Scrap the IMCR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scrap the IMCR
This subject comes up time and time again. There is no doubt that the IMCR improves safety for the VFR PPL holder and there is equally no doubt that there are many very profficient PPLs who use the rating to fly in bad weather and do so in a very safe way. Whether they could jump into an IR flight test and pass? some could some may think they could but would fail.
The fact is that the IMCR is a UK only rating which minimumally trains a pilot for flight in IMC and especially in the UK with its damp weather is a vital tool for the VFR pilot.
But we are no longer an island but part of Europe and need to look at Europe historically and politically to understand the future and that future direction.
Europe has always sat uncomfortably with GA. Europe is now made up of ex Eastern block countries as well as countries which have always historically been made up of left wing tendancies. Europe leans towards burocracy, state intervention and control.
I remember not that long ago on a commercial airliner being told not to take pictures out of the window over Italian airspace.I suppose they were scared that I might photograph some secret military instillation.
Apart from the UK and France and to a certain extent Germany GA in Europe was sparse and seen as a rich mans toy. The Europeans were uncomfortable with the idea of Joe Blogs flying his aircraft over Europe literally uncontrolled.
Many European countries were void of any meaningful GA.
In the USA it was different. A large landmass with big distances between cities meant that GA was a vital part of the transport structure and the whole system was much more geared up to the use of GA aircraft. Politically GA was welcomed with open arms.
The Europeans have legislated towards their own idea of aviation and sadly GA is not an important part of their vision.
Infact I would go further and state that GA sits uncomfortably with the Europeans.
Regarding training The Europeans would like all aviation to be confined to people carriers, controlled and their pilots trained to a professional standard.
Like any profession be it a Doctor or Lawyer the Europeans would like the pilot to go through a structured university like schooling and have leaned towards such training for professional pilots.
The PPL doesnt figure much in their minds and hence the reluctance to accomodate the PPL and his needs.
Over tea and biscuits the Europeans will lend a sympathetic ear to the needs of GA but there is no political will to bend to those needs only false promises of what may be in the distant future to keep the moaners silent.
Fighting to retain the IMCR and to broaden its acceptance and use in Europe will in my opinion be a case of shooting oneself in the foot.
That is why I am so opposed to retention of the IMCR because I feel it will not achieve what we are hoping for.
Many pilots who wanted a reasonable IR looked to the FAA, registered their aircraft on an FAA N reg and then happily flew IFR in European airspace much to the annoyance of the Europeans.
There were a number of legal challenges which were unsuccessful in stopping that practice so we MAY be in a position to argue for a limited European GA IR more along the lines of the FAA one.
The IMCR has been proved with no doubt to improve safety for the VFR PPL hence it would give EASA an easy way out to accept the IMCR.
My fear is that we would then loose the possibility of a GA IR and end up with a European IMCR which would be a far more watered down and restrictive rating than we enjoy now in the UK.
Hence my attacks on the IMCR rating which is not an IR and will never be.
Pace
The fact is that the IMCR is a UK only rating which minimumally trains a pilot for flight in IMC and especially in the UK with its damp weather is a vital tool for the VFR pilot.
But we are no longer an island but part of Europe and need to look at Europe historically and politically to understand the future and that future direction.
Europe has always sat uncomfortably with GA. Europe is now made up of ex Eastern block countries as well as countries which have always historically been made up of left wing tendancies. Europe leans towards burocracy, state intervention and control.
I remember not that long ago on a commercial airliner being told not to take pictures out of the window over Italian airspace.I suppose they were scared that I might photograph some secret military instillation.
Apart from the UK and France and to a certain extent Germany GA in Europe was sparse and seen as a rich mans toy. The Europeans were uncomfortable with the idea of Joe Blogs flying his aircraft over Europe literally uncontrolled.
Many European countries were void of any meaningful GA.
In the USA it was different. A large landmass with big distances between cities meant that GA was a vital part of the transport structure and the whole system was much more geared up to the use of GA aircraft. Politically GA was welcomed with open arms.
The Europeans have legislated towards their own idea of aviation and sadly GA is not an important part of their vision.
Infact I would go further and state that GA sits uncomfortably with the Europeans.
Regarding training The Europeans would like all aviation to be confined to people carriers, controlled and their pilots trained to a professional standard.
