IMC: 'Hung out to dry by our own side'
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't seriously imply that Jim is writing the bold for IAPOA.
No, I was referring to his write up on PPL/IR.
The EIR was very clearly not proposed as a replacement for the IMCr
In which case he should have made that bald statement rather that produce a totally confused write up which hops from IR lite to IMCr to EIR and leaves most people (as has become apparent form these threads) with absolutely no idea what is going on, and even worse, no confidence in FCL008, Mr Thorpe or EASA.
that the IMCr TK requirement is a bit light for world wide operations
Which is particularly worrying because to me it indicates he is completely out of touch with the needs of the "average" pilot.
Which leads me in to a post I wanted to make directed at Bookworm and others.
I have said it before, but it is perhaps worth repeating.
Please don’t take exception, because it may well be me that is out of touch, but I think you and some others may have little understanding of what the vast majority of pilots want.
Let’s start with what they don’t want.
They don’t want to fly half way across Europe. They don’t want to fly high performance twins. They don’t want to fly hard IFR in the extremes of weather. They don’t want to breathe oxygen for hours on end. Most of the time they don’t want to climb into the higher airways operating on the edge of the performance of most light singles. What they don’t want most of all is weeks at Oxford which they can ill afford.
I could tell you why they don’t want it, but we will leave that for another day.
So what do they want?
They want to undertake short sectors – a couple of hours perhaps to see their mates, meeting up for a coffee, that sort of thing. They want to go from Lydd to somewhere in the Midlands in the knowledge that when they go they can get above a pesky 1,000 foot overcast and cruise safely in better weather at 3,000 feet. They want to feel that when they come back if the base is 1,000 foot at Lyd they can potter down the G/S rather than scud run into their home field.
I think pilots in France and Germany and Holland largely want the same.
The EIR will not result in hoards of pilots routing airways to the south of France at FL100. Most are far happier going sleazy jet, many cant afford it in light singles and if they can they don’t have access to an aircraft they can take away for a week. Many have family and the family don’t want a weeks flying holiday wondering if they can get back to Blighty even with an EIR.
In short the EIR is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
Some do want a more accessible IR and if it is sufficiently accessible it may even be a solution to the debate we are having.
Please don’t loose site of what I believe most want and, indeed need, just because you want something else.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: london
Age: 74
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Completely agree. I work at a large Club in West London where a good number of new PPLs go on to the IMCr or AOPA Radio Navigation Certificate. THis gives new pilots confidence as well as an increased level of skill. We have a weekly friday Fly Out regularly launching 6-8 aircraft. Most of these pilots are regularly using their IMC ratings often carrying out Instrument appraoches at their destination.On longer continental flyouts the skills afforded by this rating prove invaluable.Most PPLs dont need an IR but they do need the IMCr . Dont throw the baby out with the bath water!
All together posting this on PPL/IR was very badly conceived and I would have thought some of the more responsible members of that organisation (Bookworm as one example comes to mind) would have cautioned him not to go to press.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji
I cannot disagree with a lot of your comments but I can with some.
The IMCR is I do not believe used in anger by the majority of IMCR holders.
Many got the IMCR as a safeguard for VFR flying and that is where the safety attributes of the IMCR lie.
Some do use it in anger as an OCAS mini IR but with pilots I know they tend to be ones who have added to their skills practically over time and who tend to be much more experienced.
Apart from maybe once a year on a holiday or adventure most who dont use their PPL for Business probably do pay for their hour fix every couple of weeks with a short trip in the UK.
I say this with sadness but I predicted things going this way a year ago.
The IMCR as a European rating is a non starter. Forget it as it wont happen.
You may get some allowance where the IMCR can be kept with the UK on some sort of special needs basis.
The IMCR is talked of as if it is something static to be saved. The IMCR is purely a minimal set of instrument flying requirements which theoretically could have been an hour instrument training called the IMCR to a full IR called the IMCR with anything in between called the IMCR!!! IE IMCR is nothing more than a name.
There is a bigger opportunity here of a more easely attainable IR not a lesser quality IR any more than the FAA IR can statistically be shown to be a lesser quality IR than the European Variety.
