IMC?
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In order to fly an F-reg you have to have something that is acceptable to the French authorities.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wb9999
I think you are still missing the point.
The CAA cant extend the privileges of the IMCr outside the UK because the IMCr is not an ICAO rating in the way a CAA IR is / was. Based on the FAA IR it is possible it could have been filed as such, with the relevant dispensation, but in reality even if they had wanted to, the dispensations required would have been a step so far. Most "national" ICAO IRs dont meet the ICAO requirements and that is why most national authorities have filed dispensations where their IR falls short of the ICAO standard.
That is why the ANO makes clear that the IMCr lifts certain restrictions in UK airspace.
Equally that is not to say the ANO prohibits those restrictions being lifted in a G reg aircraft outside the UK BUT it is for the relevant authority to recognise the rating as having the same or any other effect in their airspace which if they wish to do so renders the pilot entitled to exercise those privileges without contravening the ANO.
I think this is relevant because potentially it gives other EASA signatories the entitlement to render the IMCr (or in fact the IRR as it will become) valid in other EASA airspace. Who knows the IMc may yet be more widely adopted if the EIR is found wanting!
Why do you think LASORS is so clear in this regard? If you have the consent of another authority, and given what LASORS has to say on the matter, do you honestly think the CAA would prosecute? Even if you do, you are not reading the ANO correctly - you think it says the privileges may NOT be excercised outside UK airspace when in fact it says they may be excercised within UK airspace, quite a different matter from they may ONLY be excercised in the UK which the legislation might have said - but doesn't.
As to whether it is the French that are reluctant to recognise national ratings I think this is debatable. They have always had an issue with their Brevet de Base and of course have their own sub ICAO IR. Moreover the IRR seems to rather dodge the concept of national ratings, rather it is an EASA rating with certain restrictions which happen to be territorial (at the moment).
Of course as we all know the whole issue is a complete mess not helped by
the utter lack of understanding of those involved with building a "better" or more comprehensive system.
I think you are still missing the point.
The CAA cant extend the privileges of the IMCr outside the UK because the IMCr is not an ICAO rating in the way a CAA IR is / was. Based on the FAA IR it is possible it could have been filed as such, with the relevant dispensation, but in reality even if they had wanted to, the dispensations required would have been a step so far. Most "national" ICAO IRs dont meet the ICAO requirements and that is why most national authorities have filed dispensations where their IR falls short of the ICAO standard.
That is why the ANO makes clear that the IMCr lifts certain restrictions in UK airspace.
Equally that is not to say the ANO prohibits those restrictions being lifted in a G reg aircraft outside the UK BUT it is for the relevant authority to recognise the rating as having the same or any other effect in their airspace which if they wish to do so renders the pilot entitled to exercise those privileges without contravening the ANO.
I think this is relevant because potentially it gives other EASA signatories the entitlement to render the IMCr (or in fact the IRR as it will become) valid in other EASA airspace. Who knows the IMc may yet be more widely adopted if the EIR is found wanting!
Why do you think LASORS is so clear in this regard? If you have the consent of another authority, and given what LASORS has to say on the matter, do you honestly think the CAA would prosecute? Even if you do, you are not reading the ANO correctly - you think it says the privileges may NOT be excercised outside UK airspace when in fact it says they may be excercised within UK airspace, quite a different matter from they may ONLY be excercised in the UK which the legislation might have said - but doesn't.
As to whether it is the French that are reluctant to recognise national ratings I think this is debatable. They have always had an issue with their Brevet de Base and of course have their own sub ICAO IR. Moreover the IRR seems to rather dodge the concept of national ratings, rather it is an EASA rating with certain restrictions which happen to be territorial (at the moment).
Of course as we all know the whole issue is a complete mess not helped by
the utter lack of understanding of those involved with building a "better" or more comprehensive system.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 4th Jul 2013 at 19:15.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we'll have to agree to disagree then
It would be good if you confirm if the info you have from the DGAC applies to everyone or if a pilot requested individual permission.
It would be good if you confirm if the info you have from the DGAC applies to everyone or if a pilot requested individual permission.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, but would be interested why you think the position can be interpreted in any other way.