Like any profession be it a Doctor or Lawyer the Europeans would like the pilot to go through a structured university like schooling and have leaned towards such training for professional pilots.
The PPL doesnt figure much in their minds and hence the reluctance to accomodate the PPL and his needs.
Over tea and biscuits the Europeans will lend a sympathetic ear to the needs of GA but there is no political will to bend to those needs only false promises of what may be in the distant future to keep the moaners silent.
Fighting to retain the IMCR and to broaden its acceptance and use in Europe will in my opinion be a case of shooting oneself in the foot.
That is why I am so opposed to retention of the IMCR because I feel it will not achieve what we are hoping for.
Many pilots who wanted a reasonable IR looked to the FAA, registered their aircraft on an FAA N reg and then happily flew IFR in European airspace much to the annoyance of the Europeans.
There were a number of legal challenges which were unsuccessful in stopping that practice so we MAY be in a position to argue for a limited European GA IR more along the lines of the FAA one.
The IMCR has been proved with no doubt to improve safety for the VFR PPL hence it would give EASA an easy way out to accept the IMCR.
My fear is that we would then loose the possibility of a GA IR and end up with a European IMCR which would be a far more watered down and restrictive rating than we enjoy now in the UK.
Hence my attacks on the IMCR rating which is not an IR and will never be.
Pace
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An 'interesting' point of view which, unless I'm very much mistaken, you have voiced before.
Can you actually name any accidents since the inception of the IMCR that have arisen as a result of incorrect use of the rating?
Can you actually name any accidents since the inception of the IMCR that have arisen as a result of incorrect use of the rating?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One in Ireland a month ago and another that killed my friend a few years ago in a mooney.
But I am not arguing the safety benefits of the IMCR but its future in the larger European picture
Pace
But I am not arguing the safety benefits of the IMCR but its future in the larger European picture
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of South
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you enlighten us as to how these unfrotunate events were as a direct result of the IMCR?
As someone who has done both an IMCR and an IR as you may have done yourself I feel you seem to misunderstand the difference between the two.
No one has ever claimed that the IMCR is a professional licence and the syllabus is completely different to that of an IR. The argument as to whether an IMCR holder could take and pass an IR are null and void simply due to the lack of relevant input during the IMCR , ie airways , SIDS STARS etc .
The IMCR is reknowned as a get you home rating and nothing more . I am unsure of any schools that teach it as a licence to routinely fly IFR . Undoubtedly there are those that will , but to the same and there are still PPLS who will happily fly IFR Im sure every flying club has one .
I would be interested to hear what exactly you think your GAIR will contain ?This sounds to me to be little more than a renamed IMC. Remember if you wish you can still gain a PPL IR .
It seems to me that you are arguing that now we are unfrotnuately part of europe ,tat we bow to their whims and take the path of least resistance with regards to polies and procedures we have had successfully in place for many years .
Why dont we just give up our entire sovereignty and have done with it ?
I for one like many others have happily used an IMC rating as I was trained to do when the unexpected wx has occurred .
Support GA in this country and not back ridicluous ideas just because you feel for some strange reason that people over the water know best .
Anything that makes people safer pilots is a plus and need sot be encouraged not unjustifiably contested
As someone who has done both an IMCR and an IR as you may have done yourself I feel you seem to misunderstand the difference between the two.
No one has ever claimed that the IMCR is a professional licence and the syllabus is completely different to that of an IR. The argument as to whether an IMCR holder could take and pass an IR are null and void simply due to the lack of relevant input during the IMCR , ie airways , SIDS STARS etc .
The IMCR is reknowned as a get you home rating and nothing more . I am unsure of any schools that teach it as a licence to routinely fly IFR . Undoubtedly there are those that will , but to the same and there are still PPLS who will happily fly IFR Im sure every flying club has one .
I would be interested to hear what exactly you think your GAIR will contain ?This sounds to me to be little more than a renamed IMC. Remember if you wish you can still gain a PPL IR .
It seems to me that you are arguing that now we are unfrotnuately part of europe ,tat we bow to their whims and take the path of least resistance with regards to polies and procedures we have had successfully in place for many years .
Why dont we just give up our entire sovereignty and have done with it ?