Use the loss of the IMCR as levarage for some Grandfather rights to more easely getting a PPL IR and we have a possibility? Call that an IMCR and you would be happy???
Pace
I cannot disagree with a lot of your comments but I can with some.
The IMCR is I do not believe used in anger by the majority of IMCR holders.
Many got the IMCR as a safeguard for VFR flying and that is where the safety attributes of the IMCR lie.
Some do use it in anger as an OCAS mini IR but with pilots I know they tend to be ones who have added to their skills practically over time and who tend to be much more experienced.
Apart from maybe once a year on a holiday or adventure most who dont use their PPL for Business probably do pay for their hour fix every couple of weeks with a short trip in the UK.
I say this with sadness but I predicted things going this way a year ago.
The IMCR as a European rating is a non starter. Forget it as it wont happen.
You may get some allowance where the IMCR can be kept with the UK on some sort of special needs basis.
The IMCR is talked of as if it is something static to be saved. The IMCR is purely a minimal set of instrument flying requirements which theoretically could have been an hour instrument training called the IMCR to a full IR called the IMCR with anything in between called the IMCR!!! IE IMCR is nothing more than a name.
There is a bigger opportunity here of a more easely attainable IR not a lesser quality IR any more than the FAA IR can statistically be shown to be a lesser quality IR than the European Variety.
Use the loss of the IMCR as levarage for some Grandfather rights to more easely getting a PPL IR and we have a possibility? Call that an IMCR and you would be happy???
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IMCR is I do not believe used in anger by the majority of IMCR holders.
When I fly from here to say Spain, I use about 1% of the IR theory, 1% of the instrument skills, etc. 99% of IFR flight is in sunshine, on autopilot... Half an hour before you get there, you dig out the STARs etc... any monkey could do that.
With a well equipped plane, the need for currency is much lower than with a poorly equipped one.
I still don't believe the IMCR will be killed off in 2012 - the safety implications would be pretty serious.
The IMCR is purely a minimal set of instrument flying requirements which theoretically could have been an hour instrument training called the IMCR to a full IR called the IMCR with anything in between called the IMCR!!! IE IMCR is nothing more than a name.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I fly from here to say Spain, I use about 1% of the IR theory, 1% of the instrument skills, etc. 99% of IFR flight is in sunshine, on autopilot... Half an hour before you get there, you dig out the STARs etc... any monkey could do that.
10540
You must be very selective on your weather because thats nothing like my IFR flying.
The IMCR IS Minimal flying hours and flying to large tolerances my point there is that the IMCR is just a name. Dont loose that fact. You could stiffen the requirements for the IMCR overnight and still call it the IMCR or you could drop the requiremets for the IMCR and still call it the IMCR.
Go for a full IR more easely achievable and call that the IMCR then we can all say the IMCR has been saved like the whale.
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go for a full IR more easely achievable and call that the IMCR then we can all say the IMCR has been saved like the whale.
Well yes, obviously
So, let's see what you would need to achieve...
1) Doable in one's local PPL school
2) Not costing £10,000
3) dammit I am not typing that list all over again
Politically, it isn't going to happen.
The best outcome will be the existing IMCR to remain (under some local-airspace political fudge), and possibly a simpler ICAO IR designed to entice all the FAA IR holders to move over to it.
As regards my selection of flying weather: I don't go if the enroute section cannot be flown in VMC - up to FL200. Plus some other considerations.
Well said Fuji.
I have been watching this thread as it has developed and become more and more amazed at some of the drivel being espoused by many who clearly have agendas of some sort or other.The scenario you outline is certainly my experience of the the sort of use made of the IMCR by PPL's that I come across week in week out and is certainly the way I use it.
Its to be hoped that the opportunity for some common sense to prevail has not been lost and we don't end up in a situation where IMHO safety could be seriously compromised as a result of these half baked proposals which I suspect are not wanted by the vast majority of PPL's but rather possibly by those who might see themselves at more of the "elite" end of the PPL spectrum.
