IMCR numbers going down
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMCR numbers going down
Just picked up the last issue of FTN. On page 32 they have a load of charts.
IMCR new awards have gone down from ~700 in 2002 to ~ 260 in 2007, in a more or less straight line. That is a factor of three.
Any guesses as to the reason for this decline?
IMCR new awards have gone down from ~700 in 2002 to ~ 260 in 2007, in a more or less straight line. That is a factor of three.
Any guesses as to the reason for this decline?
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
Any guesses as to the reason for this decline?
I work at a large school in North-West London and at the moment we've only one student actively studying for the IMCr. At the moment, I'm not qualified to teach it and I'm wondering if it's going to be worth my while getting the additional qualification if I'm not going to be able to put it in to practice. Thus the downward spiral is self-sustaining...
TheOddOne
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the decline is not related to EASA; it's a linear decline since 2002.
I wonder if it is caused by the continual slagging off of the IMCR (a get out of jail card, a get into jail card, etc) by the usual pontificators within the flight training business. But that doesn't make total sense since a flying school should be dead keen to sell extra training.
I wonder if it is caused by the continual slagging off of the IMCR (a get out of jail card, a get into jail card, etc) by the usual pontificators within the flight training business. But that doesn't make total sense since a flying school should be dead keen to sell extra training.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My observation is that I have been having more older students who can afford to fly but are less skilled than some of the younger element. My last silver IMCR stude packed in when he could not master the ADF to a high enough level and after after a couple of his landings were criticised. I have a renewal stude tomorrow who keeps it up but does not actually use it. I detect a growing fear of flying in weather along with a perceived poorer climate for longer in the year and overly pessimistic forecasts on TV. I also notice that as flight is experienced as a holiday bus trip for the young it holds no glamour compared to my early days. I know only a handful of keen pilots at PPL who regularly use their IMC. Personally I love it but you need practice for the confidence which I see to be lacking in many low hour and training ppl students. In UK we don't use light aircraft enough and the costs are still rising too fast for many.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem has always been that the IMC course teaches students how to pass the test, and not how to seriously use the rating in the real IFR world.
However, this is merely an observation unrelated to the downward trend, since IMC students by definition would not be aware of this situation until completing the course and only then finding themselves qualified to use a rating which they had not actually been taught how to use in real life!
However, this is merely an observation unrelated to the downward trend, since IMC students by definition would not be aware of this situation until completing the course and only then finding themselves qualified to use a rating which they had not actually been taught how to use in real life!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That could be part of the problem but don't you think that as clubs like to keep fewer aircraft available to members who can be discouraged from longer trips and as the cost of landings and approaches has risen and the bigger airports have declined to offer the services thay did and that the common ATC call of "Remain clear of controlled airspace! and Squawk 7000 Good Day" and limited military LARS these days are also part of the problem. IFR in IMC terms is limited but the intention of the IMCr is not to fly in total cloud and approaches are not allways necessary. I know of IMC rated piklots who would very rarely file a flight plan and mix VMC and IMC flight as required by the conditions so long as they could get an RIS and or FIS as necesary for safety and why not. It needs updating and the hold making part of the syllabus instead of an option if tiime permits It should probably include more genuine IMC rather than screens and foggles should be banned but I know why they are not.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skycam, all true but of course my point was made relative to IFR flying and not simply IMC flying. Teaching srudents to use the rating on a real utilitarian basis including filing flight plans and conducting real actual A to B IFR trips ( regardless of whether in IMC) would make the rating much more usable and more attractive.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: England
Age: 60
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of valid points made above.
I use my IMC almost every time I go flying. I don't subscribe to the "get you out of trouble" scenario, as we all know if you are not in regular practice it will get you into trouble.
The problem is for most renters is that flying clubs will not sign you out unless its almost CAVOK. I am always amazed when I go flying that I seem to be the only aircraft in the sky, when in fact the weather isn't that bad.
The other problems are that where I learnt to fly, having done the PPL, they didn't encourage me to go and do more and as someone has said, the IMC course doesn't tell you lots of things you really need to know.... but then that's true of the IR/ATPL too.
