Instrument Flying
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But under the JAR syllabus, five hours of basic intrument flying are now included in the PPL course, which is more than nothing. Without regular practise however, these skills will be lost again within a few months.
I do not know what instructors can or cannot do regarding training so can only imagine the no instrument training can only refer to "official" loggable training rather than unnofficial stuff?
I go with 10540 re Job Protection the industry is riddled with it in Europe and all under the guise of so called safety.
Pace
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I wish to defend JAR, but it was exactly the same in our previous national licensing system. No instructing allowed outside training organisations. With the exception of a few things like multiengine type ratings.
But under the JAR syllabus, five hours of basic intrument flying are now included in the PPL course, which is more than nothing. Without regular practise however, these skills will be lost again within a few months.
But under the JAR syllabus, five hours of basic intrument flying are now included in the PPL course, which is more than nothing. Without regular practise however, these skills will be lost again within a few months.
Why can't someone rock up to a FI and say "Look, I have an AI, a TC and a VOR CDI thing, can you teach me to use them please?....oh and while you are at it could you please teach me to fly an autopilot coupled ILS please"....(that last bit might be a problem in Europe as I doubt many training organisations have a funtioning AP
)....Even if skills DO fade, being experienced to Instruments in IMC with a FI is a good thing. At least then IF it happens then the pilot is prepared and probably won't lose the plot.
Basic attitude instrument flying is not really that difficult. In fact I'd go as far as to say that keeping an aeroplane wings level with funtioning instruments is easy.....surely everyone should be able to be taught this if they wish, whether they fly with a NPPL or whatever...
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not allowed to train anybody in instrument flying outside an official course.
A JAR Instructor without Instrument restrictions can teach Instrument flying to a pilot without being part of any official course. It is only of the training is towards the issue of a rating where certain criteria have to be met. The holder of an NPPL may approach any unrestricted Instructor who is able to teach instrument flying and be taught the entire content of the IMCr or even IR without being attached to any training organisation. There is of course no way to attach the rating to an NPPL but it would certainly enhance the pilots skills and improve their awareness of IFR flying and planning.
Why can't someone rock up to a FI and say "Look, I have an AI, a TC and a VOR CDI thing, can you teach me to use them please?....oh and while you are at it could you please teach me to fly an autopilot coupled ILS please"....(that last bit might be a problem in Europe as I doubt many training organisations have a funtioning AP )....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was teaching someone to fly I would teach them to fly VFR/IFR as if there was no distinction, with seamless transitions.
The whole VFR-only thing makes no practical sense (the weather doesn't exactly co-operate on the product differentiation ) and merely results in pilots who are barred from getting any utility from their plane.
The legality of flight in IMC is something else... obviously one cannot do it where it's going to get one into trouble.
Anyway, this chap can upgrade his NPPL to a PPL and then he's sorted for adding the "right" paperwork to that
As regards JAA training, the PPL has to be done via a registered school (in the UK, anyway). The IMCR I don't know about, but the IMCR is substantially outdated if one wants practical IFR capability; I spent ages banging NDB holds and what was the point? I certainly would not train towards any "official" product without logging it legitimately because, one day, that training may be admissible towards something (but only if properly logged).
The whole VFR-only thing makes no practical sense (the weather doesn't exactly co-operate on the product differentiation
) and merely results in pilots who are barred from getting any utility from their plane.The legality of flight in IMC is something else... obviously one cannot do it where it's going to get one into trouble.
Anyway, this chap can upgrade his NPPL to a PPL and then he's sorted for adding the "right" paperwork to that
As regards JAA training, the PPL has to be done via a registered school (in the UK, anyway). The IMCR I don't know about, but the IMCR is substantially outdated if one wants practical IFR capability; I spent ages banging NDB holds and what was the point? I certainly would not train towards any "official" product without logging it legitimately because, one day, that training may be admissible towards something (but only if properly logged).
I did my civil IR (I had already held an RAF Master Green IR for many, many years) at Kidlington in 1974 with Dai Heather-Hayes.
He had a wonderful poster on the wall behind his desk. It showed two pilots sitting in a cockpit taken from behind with the instrument panel in front of them.
The caption was;
"Instrument flying is an unnatural act - probably punishable by God".
I thought that was a wonderful statement. Does anyone know where I could get a copy of this poster?
He had a wonderful poster on the wall behind his desk. It showed two pilots sitting in a cockpit taken from behind with the instrument panel in front of them.
The caption was;
"Instrument flying is an unnatural act - probably punishable by God".
I thought that was a wonderful statement. Does anyone know where I could get a copy of this poster?