SF
I have been watching this thread as it has developed and become more and more amazed at some of the drivel being espoused by many who clearly have agendas of some sort or other.The scenario you outline is certainly my experience of the the sort of use made of the IMCR by PPL's that I come across week in week out and is certainly the way I use it.
Its to be hoped that the opportunity for some common sense to prevail has not been lost and we don't end up in a situation where IMHO safety could be seriously compromised as a result of these half baked proposals which I suspect are not wanted by the vast majority of PPL's but rather possibly by those who might see themselves at more of the "elite" end of the PPL spectrum.
SF
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what is the problem?
Is it that those with deep pockets who have spent lots of wonga on an IR don't like to share the airspace with oiks with an IMC.
And from the years of evidence we have of IMC-equipped pilots, has there been an incident that can show it is inherently unsafe?
Being a low-end VFR pilot who can't even afford the IMC, I'd quite like to know what is going on. It does seem that there are some vested interests screwing up the debate here.
Is it that those with deep pockets who have spent lots of wonga on an IR don't like to share the airspace with oiks with an IMC.
And from the years of evidence we have of IMC-equipped pilots, has there been an incident that can show it is inherently unsafe?
Being a low-end VFR pilot who can't even afford the IMC, I'd quite like to know what is going on. It does seem that there are some vested interests screwing up the debate here.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone is claiming it is unsafe. It gets so little use in reality (apart from a few diehards flying well equipped aircraft) that it would be hard to prove it is unsafe. I phoned around the main GA IFR airfields this morning to get a view on light GA non airways IFR in the past week (training flights removed) and did not make it to 10.....
What I object to is the wild claims that it's loss will have tin raining on our heads. Those type of claims are just red top reporting.
Whats it's loss will mean is that pilots will not have a rating that enhances pilot ability, skill and confidence. However the solution to that is for AOPA to maintain it as a certificate rather than a licence rating. The course could still be taught and pilots will have the approach and instrument experience to get out of trouble. Those who want to go serious IFR touring then have the option of doing the IR and going touring. The UK is getting ever smaller in terms of available IAP's anyway.
What I object to is the wild claims that it's loss will have tin raining on our heads. Those type of claims are just red top reporting.
Whats it's loss will mean is that pilots will not have a rating that enhances pilot ability, skill and confidence. However the solution to that is for AOPA to maintain it as a certificate rather than a licence rating. The course could still be taught and pilots will have the approach and instrument experience to get out of trouble. Those who want to go serious IFR touring then have the option of doing the IR and going touring. The UK is getting ever smaller in terms of available IAP's anyway.
Robin
Not sure it is entirely that but the risk is that potentially it is only those with deep pockets that could afford the new proposals so that you and many people in similar circumstances potentially lose the opportunity to expand your experience and learn skills that will make you a safer pilot-because you can bet your bottom dollar if you can't afford the IMCR the new proposals are likely to be a lot more expensive.Have a look at the other thread on how erir may work to see what a nonsense it could become.
SF
Not sure it is entirely that but the risk is that potentially it is only those with deep pockets that could afford the new proposals so that you and many people in similar circumstances potentially lose the opportunity to expand your experience and learn skills that will make you a safer pilot-because you can bet your bottom dollar if you can't afford the IMCR the new proposals are likely to be a lot more expensive.Have a look at the other thread on how erir may work to see what a nonsense it could become.
SF
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vilnius
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If what has been posted here is to be believed than only 17.4% of current IMC rating holders want to keep the rating enough to petition their local government.
This "Unique UK Weather" diminishes the credibility of those proposing the idea. How is the weather on one side of a land border different from that on the other side?
Quote from AOPA.
No where in the above is there any mention of retaining the UK IMC Rating.
The UK IMC rating was going to be looked at as was cloud flying by gliders and other cases where flight in IMC takes place without an IR.
Having reviewed the situation then there was a decision to be made - Is there a need to develop an additional European Rating to fly in IMC with less training, but also with limited privileges?
Clearly having completed the review they decided that the answer to the question was "Yes"
Now that they have decided "Yes" they have also published how they propose to do it.
That is a proposal. How about coming up with a proposal that will be not only bemore acceptable to the 17.4% of UK pilots (tiny percentage of European pilots) but also acceptable to the regulators.