Happy then we agree to disagree but the words seem very clear to me. It is my job to deal with legislation and I am therefore intrigued.
The requests were individual.
Happy then we agree to disagree but the words seem very clear to me. It is my job to deal with legislation and I am therefore intrigued.
The requests were individual.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few things that lead me to think the IMCr is not valid outside of the UK, IoM and CI:
Regarding the ANO, I said it allows the IMCr privileges "within the United Kingdom" (that is how it is worded in the ANO). I know it doesn't specifically forbid the IMCr outside of the UK, but it doesn't permit it either.
I suspect that "The IMC Rating may not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless permission to do so has been given by the appropriate authority of that Country" is for the benefit of the IoM and Channel Islands.
If only the CAA could make things clearer there would be no need for these discussions!
- CAP804 (LASORS' replacement) is not a legal document.
- The ANO, which is law and overrides anything CAP804 says, doesn't mention about being able to fly in another in country with the permission of the national authority. You can be prosecuted for a breach of the ANO - not for CAP804.
- The ANO specifies the privileges of a PPL - including minimum flight vis of 3km, non-IMC etc. These apply worldwide (unless there are more restrictive regulations in the country you're flying). If an IMCr privileges are only "within the UK" then the PPL privileges apply elsewhere.
- The CAA's skills test guidance for the IMCr states "It is only valid for flight in UK territorial airspace, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man airspace.". This document has as much legal standing as CAP804.
Regarding the ANO, I said it allows the IMCr privileges "within the United Kingdom" (that is how it is worded in the ANO). I know it doesn't specifically forbid the IMCr outside of the UK, but it doesn't permit it either.
I suspect that "The IMC Rating may not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless permission to do so has been given by the appropriate authority of that Country" is for the benefit of the IoM and Channel Islands.
If only the CAA could make things clearer there would be no need for these discussions!
Last edited by wb9999; 4th Jul 2013 at 20:23.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP804 (LASORS' replacement) is not a legal document.
The ANO, which is law and overrides anything CAP804 says, doesn't mention about being able to fly in another in country with the permission of the national authority.
The ANO specifies the privileges of a PPL - including minimum flight vis of 3km, non-IMC etc. These apply worldwide (unless there are more restrictive regulations in the country you're flying). If an IMCr privileges are only "within the UK" then the PPL privileges apply elsewhere.
The CAA's skills test guidance for the IMCr states "It is only valid for flight in UK territorial airspace, the Channel Islands and Isle of Man airspace.". This document has as much legal standing as CAP804.
I suspect that "The IMC Rating may not be used in the airspace of any other Country unless permission to do so has been given by the appropriate authority of that Country" is for the benefit of the IoM and Channel Islands.
You see I think if you read the legislation carefully the ANO doesnt say the rating can only be used in the UK, it specifies how it amends your privileges in the UK - this is the key point. I don't think any barrister could successfully argue the law says the rating cannot be used outside the UK - it doesn't say that, and if it doesn't say that it cant be illegal unless there is case law to the contrary, which there isn't. However, because it is not ICAO no other ICAO authority is obliged to accept the rating any more or less than they are obliged to accept anything that is sub ICAO.
It is no different than sub cat. A aircraft (permit etc) where the CAA grant privileges in our airspace, but neither grant nor deny privileges else where, because they cant. That doesn't mean you cant exercise those privileges else where, but it does mean you need the consent of the relevant authority.
If you think about it, the only reason any privilege can be used any where else in the world is because it is ICAO, sub ICAO and the privilege is discretionary outside the remit of the granting authority.
If the CAA didn't think this was the correct interpretation then why did they say the rating may be used with the permission of another country and if they intended to refer only to the CIs and IofM then why did they refer to country when in fact I suspect they are well aware it is debatable they are countries.
I hope that is a reasoned argument and response.