I use my IMC almost every time I go flying. I don't subscribe to the "get you out of trouble" scenario, as we all know if you are not in regular practice it will get you into trouble.
The problem is for most renters is that flying clubs will not sign you out unless its almost CAVOK. I am always amazed when I go flying that I seem to be the only aircraft in the sky, when in fact the weather isn't that bad.
The other problems are that where I learnt to fly, having done the PPL, they didn't encourage me to go and do more and as someone has said, the IMC course doesn't tell you lots of things you really need to know.... but then that's true of the IR/ATPL too.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The suitability of aircraft for IMC flying in the club scene is next to none. There is a prosecution culture for those who make a mistake and in a badly equipped aircraft you have more chance of a mistake in IMC. In the past pilots would be happy to blag with a minimum IMC fit and a portable GPS, now they are more wary of explaining themselves if it goes wrong.
There is a growing move towards the LAA hot-ships which are day VFR at grass roots level and at the other end people tend to do the IR either FAA or JAA.
The cost of fuel and the burden of legislation, lack of access to approaches etc. make it more difficult to maintain the currency so people can't be bothered to do the training in the first place.
With the permit type culture a lot of people are still doing long touring trips but VFR and prepared to live with the delays that bad weather causes. Whatever many of us IR flyers may say an IR or IMC is not required for serious touring, it is required for serious business use where you are on a schedule and as a result there is a gulf appearing between the two camps.
What everyone needs to watch is how the gulf is very cleverly being engineered, a Europe wide licence that requires a minimal medical and is a VFR rating (possibly with Night) that basically pushes private flying towards the LAPL and pigeon holes flyers into the VFR hotships. Removing the need for a CPL from the FI rating only currently applies to LAPL training so more people will be pushed down that route, the guys with the CPL will be a shrinking market as the airlines eventually take them. What we are left with is GA neatly boxed.
If you then want to play with the 'big boys' IMC flight international rights etc you have to go for the full licence.
In a few years time it will be interesting to see the look on peoples faces when they turn up somewhere like the states with a LAPL and are told it is sub ICAO and they can't fly.
Europe is in danger of becoming the 'insular' united states of europe that we have always criticised the yanks for.......
There is a growing move towards the LAA hot-ships which are day VFR at grass roots level and at the other end people tend to do the IR either FAA or JAA.
The cost of fuel and the burden of legislation, lack of access to approaches etc. make it more difficult to maintain the currency so people can't be bothered to do the training in the first place.
With the permit type culture a lot of people are still doing long touring trips but VFR and prepared to live with the delays that bad weather causes. Whatever many of us IR flyers may say an IR or IMC is not required for serious touring, it is required for serious business use where you are on a schedule and as a result there is a gulf appearing between the two camps.
What everyone needs to watch is how the gulf is very cleverly being engineered, a Europe wide licence that requires a minimal medical and is a VFR rating (possibly with Night) that basically pushes private flying towards the LAPL and pigeon holes flyers into the VFR hotships. Removing the need for a CPL from the FI rating only currently applies to LAPL training so more people will be pushed down that route, the guys with the CPL will be a shrinking market as the airlines eventually take them. What we are left with is GA neatly boxed.
If you then want to play with the 'big boys' IMC flight international rights etc you have to go for the full licence.
In a few years time it will be interesting to see the look on peoples faces when they turn up somewhere like the states with a LAPL and are told it is sub ICAO and they can't fly.
Europe is in danger of becoming the 'insular' united states of europe that we have always criticised the yanks for.......
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point 1 - is there a similar decline in PPL issues?
Point 2 - how many high income people have emigrated since 2002 - many thousands
Also I don't think many high income people (say, £100k+) have been hanging around GA in recent decades. The high income men driving nice cars have moved on to more interesting activities (more excitement, more interesting females around, or both) back in the 1970s, as far as I can tell.
Removing the need for a CPL from the FI rating only currently applies to LAPL training
Anyway, whatever is happening is specific to the IMCR, and it is a strong effect. I don't think it is the clapped out planes; they were just as clapped out when I started my PPL in 2000. It is a major attitude change somewhere. Are schools not advertising it? That would be a key factor because AFAICS most people that do it do it quite early on in their flying career, before they have got clued up on the real world out there.