The UK IMC rating may be 15 hours of a course but the actual IMC / simulated IMC time is very small. Contrary to what someone said earlier it does very little to prepare the pilot for IFR enroute flight and the enroute element is basically VFR enroute planning but above MSA and in IMC. There is no SID / STAR training despite the fact that in the UK, the privileges entitle the pilot to Depart on a SID, fly along an ATS route and compete a STAR with IAP at the destination.
Finally, look at the many arguments on these pages about IMC Rating hoders minima. If the argument that they can use IR minima with a visibility restriction than any other European pilot will translate that into having privileges that they use their IR for - ergo, the UK IMC Rating gives a UK pilot the same privileges that French PPL-IR uses to fly IFR on the lower airways.
This "Unique UK Weather" diminishes the credibility of those proposing the idea. How is the weather on one side of a land border different from that on the other side?
FCL-008’s terms of reference were headed ‘Qualifications for Flying in Instrument Meteorological Conditions’ and included under section 3, Objectives: ‘Review the requirements of the UK IMC rating and other national qualifications for flying in IMC and consider whether there is a need to develop an additional European rating to fly in IMC with less training, but also with limited privileges.’
No where in the above is there any mention of retaining the UK IMC Rating.
The UK IMC rating was going to be looked at as was cloud flying by gliders and other cases where flight in IMC takes place without an IR.
Having reviewed the situation then there was a decision to be made - Is there a need to develop an additional European Rating to fly in IMC with less training, but also with limited privileges?
Clearly having completed the review they decided that the answer to the question was "Yes"
Now that they have decided "Yes" they have also published how they propose to do it.
That is a proposal. How about coming up with a proposal that will be not only bemore acceptable to the 17.4% of UK pilots (tiny percentage of European pilots) but also acceptable to the regulators.
The UK IMC rating may be 15 hours of a course but the actual IMC / simulated IMC time is very small. Contrary to what someone said earlier it does very little to prepare the pilot for IFR enroute flight and the enroute element is basically VFR enroute planning but above MSA and in IMC. There is no SID / STAR training despite the fact that in the UK, the privileges entitle the pilot to Depart on a SID, fly along an ATS route and compete a STAR with IAP at the destination.
Finally, look at the many arguments on these pages about IMC Rating hoders minima. If the argument that they can use IR minima with a visibility restriction than any other European pilot will translate that into having privileges that they use their IR for - ergo, the UK IMC Rating gives a UK pilot the same privileges that French PPL-IR uses to fly IFR on the lower airways.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vilnius
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With no IMC, rating more people will be killed chancing their arm in marginal weather, due to the lack of training.
If it is winter time with the freezing level below the MSA, please explain how IMC flight in a non-deiced aircraft is going to be any less dangerous than flying below cloud.
I believe that in such a case the only safe option would be to remain on the ground.
Brendan.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If what has been posted here is to be believed than only 17.4% of current IMC rating holders want to keep the rating enough to petition their local government.
Look at the responses to any consultation. It generally runs to the conclusion
"Thanks for writing in, but actually, we still think we're right so s*d you"
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Age: 68
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats it's loss will mean is that pilots will not have a rating that enhances pilot ability, skill and confidence. However the solution to that is for AOPA to maintain it as a certificate rather than a licence rating.
I recently re read Alex Henshaw's Flight of the Mew Gull. In it he talks of spending hours training himself for "blind flying", sometimes using the new fangled gyro instruments. It was of course all about skills level and not about wanting to fly in IMC or IFR (which iI guess did not exist then).
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The UK IMC rating may be 15 hours of a course but the actual IMC / simulated IMC time is very small. Contrary to what someone said earlier it does very little to prepare the pilot for IFR enroute flight
Let me try to enlighten you. You turn the yoke so the AI is level, and you push it and pull it (with trimming for the more advanced pilots) to maintain altitude. You do what ATC tell you re headings/levels etc. You might be asked to hold (extremely rare) but I did holds in the IMCR so that's OK. You can fly any IAP too
The enroute element is basically VFR enroute planning but above MSA and in IMC.