Whiskey Kilo Wanderer wrote:
How very true. But often people are far too keen to rush in to the applied part before their basic IF is satisfactory. I learned IF on Chipmunks and later Jet Provosts; however, the emphasis was on instrument flying rather than (in the Jet Provost) using the Eureka DME system for navigation in IMC. Although we did do a few 'radio navigation' trips, relying on Eureka and UHF/DF!
In the latest edition of one of the more popular flying magazines, there's a caption stating incredulously 'they taught 'blind flying' on those instruments!' Yes, after about 10 hours IF in the back of a Chipmunk, I had to fly 2 SRAs on my IRT - one was a full panel ACR7 approach into RAF Andover and the other was a limited panel (no Artificial Horizon, my Examiner toppled that!) SRA into somewhere else (can't recall). Yet elsewhere in the same magazine there were pictures of some poor little light tourer with more screens than a Dixons' showroom, rather giving the impression that IMC rating flying is all about radio / GPS navigation. It isn't!
The emphasis at IMC level should be on proficient IF and the 'applied' phase only comes after a pilot can fly accurately by sole reference to instruments. When I taught IF, the students were often quite surprised at how inaccurate their basic IF was; this has become worse now that there is no minimum IF time in the JAR-FCL PPL syllabus. Some basic radio navigation (VOR, NDB and VOR/DME fixing) is taught, but for the NPPL at least there is an hour of IF awareness included in the course.
If your business is flying SE/ME spamcans in IMC, then those gucci glass systems are probably what you want and good luck to you. However, I found that many 'traditional' FIs couldn't even teach the use of the Garmin GPS 150 or GNC 250, so a student may discover that finding someone who can provide adequate training using those new Garmin wonder-boxes might prove difficult.
Last point re. the NPPL. NPPL pilots may not fly in IMC - it's a Day VFR only licence and pilots are not subjected to any medical assessment regarding their ability to fly without visual reference. With a NPPL, you must keep well clear of cloud at all times!
As you are probably aware, there are two aspects to instrument flying. The first is controlling the aircraft by sole reference to the instruments. This includes identifying instrument failures and flying on 'partial panel'.
The second or applied part of the training involves the navigational aspect of instrument flying. This includes navigation by VOR, NDB, GPS and ILS etc.
The second or applied part of the training involves the navigational aspect of instrument flying. This includes navigation by VOR, NDB, GPS and ILS etc.
In the latest edition of one of the more popular flying magazines, there's a caption stating incredulously 'they taught 'blind flying' on those instruments!' Yes, after about 10 hours IF in the back of a Chipmunk, I had to fly 2 SRAs on my IRT - one was a full panel ACR7 approach into RAF Andover and the other was a limited panel (no Artificial Horizon, my Examiner toppled that!) SRA into somewhere else (can't recall). Yet elsewhere in the same magazine there were pictures of some poor little light tourer with more screens than a Dixons' showroom, rather giving the impression that IMC rating flying is all about radio / GPS navigation. It isn't!
The emphasis at IMC level should be on proficient IF and the 'applied' phase only comes after a pilot can fly accurately by sole reference to instruments. When I taught IF, the students were often quite surprised at how inaccurate their basic IF was; this has become worse now that there is no minimum IF time in the JAR-FCL PPL syllabus. Some basic radio navigation (VOR, NDB and VOR/DME fixing) is taught, but for the NPPL at least there is an hour of IF awareness included in the course.
If your business is flying SE/ME spamcans in IMC, then those gucci glass systems are probably what you want and good luck to you. However, I found that many 'traditional' FIs couldn't even teach the use of the Garmin GPS 150 or GNC 250, so a student may discover that finding someone who can provide adequate training using those new Garmin wonder-boxes might prove difficult.
Last point re. the NPPL. NPPL pilots may not fly in IMC - it's a Day VFR only licence and pilots are not subjected to any medical assessment regarding their ability to fly without visual reference. With a NPPL, you must keep well clear of cloud at all times!
Last edited by BEagle; 3rd Feb 2010 at 20:30.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
Not that I sleep with a copy of JAR-FCL under my pillow, but I think I know my rules quite well. This is, what I am allowed to do according to JAR-FCL 1.390:
In short words, this article says: "The privileges of the holder of an IRI(A) rating are limited to conduct flight instruction for the issue of an IR(A)."
I understand it in the way, that for every other purpose (like the training we talk about here that cannot conclude with the issue of an IR(A) because of the underlying NPPL license) I am not allowed to give instrument flying instruction.
And Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.205 states very clearly in several places that "This module (referring to practical instrument flying training) shall be conducted at an approved FTO".
So I, with my very limited knowledge of the rules, from these two articles conclude that I am only allowed to teach instrument flying within an FTO.
But maybe you can (and will) explain to me, how these rules may be interpreted differently!
Looking forward to that!, max
bose x:Which is also quite incorrect and as a JAR IR Instructor I am a little shocked that you know so little of the rules.
A JAR Instructor without Instrument restrictions can teach Instrument flying to a pilot without being part of any official course. ...
A JAR Instructor without Instrument restrictions can teach Instrument flying to a pilot without being part of any official course. ...
Code:
JAR–FCL 1.390 Instrument rating instructor rating (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). [(c) the basic phase of training (see Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.520 & 1.525) provided that the IRI(A) has an IR(A) ME, IR(A) instructional privileges; and .....
I understand it in the way, that for every other purpose (like the training we talk about here that cannot conclude with the issue of an IR(A) because of the underlying NPPL license) I am not allowed to give instrument flying instruction.
And Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.205 states very clearly in several places that "This module (referring to practical instrument flying training) shall be conducted at an approved FTO".
So I, with my very limited knowledge of the rules, from these two articles conclude that I am only allowed to teach instrument flying within an FTO.
But maybe you can (and will) explain to me, how these rules may be interpreted differently!
Looking forward to that!, max
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats Next
The piece above refers to the IR which is carried out in a much more controlled invironment and lays out your licence limitations in regards to training a pilot towards an IR.
For instance with the above that you have pasted you cannot teach the IMCR only the IR ? Correct me if I am wrong as I am not an instructor.
But the main point is that exert is relevant to a structured training towards the final goal of an IR and not unofficial training which is leading to nothing other than a better understanding of nav and instrument flying.
At the end of the day the NPPL is still an NPPL with the legal restraints of an NPPL and not an NPPL plus (an instrument qualification)
You could call it an instrument appreciation flight or whatever? its not loggable by the NPPL. He holds an NPPL and as such doesnt need you along to make the flight legal. As long as you dont enter IMC and do all your training under VFR and in VMC if the aircraft itself doesnt comply for IFR flight, what you do in the aircraft is up to you?
Thats how I see it but I maybe way off the mark?
Pace
The piece above refers to the IR which is carried out in a much more controlled invironment and lays out your licence limitations in regards to training a pilot towards an IR.
For instance with the above that you have pasted you cannot teach the IMCR only the IR ? Correct me if I am wrong as I am not an instructor.
But the main point is that exert is relevant to a structured training towards the final goal of an IR and not unofficial training which is leading to nothing other than a better understanding of nav and instrument flying.
At the end of the day the NPPL is still an NPPL with the legal restraints of an NPPL and not an NPPL plus (an instrument qualification)
You could call it an instrument appreciation flight or whatever? its not loggable by the NPPL. He holds an NPPL and as such doesnt need you along to make the flight legal. As long as you dont enter IMC and do all your training under VFR and in VMC if the aircraft itself doesnt comply for IFR flight, what you do in the aircraft is up to you?
Thats how I see it but I maybe way off the mark?
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 3rd Feb 2010 at 22:07.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max, I am not going to get into a fight with you, it us my February resolution.
You really need to get a proper understanding of the rules before you start a pissing contest though.
I will say again, there is nothing preventing a suitably qualified FI teaching Instrument flight outside of an approved course.
You will try and convince me next that I can't teach tailwheel or complex outside of an approved course......
You really need to get a proper understanding of the rules before you start a pissing contest though.
I will say again, there is nothing preventing a suitably qualified FI teaching Instrument flight outside of an approved course.
You will try and convince me next that I can't teach tailwheel or complex outside of an approved course......
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add Pace has it quite right apart from the fact that the student can log the time as PUT regardless of whether the training was towards the grant of a licence or not. If towards the grant of a licence then it must meet the criteria for issue if the license or rating.
But hey what would an Examiner know about the rules....
But hey what would an Examiner know about the rules....
Last edited by S-Works; 4th Feb 2010 at 06:56.
I understand it in the way, that for every other purpose (like the training we talk about here that cannot conclude with the issue of an IR(A) because of the underlying NPPL license) I am not allowed to give instrument flying instruction.
A lot of this has to do with the mindset towards regulations.....
It was explained to me by a German Airbus test pilot thus:
A Brit, a German and a Frenchman all receive a new aircraft type. Each decides they want to use it for a specific purpose.