There is a drift towards permit types, quite a strong one, but that just means the pilots are flying IMC enroute if necessary.
Once you learnt to fly instruments, and you have a decent GPS, you won't be afraid of IMC. What makes the IMCR (and the IR) hard is a) the lack of situational awareness without a moving map and b) the need to perform complex tricks like NDB holds.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say its a combination of lack of suitablly equipped rental aircraft (and maintained to such a standard that you would put your trust in the kit) and the, as Bose says, there is a reluctance for schools to sign you out.
I would hazard a guess that most people renewing IMC/IR quals are either going for the airlines or are owners and therefore more likely to use it. Maybe any FIs on here can give some info on that one for their own experience.
J.
I would hazard a guess that most people renewing IMC/IR quals are either going for the airlines or are owners and therefore more likely to use it. Maybe any FIs on here can give some info on that one for their own experience.
J.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where have you read this, bose x? It's categorically not what the #1 man in charge told me personally earlier this year.
There is a drift towards permit types, quite a strong one, but that just means the pilots are flying IMC enroute if necessary.
I think schools are still pushing the IMCR hard as a rating because it is a revenue stream. As I said before I think GA is seeing a step change towards the lighter end which is VFR only for recreational purposes. Pilots can fly the old classics and the permit types on nothing more than a PPL with a two year revalidation. Simple and cheap.
While you and I will cling onto our IR Ratings for grim death due to the type of flying we do, most people are not interested in the time and financial commitments that even an IMC entails for the limited legal use they get in these types.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bose x
I am impressed; you have come a long way in the last 18 months…
In the 90’s most of the club fleets were IFR equipped; now this is not the case. Even if the kit is fitted, it is old and often not operational. This may be less true south of Watford, but it is up here.
In recent times the CAA has somewhat rubbished the IMCR. More recently still the EASA uncertainty has struck. A surprising number of PPL’s think the IMCR has already gone, or is about to vanish so no point in doing it. By comparison my French PPL contacts would love to get one.
Serious VFR touring as part of flying for fun does not require an IMCR. Oddly there is an increasing pressure to not fit VFR only aircraft with adequate kit to “survive” in IMC. The VFR rules are very flexible, but you do need some kit and some training if you are going to fly near the VFR minima. To brand all VFR touring pilots as bandits who all fly illegal IFR legs is crap. The accident statistics show this is either not happening, or we are all so good at it that none of us has got it wrong for the last few years.
Back to the IMCR.
15% of the LAA has an IMCR (this is a significant number)
EASA are trying to kill it off.
The club fleet is becoming unsuitable.
The number of new aircraft which are VFR only is rising fast and getting faster.
The number of renewals is falling to a negligible level.
I am a big fan of the IMCR, but Given the above it is highly unlikely to survive, unless EASA reintroduce it as a “European” idea.
Rod1
I am impressed; you have come a long way in the last 18 months…
In the 90’s most of the club fleets were IFR equipped; now this is not the case. Even if the kit is fitted, it is old and often not operational. This may be less true south of Watford, but it is up here.
In recent times the CAA has somewhat rubbished the IMCR. More recently still the EASA uncertainty has struck. A surprising number of PPL’s think the IMCR has already gone, or is about to vanish so no point in doing it. By comparison my French PPL contacts would love to get one.
Serious VFR touring as part of flying for fun does not require an IMCR. Oddly there is an increasing pressure to not fit VFR only aircraft with adequate kit to “survive” in IMC. The VFR rules are very flexible, but you do need some kit and some training if you are going to fly near the VFR minima. To brand all VFR touring pilots as bandits who all fly illegal IFR legs is crap. The accident statistics show this is either not happening, or we are all so good at it that none of us has got it wrong for the last few years.
Back to the IMCR.
15% of the LAA has an IMCR (this is a significant number)
EASA are trying to kill it off.
The club fleet is becoming unsuitable.
The number of new aircraft which are VFR only is rising fast and getting faster.
The number of renewals is falling to a negligible level.
I am a big fan of the IMCR, but Given the above it is highly unlikely to survive, unless EASA reintroduce it as a “European” idea.
