IMCR (again)
Not stricly on the subject: I do wonder if some of the people pushing the "IR or nothing" agenda already hold IRs and are being slightly elitist. Perhaps it would help to make more informed views on posts if people declared what rating they held.
The vast majority of contributors to these debates who already hold IRs (of whom I am one) have strongly supported a reduction in the training requirement for the IR from 55 hours to 25 hours and a halving of the theoretical knowledge requirements, so that many more pilots can get the safety and operational benefits of IFR flight without having to go through the hell that we went through to get ours. If that is "elitist" then I'm proud to be elitist.
However, since the name of this rating is "Instrument Rating" rather than "IMC rating", it seems that an inverted-elitism means that current IMC rating holders react against the very label "IR" and claim that they "don't want it" and "don't need it", despite never having properly understood the benefits it offers, not just to them but potentially many thousands of other pilots around Europe.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If nobody had tried to block a more achievable IR, we would have had it decades ago, because this debate has been running for many more years than I've been flying, and the IR has got harder at each regulatory overview (except little bits in recent years, with the removal of jet-related questions from the PPL/IRexams).
However, I don't recall meeting a private pilot with an IR who thinks the IR should be hard or harder to get. The issues seem to exist higher up, in the
- National CAAs (i.e. retired commercial pilots, retired military)
- ATC
- unions for the above
The real basic problem in Europe is that the tag "professional pilot" has been nailed to the IR, when it should have been nailed to the ATPL which is how the USA has done it. So there is a massive emotional / professional-status attachment to keeping the IR hard to get. This is gradually easing but IMHO one would be a fool to consider the job done and put any personal plans on hold.
However, I don't recall meeting a private pilot with an IR who thinks the IR should be hard or harder to get. The issues seem to exist higher up, in the
- National CAAs (i.e. retired commercial pilots, retired military)
- ATC
- unions for the above
The real basic problem in Europe is that the tag "professional pilot" has been nailed to the IR, when it should have been nailed to the ATPL which is how the USA has done it. So there is a massive emotional / professional-status attachment to keeping the IR hard to get. This is gradually easing but IMHO one would be a fool to consider the job done and put any personal plans on hold.
Guest
Posts: n/a
IO540 wrote;
References for ATC and ATC union involvement in the IR process please.
However, I don't recall meeting a private pilot with an IR who thinks the IR should be hard or harder to get. The issues seem to exist higher up, in the
- National CAAs (i.e. retired commercial pilots, retired military)
- ATC
- unions for the above
- National CAAs (i.e. retired commercial pilots, retired military)
- ATC
- unions for the above
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My main worry is that we won't end up with an attainable IR. For *most* people, and attainable IR is one that doesn't cost as much as a decent car, and can be done in 4 weeks.
People cite the FAA example and they are right to do so. For example the co-owner of my aeroplane wants an IR, so we've decided to do the following. We'll put the aeroplane on the N reg - at no great cost as it is being done at the same time as a repair. Then a friend of mine who is a Captain flying from Bournemouth, who happens to also hold all FAA ratings will train my buddy in our aeroplane ( in return for some free time in our aeroplane when he wants). As I also hold an FAA IR we can go off places, him flying, me safety pilot so he can build his experience and log the hours. When he is at a suitable level we'll go off to the USA for a week for him to finish.
We don't regard the week in the USA as a hassle, we'll load up with avionics and cheap spare parts and bring them back to the UK
He was originally going to do the IMCr but due to this current chit chat that is no longer an option as far as he's concerned. It is not an option to do the JAA Ir, not because of cost, but because of time and hassle factor, the medical factor and the "approved FTO" limitation. As it is he bought the King DVD set and has already worked through most of it, and I reckon if he took the FAA exam now, he'd pass....
Shame really, that we have to re-register our aeroplane to a foreign registry just so we can fly IFR. We'd be more than happy to leave it on the G reg but when all is said and done, to convert me to the JAA IR and for him to get the JAA IR would pay for a G500 installation.....rather than simply a G430.
People cite the FAA example and they are right to do so. For example the co-owner of my aeroplane wants an IR, so we've decided to do the following. We'll put the aeroplane on the N reg - at no great cost as it is being done at the same time as a repair. Then a friend of mine who is a Captain flying from Bournemouth, who happens to also hold all FAA ratings will train my buddy in our aeroplane ( in return for some free time in our aeroplane when he wants). As I also hold an FAA IR we can go off places, him flying, me safety pilot so he can build his experience and log the hours. When he is at a suitable level we'll go off to the USA for a week for him to finish.
We don't regard the week in the USA as a hassle, we'll load up with avionics and cheap spare parts and bring them back to the UK
He was originally going to do the IMCr but due to this current chit chat that is no longer an option as far as he's concerned. It is not an option to do the JAA Ir, not because of cost, but because of time and hassle factor, the medical factor and the "approved FTO" limitation. As it is he bought the King DVD set and has already worked through most of it, and I reckon if he took the FAA exam now, he'd pass....
Shame really, that we have to re-register our aeroplane to a foreign registry just so we can fly IFR. We'd be more than happy to leave it on the G reg but when all is said and done, to convert me to the JAA IR and for him to get the JAA IR would pay for a G500 installation.....rather than simply a G430.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shame really, that we have to re-register our aeroplane to a foreign registry just so we can fly IFR. We'd be more than happy to leave it on the G reg but when all is said and done, to convert me to the JAA IR and for him to get the JAA IR would pay for a G500 installation.....rather than simply a G430.
Excellent post which highlights the issue quite clearly
At the moment FAA IR Holder can fly airways in Europe faster and easier and for less cost so why can't EASA wake up and see that it is already happening and the only people who are being disadvantaged are pilots who wish to stay on a Euro register and licensing system.
Surely it is a no brainer to create a cut and paste Euro version of FAA IR
Better for Europe and better for European pilots
A group of schoolkids could figure this out in a few minutes so why the big debate in EASA committees ?
Excellent post which highlights the issue quite clearly
At the moment FAA IR Holder can fly airways in Europe faster and easier and for less cost so why can't EASA wake up and see that it is already happening and the only people who are being disadvantaged are pilots who wish to stay on a Euro register and licensing system.
Surely it is a no brainer to create a cut and paste Euro version of FAA IR
Better for Europe and better for European pilots
A group of schoolkids could figure this out in a few minutes so why the big debate in EASA committees ?