I for one like many others have happily used an IMC rating as I was trained to do when the unexpected wx has occurred .
Support GA in this country and not back ridicluous ideas just because you feel for some strange reason that people over the water know best .
Anything that makes people safer pilots is a plus and need sot be encouraged not unjustifiably contested
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maxdrypower
Suggest you read the other threads currently here on the IMC rating before making assumptions on what I am saying as you appear to be way off the mark.
Pace
Suggest you read the other threads currently here on the IMC rating before making assumptions on what I am saying as you appear to be way off the mark.
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of South
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would I wish to do that , I am basing my reply on words used by you on this thread , so unless you are saying you didnt mean what you said then my response is valid and not based on any assumption but on your opinion which is there in black and white .
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody wants to see the IMCR as an excuse for EASA failing to come up with a sensible PPL/IR, however UNLESS EASA come up with a sensible IMCR we need to retain IMCR privileges and ideally extend them.
It is true that Europe doesn't really see light aircraft as a mode of transport, but I and many others use them like that and I'm not prepared to be have that right restricted unnecessarily.
As some one who (as yet) only has an IMCR but flies regularly with both G and N reg IR holders I have observed that flying IFR across Europe is a lot easier than VFR whether IMC or not, moreover I can do most of the operational and flying bits as well as they can, as long as I keep in practice. I have considered an FAA IR but since I own a G reg aeroplane I'm going to have to flog my way through the mad ground school requirements and then do the flying.
At least I'll have a good excuse to fit a garmin 430W
It is true that Europe doesn't really see light aircraft as a mode of transport, but I and many others use them like that and I'm not prepared to be have that right restricted unnecessarily.
As some one who (as yet) only has an IMCR but flies regularly with both G and N reg IR holders I have observed that flying IFR across Europe is a lot easier than VFR whether IMC or not, moreover I can do most of the operational and flying bits as well as they can, as long as I keep in practice. I have considered an FAA IR but since I own a G reg aeroplane I'm going to have to flog my way through the mad ground school requirements and then do the flying.
At least I'll have a good excuse to fit a garmin 430W
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you enlighten us as to how these unfrotunate events were as a direct result of the IMCR?
As someone who has done both an IMCR and an IR as you may have done yourself I feel you seem to misunderstand the difference between the two.
As someone who has done both an IMCR and an IR as you may have done yourself I feel you seem to misunderstand the difference between the two.
No one has ever claimed that the IMCR is a professional licence and the syllabus is completely different to that of an IR. The argument as to whether an IMCR holder could take and pass an IR are null and void simply due to the lack of relevant input during the IMCR , ie airways , SIDS STARS etc .
The IMCR is reknowned as a get you home rating and nothing more . I am unsure of any schools that teach it as a licence to routinely fly IFR . Undoubtedly there are those that will , but to the same and there are still PPLS who will happily fly IFR Im sure every flying club has one .
I would be interested to hear what exactly you think your GAIR will contain ?This sounds to me to be little more than a renamed IMC. Remember if you wish you can still gain a PPL IR .
The IMCR is reknowned as a get you home rating and nothing more . I am unsure of any schools that teach it as a licence to routinely fly IFR . Undoubtedly there are those that will , but to the same and there are still PPLS who will happily fly IFR Im sure every flying club has one .
I would be interested to hear what exactly you think your GAIR will contain ?This sounds to me to be little more than a renamed IMC. Remember if you wish you can still gain a PPL IR .
It seems to me that you are arguing that now we are unfrotnuately part of europe ,tat we bow to their whims and take the path of least resistance with regards to polies and procedures we have had successfully in place for many years . Why dont we just give up our entire sovereignty and have done with it ?
I for one like many others have happily used an IMC rating as I was trained to do when the unexpected wx has occurred .
Support GA in this country and not back ridicluous ideas just because you feel for some strange reason that people over the water know best .
Anything that makes people safer pilots is a plus and need sot be encouraged not unjustifiably contested
Anything that makes people safer pilots is a plus and need sot be encouraged not unjustifiably contested
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of South
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately I do not know how to QUOTE on here , but following your last post I suggest you re-read your first post and if you come to the conclusion that you dont sound like an ill informed politician than I shall bow down to your greater knowledge .