In airways flight, the obstacle clearance enroute is done by airway MEAs / ATC MVA etc. So that is easier. IMCR flight is done without this system/ATC support, which is why pilots are taught about MSA.
There is no SID / STAR training despite the fact that in the UK, the privileges entitle the pilot to Depart on a SID, fly along an ATS route and compete a STAR with IAP at the destination.
Firstly, there are hardly any (any??) SIDs in the UK whose join to the enroute waypoint is below Class A, so an IMCR holder could not usefully depart on one of these.
Secondly, if a SID is assigned, it will be handed out in the departure clearance, and if the filed flight plan was filed below Class A then the flight control officer (or whatever they are called here) isn't going to issue a SID. The only way to get a SID issued is if one files a legit Eurocontrol airways (which means generally FL100 plus) flight plan, which for an IMCR holder would be an illegal flight because there is almost no way to file a real IFPS flight plan without hitting Class A. I know of cases where this was done as an honest mistake and it caused havok, and I think measures have been implemented by London Control etc to avoid this - by them washing their hands of such low level flight plans. So no SID will be assigned to start with.
Thirdly, there is no STAR in the UK whose terminating (entry) point can be reached below Class A. Maybe something can be hacked which is flyable wholly in Class D but one would really have to work on it, but one would never be sure what IFPS/LTCC did with the flight plan, so the usual airways implied IFR clearance could not be assumed, so why bother filing such a contrived thing in the first place?
On the IMCR, one flies a mixture of CAS and OCAS, DCT as much as possible, and one joins to airports as directed by ATC.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vilnius
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540,
It is possible in the UK with an IMC rating to legally fly an SID (in total) then along the enroute structure following an ATS route and then fly the full STAR, hold and approach. The departure is a busy UK international airport and the arrival is likewise. The flight is 100% within controlled airspace and is 100% legal.
Perhaps this demonstrates that people don't really know how outsiders see exactly how the IMC can actually be used in the UK and how it can result in a pilot attempting to do something that the rating entitles them to do but they have received absolutely no training in.
I think that is why everyone (outside the UK) looked at the UK-IMC rating and said straight away that the idea of copying it was a non-starter.
Rather than using incorrect information to try and retain a unique ( clearly misunderstood) rating that in other places gives effectively IR privileges to the average PPL. Why not put a bit more effort into getting a new rating that will acheive the aims and gat some from of bridging.
Anything else is doomed to failure I fear.
Brandan
It is possible in the UK with an IMC rating to legally fly an SID (in total) then along the enroute structure following an ATS route and then fly the full STAR, hold and approach. The departure is a busy UK international airport and the arrival is likewise. The flight is 100% within controlled airspace and is 100% legal.
Perhaps this demonstrates that people don't really know how outsiders see exactly how the IMC can actually be used in the UK and how it can result in a pilot attempting to do something that the rating entitles them to do but they have received absolutely no training in.
I think that is why everyone (outside the UK) looked at the UK-IMC rating and said straight away that the idea of copying it was a non-starter.
Rather than using incorrect information to try and retain a unique ( clearly misunderstood) rating that in other places gives effectively IR privileges to the average PPL. Why not put a bit more effort into getting a new rating that will acheive the aims and gat some from of bridging.
Anything else is doomed to failure I fear.
Brandan
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is possible in the UK with an IMC rating to legally fly an SID (in total) then along the enroute structure following an ATS route and then fly the full STAR, hold and approach. The departure is a busy UK international airport and the arrival is likewise. The flight is 100% within controlled airspace and is 100% legal.
If what has been posted here is to be believed than only 17.4% of current IMC rating holders want to keep the rating enough to petition their local government.
The Euro-skepticism and downright hatred in the UK towards anything beyond its own shores is frightening at times
We'd like to recommend the IMCR to other countries, but failing that please can we keep it. What's anti-European about that?
Thinking that being "European" is about forcing everyone to do the same thing is like suggesting that we should drive on the right, that Bavarians should stop wearing Lederhosen, that the Irish should stop drinking Guinness... (enough national stereotypes)