I agree it could be argued the position is not crystal clear but I do think it is clear that the ANO does not say the rating cannot be used outside the UK and there is at least enough evidence elsewhere that the regulatory authority does not believe the ANO intended to place any such restriction on the rating.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont understand your point. The PPL is not limited because it was always constructed to be ICAO. The IMCr couldn't be ICAO. An ICAO member state is obliged to accept ICAO privileges, but because an IMCr is not ICAO you cant oblige another ICAO signatory to accept it, but you can leave them to make their own decision.
To summarise:
Worldwide: normal PPL privileges with VFR only
UK: IMCr privileges, within UK only
= VFR only outside of UK.
So I'm puzzled how you can then say that the IMCr is valid outside of the UK based on the ANO. I know what you mean about CAP804 saying otherwise, but the ANO overrides CAP804.
A clever lawyer could probably argue otherwise in the unlikely event of the CAA prosecuting. But the CAA do have the legal right to revoke a licence without going to court. So if they say you can't fly on an IMCr in France, then I for one would not want to risk losing my licence for that.
If DGAC intend on the IMCr being fully accepted in France then they should do what the IoM and CI do - include it in their ANO or publish an exemption as the CI do for the NPPL. By doing neither, it doesn't look like it is official DGAC policy or their intention for it to be. More likely an administrative error by somebody who isn't sure what the IMCr is.
Last edited by wb9999; 4th Jul 2013 at 22:33.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, i think we nearly agree.
The ppl is vmc restricted because under icao the only icao way of lifting that restriction is an icao ir.
The restriction is lifted in the uk with an imcr because we can do what we like in our own airspace.
We cant lift that restriction outside the uk because the imcr isnt icao so even if we tried it would be illegal in say france. We can however leave any other country to lift the restriction in any way they see fit. If we chose we could say it is illegal to fly in imc without an ir outside the uk - simple, but we havent and we dont. So far as we are concerned its legal BUT in germany for example the licence would have no icao ir attached so it would be illegal without german consent.
I think you are getting bogged down in chalk and cheese. We dont say things about licences which grant icao priviliges because icao automatically extends those priviliges to all signatories, but we do say things about ratings not covered by icao and we can either say the privilige cannot be used ouside the uk or say nothing about whether or not it can. If nothing is said then it is not prohibited by us but it is another matter whether anouther country wants to accept the rating because they have no oligation to do so under icao. In other words it is not an automatic right, but discretionary. In the same way if a country had not signed up to icao they could happily say we dont accept your ir. On the other hand if the ano said you may not use the imcr outside the uk then even if another country accepted the rating it would be illegal to excercise the priviliges in a g reg. So to come full circle, the draughtsman chose not to write you may not and parliament accepted the work of the draughtsman.
As you state the ano is the solid law - show me where it says you may not use the imcr outside of the uk?
Taken to its conclusion i see nothing in easa that says france cant adopt the irr, do you?
The ppl is vmc restricted because under icao the only icao way of lifting that restriction is an icao ir.
The restriction is lifted in the uk with an imcr because we can do what we like in our own airspace.
We cant lift that restriction outside the uk because the imcr isnt icao so even if we tried it would be illegal in say france. We can however leave any other country to lift the restriction in any way they see fit. If we chose we could say it is illegal to fly in imc without an ir outside the uk - simple, but we havent and we dont. So far as we are concerned its legal BUT in germany for example the licence would have no icao ir attached so it would be illegal without german consent.
I think you are getting bogged down in chalk and cheese. We dont say things about licences which grant icao priviliges because icao automatically extends those priviliges to all signatories, but we do say things about ratings not covered by icao and we can either say the privilige cannot be used ouside the uk or say nothing about whether or not it can. If nothing is said then it is not prohibited by us but it is another matter whether anouther country wants to accept the rating because they have no oligation to do so under icao. In other words it is not an automatic right, but discretionary. In the same way if a country had not signed up to icao they could happily say we dont accept your ir. On the other hand if the ano said you may not use the imcr outside the uk then even if another country accepted the rating it would be illegal to excercise the priviliges in a g reg. So to come full circle, the draughtsman chose not to write you may not and parliament accepted the work of the draughtsman.
As you state the ano is the solid law - show me where it says you may not use the imcr outside of the uk?
Taken to its conclusion i see nothing in easa that says france cant adopt the irr, do you?