Rod1
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am impressed; you have come a long way in the last 18 months…
The problem is that the gulf between the two ends is increasing rapidly and I have an uneasy feeling that we are being manipulated into a VFR box for private flying. I think the permit hot ship flyers gloating about the cheap costs and flexibility of private strips etc. are accelerating us into this box.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying enroute illegally in IMC you mean in an aircraft restricted to DAY VFR ONLY flight?
I see your point about changing to some VLA type if they could fly IFR but I think you would end up having a rather close look at the build quality compared to your Cessna, or my TB20, and walk away. The two don't compare. Most VLA types are built to much lower standards. They should be structurally (G) as strong but the general build standard is much lower. Look at details like control linkages... No wonder you get silly problems like tails falling off.
Serious VFR touring as part of flying for fun does not require an IMCR
To brand all VFR touring pilots as bandits who all fly illegal IFR legs is crap
I have an uneasy feeling that we are being manipulated into a VFR box for private flying.
I can't blame them; this kind of thing needs a higher level authority which can say "we need IFR capability in GA" as a principle - just as EASA has always been saying. GA is its own worst enemy in this respect. I don't know why I bang on about this on behalf of others ... I have my CPL/IR and that should do me for long enough.Back to the IMCR decline, I do live south of Watford but I don't see any difference in the junk that is available for rental today compared to when I started training in 2000.
I walked out of one school (which happened to have an AOC for charter) due to bare wires hanging around under the cowling. When I complained, saying this could cause a short & a fire, the instructor (an fATPL) said "that goes to the landing light; just don't turn on the landing light and you will be fine".
In short, I don't see what physical factor could have caused the 3x decline. I reckon the slagging off of the IMCR (GASCO. GASIL, CAA safety seminars a few years back, various instructors, often on pilot forums) is a prime candidate.
Last edited by IO540; 10th Apr 2008 at 11:12.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of it can be put at the door of the CAA change in approach that occurred several years ago after a pilot with a 'current' but unused for 18 months IMCR launched himself from the South Coast in crap weather heading for Scotland and flew into a mountain. As a result of this the CAA started to recommend the rating as a get you home rather than sustained instrument flight rating.
As far as needing an IR for serious touring is concerned I have to disagree. I have a JAA IR and a huge pile more hours than IO does and I tour extensively. We normally go as a group and the other aircraft are VFR only and we never have a problem. We are going to Sweden next week and Morocco in July. I will fly IFR as it is easier but not because it is 'required' for serious touring. The whole point of touring is the journey.
When flying for business it is a different matter and that is when having an IR comes into it's own.
As far as needing an IR for serious touring is concerned I have to disagree. I have a JAA IR and a huge pile more hours than IO does and I tour extensively. We normally go as a group and the other aircraft are VFR only and we never have a problem. We are going to Sweden next week and Morocco in July. I will fly IFR as it is easier but not because it is 'required' for serious touring. The whole point of touring is the journey.
When flying for business it is a different matter and that is when having an IR comes into it's own.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Only if you are willing to fly in IMC illegally. It is virtually impossible to do significant touring without some encounter with cloud - unless one is a permanently retired old chap with all the time in the world.”
This is a completely flawed argument. If a significant number of permit aircraft were being flown in IMC with uncertified systems then the accident rate for LAA aircraft would be higher than for similar accidents in C of A aircraft. Instead the accident rate for c of a aircraft is rising slowly (I think) but the accident rate IMC related incidents for LAA aircraft has been ZERO for years (as summarized in the LAA mags).
The start of the decline in the IMCR coincided with the CAA change in position regarding the IMCR being only a get you home qualification. This came about due to an accident not too dissimilar to the recent one in Scotland.
Rod1
This is a completely flawed argument. If a significant number of permit aircraft were being flown in IMC with uncertified systems then the accident rate for LAA aircraft would be higher than for similar accidents in C of A aircraft. Instead the accident rate for c of a aircraft is rising slowly (I think) but the accident rate IMC related incidents for LAA aircraft has been ZERO for years (as summarized in the LAA mags).
The start of the decline in the IMCR coincided with the CAA change in position regarding the IMCR being only a get you home qualification. This came about due to an accident not too dissimilar to the recent one in Scotland.
Rod1