If persons are talking gibberish in other forums then you should perhaps post in those forums rather than start new ones then direct people to them . Especially with sensationalist headlines lie SCRAP THE IMCR, or do you work for sky news? Is that what you eman by "Wild Unfounded statements"Based on your post if you are in any way connected with European negotiations then I shall wave goodbye to the IMCR right now .
If persons are talking gibberish in other forums then you should perhaps post in those forums rather than start new ones then direct people to them . Especially with sensationalist headlines lie SCRAP THE IMCR, or do you work for sky news? Is that what you eman by "Wild Unfounded statements"Based on your post if you are in any way connected with European negotiations then I shall wave goodbye to the IMCR right now .
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Age: 68
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would challenge Pace's very generalised assertions concerning European GA, though I agree that there are countries which have a tendency towards bureaucracy. Interestingly, one of the most bureaucratic is France, where GA flourishes. Italy, which is a governmental nightmare, was home to the likes of the Siai Marchetti, Falco and now Alpi Pioneer and Tecnam. Some of the most dynamic innovation in light aviation is in the former eastern block countries.
GA has flourished or withered according to the state of individual government regulation and social, historic and economic factors. Our own CAA does not exactly have an unblemished record, particularly in the area of aircraft certification, but paradoxically the UK has a vibrant Permit sector where the CAA happily delegate administration to the LAA and it is of course home the the IMCR. Let us not forget that the IMCR is almost unique in the world.
Now things are changing. JAA FCL was essentially based upon ICAO standards, as were most national PPLs. The advent of the light sports licence (a name some hate) is not to my mind evidence of a Europe wholy against GA; quite the reverse. Yes, there appears to be substantial opposition to the IMCR in Europe. No doubt some of this is born from the different airspace regulation (no IFR outside of controlled airspace). Ditching the IMCR in the belief that this will secure some sort of IR (light) for PPL is folly. First, there is no evidence that there will be any weight of opinion in favour of such a move. Secondly, EASA wil not I suspect create something which is significantly non ICAO compliant, so the chances of anything taylor made for PPLs seems to me to be remote and the most that is likely will be some modification of the theoretical knowledge requirement. The practical training requirement has already been modified. It is difficult to believe that two levels of IR (PPL and commercial) will find favour at all.
Dump the IMCR and you risk loosing everything.
GA has flourished or withered according to the state of individual government regulation and social, historic and economic factors. Our own CAA does not exactly have an unblemished record, particularly in the area of aircraft certification, but paradoxically the UK has a vibrant Permit sector where the CAA happily delegate administration to the LAA and it is of course home the the IMCR. Let us not forget that the IMCR is almost unique in the world.
Now things are changing. JAA FCL was essentially based upon ICAO standards, as were most national PPLs. The advent of the light sports licence (a name some hate) is not to my mind evidence of a Europe wholy against GA; quite the reverse. Yes, there appears to be substantial opposition to the IMCR in Europe. No doubt some of this is born from the different airspace regulation (no IFR outside of controlled airspace). Ditching the IMCR in the belief that this will secure some sort of IR (light) for PPL is folly. First, there is no evidence that there will be any weight of opinion in favour of such a move. Secondly, EASA wil not I suspect create something which is significantly non ICAO compliant, so the chances of anything taylor made for PPLs seems to me to be remote and the most that is likely will be some modification of the theoretical knowledge requirement. The practical training requirement has already been modified. It is difficult to believe that two levels of IR (PPL and commercial) will find favour at all.
Dump the IMCR and you risk loosing everything.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would advocate allowing a EUR-GA-IR or a EUR-GA-IMCR (whats in a name) to fly:
VFR on top all over Europe (one standard for al the airspace)
low airways (up to FL245?) at VFR levels (+500) (one standard for all the airspace)
flying the procedures (GPS/VOR/NDB/ILS) with the current IMCR restrictions (one standard for all the airspace).
All the above with a speed restriction of 2oo knots (to prevent the mini jet owners to get away with this level)
Anyone wanting lower minima or flying the IFR levels in the airways to obtain the same standard as the other pilots flying there.
I tend to agree with Pace that the current reluctance to discuss the IMCR is not actually helping the case of a european wide achievable non-pro IR. Whilst i understand the fear, I think a strong COMBINED lobby of all GA representations is the way forward, but I have no idea if this is achievable.
