should I be out of date. I need some assistance in interpreting your extract, presumably from LASORS.

I qoute the following from your extract;

In the UK, the same (IRI)
qualification course is also used to qualify
instructors to teach for the UK National IMC
rating. The entry requirements for the IRI course
to teach solely for the UK IMC rating are detailed
in Section H1.4 (Removal of No Applied
Instrument Restriction). The theoretical ground
training requirements shall be the same as those
required for the IRI qualification.

I'm presuming that the long pre-amble which precedes the above bit outlines the requirements for a CRI i.e. for someone who is not a fully qualified Flight Instructor with the No Applied Instruments endorsement removed but who wishes to instruct on an approved IR course.

I've not gone away, I thought I'd let you help me through this jungle.

[S-Works]

It is my understanding that under JAA to teach for the IR the holder must have a current IR and have an IRI rating. The IRI rating can be added to an FI or a CRI. An ME IRI has to be added to the ME CRI rating. An FI who wishes to be an ME Instructor has to do a ME CRI which is what the LASORS entry refers to.

For an FI to teach for the IMC they are required to have the no Instrument flight restriction lifted. It is my understanding that lifting this restriction only allows them to teach for the IMC. An IRI may teach for the IR if they hold a current IR and the IMC. If they do not hold an IR then they may only teach for the IMC.

That is my understanding. I too stand to be corrected.

But the purpose of my post was to point out that there is such a thing an IRI rating, with a course and a test.

[aztec25]

Not quite the case.
It is my understanding that the removal of the applied instrument restriction allows an FI to instruct for both the IR or the IMC provided of course he/she has that rating themselves.

[frog_ATC]

IO : "but there is AFAIK no known case of instrument training done outside the USA (in a European reg plane) being disallowed for the award of an FAA IR, by the FAA examiner, on the basis that the instructor had an IMCR and not the full valid IR."


Of course there are known cases.

But IO does not seem to be very good at respecting the rules, as I remembered above on this thread that he claimed that a VFR pilot entering IMC should tell the ATC that he is VMC...

Great job boy !

[S-Works]

I have it in writing from the FAA that they regard the UK IMCR as equivalent to the FAA IR - within the respective legal privileges of the two ratings obviously.

Then why won't the issue a foreign instrument pilot rating after passing the theory to IMCR holders?

[S-Works]

Both sides of the story!


Removal of No Applied Instrument
Restriction
a. Hold either a valid single pilot, Instrument Rating
(IR(A)) or Instrument Meteorological Conditions
(IMC) Rating.
b. Hold a valid FI(A) with Supervisory Restriction
removed.
c. Have flown at least 200 hours flight time in
accordance with Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), of
which up to 50 hours may be instrument ground
time in an approved flight simulator or FNPT II.
Where pilots have recorded flight by sole
reference to instruments and not under IFR then
1 hour of flight by sole reference to instruments
may be counted as 4 hours flight by IFR. Where
pilots wish solely to instruct for the IMC Rating a
reduced experience level of 10 hours flight time
by sole reference to instruments is applicable
and;
d. Complete an approved course comprising at
least 5 hours dual flight training on instruments in
an aeroplane, flight simulator or FNPT 2 and 10
hours of theoretical training. All training to be
conducted by FIC Instructor qualified to conduct
instrument training at an approved FIC FTO.
e. Pass the relevant elements of a FI Skill Test in a
single pilot aeroplane with a suitably qualified
FIE(A).
In addition, for the issue of an IR(A) multi-engine
aeroplanes the instructor shall meet the
requirements of JAR-FCL 1.380(a) (see Section
H3.3)

[IO540]

But IO does not seem to be very good at respecting the rules, as I remembered above on this thread that he claimed that a VFR pilot entering IMC should tell the ATC that he is VMC...

I didn't say he "should". That would be illegal

"Then why won't the issue a foreign instrument pilot rating after passing the theory to IMCR holders?"

Because the IMCR is non-ICAO, could be one reason.

[S-Works]

Therefore to use your method of surmising the FAA IR and the IMCR are in fact not equivalents? The IMCR is a sub ICAO licence with significantly less training than an FAA IR.

They may be close cousins but they are not equivalents.

[BEagle]

The IRI is a standalone Rating for a non-FI.

The 'Removal of no Applied IF' as an additional qualification for an FI.

Either may teach for the IMCR or IR, but must hold the IR to teach for it. There are also greater 'IFR' hours requirements for the standalone IRI.

[homeguard]

Frog in the throat!

Frog

You are allowing yourself to be dragged into a downward spiral going nowhere, some thrive on it. You have until now kept above bickering, keep it that way. Human Factors, remember..........!

From the recent interlude, perhaps, your able now to agree that there is no such thing for a fully qualified UK Flight Instructor to have an IR Instructor rating as a seperate attachment. Only an Instructor Rating with the 'no applied Instrument training endorsement removed exists, at least within the UK.

For the purposes of the USA I presume an Instructor with the UK Flight Instructor 'no applied .........' endorsement removed, having validated a pilots logbook, satisfies their requirement. The holder of an IMCr will by holding the IMC rating be able to demonstrate that they meet the requirement of 15 hours dual instrument training.

I can quite see that it will not be so simple for those outside of the UK to demonstrate the same without logbook endorsements, which may have lead you to your believe.