The Brit checks the manual - if there's nothing stating that he can't do it, then he'll go ahead and do it.
The German checks the manual - if there's nothing saying that he can do it, then he won't do it.
The Frenchman merely says "What manual?".........
So unless there's a specific rating privilege stating "The holder may give IF instruction to any other pilot" or similar, a German simply won't do it.
This isn't some racist nonsense, it's a consequence of different types of legal systems. One needs rules for everything, the other only has rules for prohibition.
It was explained to me by a German Airbus test pilot thus:
A Brit, a German and a Frenchman all receive a new aircraft type. Each decides they want to use it for a specific purpose.
The Brit checks the manual - if there's nothing stating that he can't do it, then he'll go ahead and do it.
The German checks the manual - if there's nothing saying that he can do it, then he won't do it.
The Frenchman merely says "What manual?".........
So unless there's a specific rating privilege stating "The holder may give IF instruction to any other pilot" or similar, a German simply won't do it.
This isn't some racist nonsense, it's a consequence of different types of legal systems. One needs rules for everything, the other only has rules for prohibition.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Frenchman merely says "What manual?".........
So unless there's a specific rating privilege stating "The holder may give IF instruction to any other pilot" or similar, a German simply won't do it
So unless there's a specific rating privilege stating "The holder may give IF instruction to any other pilot" or similar, a German simply won't do it
I thought the French just took the manual and with a pen scribbled out the bits they didnt like and wrote in their own
We British are Queue mad and will form one anywhere just for the sake of it
There is a whole industry of specialists throughout Europe Germany included whos job it is to find loop holes and grey areas in the law so that their clients can make money while working within the law. Aviation is no different
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 4th Feb 2010 at 08:45.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Basingstoke
Age: 48
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm assuming the OP is unable to obtain the JAR PPL, perhaps for medical reasons?
With 180 hours logged and in current flying practice an upgrade to the full PPL should be very straightforward, then just complete the IMC course so you can legally use the privileges it affords.
With 180 hours logged and in current flying practice an upgrade to the full PPL should be very straightforward, then just complete the IMC course so you can legally use the privileges it affords.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm assuming the OP is unable to obtain the JAR PPL, perhaps for medical reasons?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the end of a long, long road
Age: 76
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My God, what have I started! I only asked for suggestions for books/DVDs which could help me whilst I did some instrument training with an instructor. By the way, he is a former RAF instructor, current 747 pilot and also teaches PPL, IMC, aerobatic and formation flying.
Having now learnt a good deal more about the subject and read the more apposite comments it would seem that my basic idea to gain experience of instrument flying was a good one.
However, it is all very well to say that I should never put myself in the position of flying in cloud. Many more experienced pilots than myself have been caught out unawares. Having read the letters in AOPA magazine, a lot of pilots expressed the view that their ability to fly on instruments saved their lives and this is where I am coming from.
Regarding the update of an NPPL to a PPL this is not possible in my case due to medical reasons. I believe it it this reason, rather than cost, that most people opt for the NPPL.
Having now learnt a good deal more about the subject and read the more apposite comments it would seem that my basic idea to gain experience of instrument flying was a good one.
However, it is all very well to say that I should never put myself in the position of flying in cloud. Many more experienced pilots than myself have been caught out unawares. Having read the letters in AOPA magazine, a lot of pilots expressed the view that their ability to fly on instruments saved their lives and this is where I am coming from.
Regarding the update of an NPPL to a PPL this is not possible in my case due to medical reasons. I believe it it this reason, rather than cost, that most people opt for the NPPL.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miroku
Dont worry about it we fight about anything in these forums more about one upmanship
Regardless your approach seems very well thought out so all the best with your flying. MSFS is a useful tool to keep your instrument scan and understanding up to scratch.
Have fun
Pace
Dont worry about it we fight about anything in these forums more about one upmanship
Regardless your approach seems very well thought out so all the best with your flying. MSFS is a useful tool to keep your instrument scan and understanding up to scratch.
Have fun
Pace
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the update of an NPPL to a PPL this is not possible in my case due to medical reasons. I believe it it this reason, rather than cost, that most people opt for the NPPL.
You can find a list of approved medications / conditions on the web, and you'd be surprised what illness you may have but can still get a class 2 medical certificate.
Interestingly Viagra is an approved medication, the only stipulation is that it is not taken within 6 hours of flying.....
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly Viagra is an approved medication, the only stipulation is that it is not taken within 6 hours of flying.....
The reason for that is you may have a problem getting into the aircraft if you take Viagra before
well some of us might! not that I have ever needed to take it Pace