VFR on top all over Europe (one standard for al the airspace)
low airways (up to FL245?) at VFR levels (+500) (one standard for all the airspace)
flying the procedures (GPS/VOR/NDB/ILS) with the current IMCR restrictions (one standard for all the airspace).
All the above with a speed restriction of 2oo knots (to prevent the mini jet owners to get away with this level)
Anyone wanting lower minima or flying the IFR levels in the airways to obtain the same standard as the other pilots flying there.
I tend to agree with Pace that the current reluctance to discuss the IMCR is not actually helping the case of a european wide achievable non-pro IR. Whilst i understand the fear, I think a strong COMBINED lobby of all GA representations is the way forward, but I have no idea if this is achievable.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No
answer is get the GA community to work together.
No pilot can argue that the EUR-GA_IMCR is not achievable.
The French would continue to be allowed to fly VFR on top,
the UK can continue the IMCR privileges
the big birds have guaranteed 500ft separation from GA
we can all fly airways with all the benefits of hand over, one transponder code per flight
lighter workload for ATC because all gets normalised
answer is get the GA community to work together.
No pilot can argue that the EUR-GA_IMCR is not achievable.
The French would continue to be allowed to fly VFR on top,
the UK can continue the IMCR privileges
the big birds have guaranteed 500ft separation from GA
we can all fly airways with all the benefits of hand over, one transponder code per flight
lighter workload for ATC because all gets normalised
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, well.
Since we're having the same old circular argument with everyone reposting their views, I'll repost mine too:
There is nothing fundamentally wrong or unattainable with the current JAR IR. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to actually sign up for one and give it a go, then report back.
This is not to say I'm against re-evaluating the current system, but as it is it's perfectly doable.
Since we're having the same old circular argument with everyone reposting their views, I'll repost mine too:
There is nothing fundamentally wrong or unattainable with the current JAR IR. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to actually sign up for one and give it a go, then report back.
This is not to say I'm against re-evaluating the current system, but as it is it's perfectly doable.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The basic problem, chaps, is that there is very little prospect of getting a European IR which is significantly more accessible to the typical appropriately funded aircraft owner client who is a business/professional type in his 40s or 50s, i.e.
- one exam, doable at any school, no fixed timetable
- doable in any IFR certified plane
- doable in your old PPL school
- doable with the IFR hood (no window screens)
- doable on the Class 2 PPL medical (no Class 1 audiogram)
- sensible syllabus without silly stuff like the JAA fancy NDB holding techniques
and one could throw in a few other reasons why in the USA such a large % of private pilots hold the full IR; of the order of 30x higher as a % of total.
The current (recently started) EASA committee process has a chance of chipping away around the edges of some of the above but it has a zero chance of addressing the really major accessibility issues like the # of exams and the ability of any school to teach it.
So, practically and pragmatically speaking, we are stuck with the desire for the continuation of the IMCR or some similar privilege.
Pace's very "Marxist-like" ideology will always resonate productively with the professional pilots, ATC, the national regulators, and all the other assorted self proclaimed guardians of heavenly purity and aviation safety. But most of these people haven't got a clue because if any of them have ever flown privately (most have not) they have not done so for many years.
The IMCR is wholly appropriate for the UK "user pays" way of approaching everything, the UK airspace structure which is mostly Class G in which you have a free for all because nobody has the authority to issue an IFR clearance in G, where there is no meaningful enroute ATC service (and if there was, who would pay for it?), and its huge private pilot community which often needs a way to deal with IMC but most often outside CAS where nobody is going to care about you anyway.
Finally, never forget that the State has no business in dictating individual attitude to risk. To argue the converse is to ban mountain biking, scuba diving, climbing, etc etc. Flying will always have a certain risk and the pilot should be free to decide whether he accepts this risk. Any passengers flying with him must also realise (unless they are stupid) that they must reduce their expectations of safety relative to flying in a 747.
For every IMCR holder who killed himself in IMC, one could dig out a dozen airliners which were ploughed into terrain by two highly experienced and current professional pilots with gold plated ATPLs, flying a piece of hardware with a fantastic mission capability. So, trying to pick on some IMCR holder's accident is a complete waste of time. There are very few anyway - accidents flying proper published instrument approaches are very rare and just as many of them were done by IR holders.
- one exam, doable at any school, no fixed timetable
- doable in any IFR certified plane
- doable in your old PPL school
- doable with the IFR hood (no window screens)
- doable on the Class 2 PPL medical (no Class 1 audiogram)
- sensible syllabus without silly stuff like the JAA fancy NDB holding techniques
and one could throw in a few other reasons why in the USA such a large % of private pilots hold the full IR; of the order of 30x higher as a % of total.
The current (recently started) EASA committee process has a chance of chipping away around the edges of some of the above but it has a zero chance of addressing the really major accessibility issues like the # of exams and the ability of any school to teach it.
So, practically and pragmatically speaking, we are stuck with the desire for the continuation of the IMCR or some similar privilege.
Pace's very "Marxist-like" ideology will always resonate productively with the professional pilots, ATC, the national regulators, and all the other assorted self proclaimed guardians of heavenly purity and aviation safety. But most of these people haven't got a clue because if any of them have ever flown privately (most have not) they have not done so for many years.
The IMCR is wholly appropriate for the UK "user pays" way of approaching everything, the UK airspace structure which is mostly Class G in which you have a free for all because nobody has the authority to issue an IFR clearance in G, where there is no meaningful enroute ATC service (and if there was, who would pay for it?), and its huge private pilot community which often needs a way to deal with IMC but most often outside CAS where nobody is going to care about you anyway.
Finally, never forget that the State has no business in dictating individual attitude to risk. To argue the converse is to ban mountain biking, scuba diving, climbing, etc etc. Flying will always have a certain risk and the pilot should be free to decide whether he accepts this risk. Any passengers flying with him must also realise (unless they are stupid) that they must reduce their expectations of safety relative to flying in a 747.
For every IMCR holder who killed himself in IMC, one could dig out a dozen airliners which were ploughed into terrain by two highly experienced and current professional pilots with gold plated ATPLs, flying a piece of hardware with a fantastic mission capability. So, trying to pick on some IMCR holder's accident is a complete waste of time. There are very few anyway - accidents flying proper published instrument approaches are very rare and just as many of them were done by IR holders.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One in Ireland a month ago and another that killed my friend a few years ago in a mooney.
Quoted from PACE.
I don't believe anyone - even the biggest political distortionist of the truth - could stand up with a straight face and claim that the accident in Ireland was caused by the IMCR. Whilst it is inappropriate to comment on accidents that are still subject to full accident reports, suffice to say that the pilot was flying in weather that was inappropriate for the flight - regardless of rating. Please post the details of the one involving the Mooney as, given you've posted one spurious example, I think you're lying about this one as well, simply to suit your own personal point of view.
Quoted from PACE.
I don't believe anyone - even the biggest political distortionist of the truth - could stand up with a straight face and claim that the accident in Ireland was caused by the IMCR. Whilst it is inappropriate to comment on accidents that are still subject to full accident reports, suffice to say that the pilot was flying in weather that was inappropriate for the flight - regardless of rating. Please post the details of the one involving the Mooney as, given you've posted one spurious example, I think you're lying about this one as well, simply to suit your own personal point of view.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one in Ireland (which went into the peat bog) was definitely not in any way related to the IMCR.
If the pilot had an IMCR (maybe he did; I have no idea) and was actually exercising its privileges, he would have not hit the ground because he would have flown at/above the MSA, and landed on an instrument approach - just as he had been trained to do
I am assuming the IMCR is valid in N Ireland.
What was the Mooney one?
If the pilot had an IMCR (maybe he did; I have no idea) and was actually exercising its privileges, he would have not hit the ground because he would have flown at/above the MSA, and landed on an instrument approach - just as he had been trained to do
I am assuming the IMCR is valid in N Ireland.
What was the Mooney one?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heh Pace are you bored today? What crap!
DO.
Apologies. I don't usually post like this but you do seem to just be stirring. We need a viable alternative before banning anything. The problem is Europe, not the IMC.
Help. Please tow the UK further west.
DO.
Apologies. I don't usually post like this but you do seem to just be stirring. We need a viable alternative before banning anything. The problem is Europe, not the IMC.
Help. Please tow the UK further west.
Last edited by dont overfil; 27th Dec 2008 at 20:47.