The future of EASA Instrument Qualifications

[Timothy]

There is as full an explanation of the new EASA Instrument Qualifications as we can come up with on the PPLIR Website.

Click here for the home page, then follow the link to THE FUTURE OF EASA INSTRUMENT QUALIFICATIONS

[Pace]

Timothy

Basically EASA were working on the PPL stuff supposed to be complete by October this year and would then move onto commercial licences.

the most exciting part is conversion of 3rd country IRs to EASA. As most PPL IRs are based around N reg it would appear sensible to put something in place which is attractive making the need to fly N reg in Europe less attractive.
This appears to be the case with the conversion process on the table.
We have to see Whether this runs the course or whether negative influences in Europe put a spanner in the works and damage it.

As for moving onto 3rd country BASA on commercial licences? Thankfully the current regulations have been delayed for a further year.
hopefully something more sensible will come along before the now April 2015 deadline.

This has to happen as GA in Europe is dying through over regulation and high costs a point the training industry lobbying against these changes fail to see!
Ok if they keep lobbying and sadly were successful it would very much be an own Goal on their part so I very much hope these negative forces see the light and Lobby for the benefit of their Industry and not to destroy it as they appear to be doing at present.

Pace

[daxwax]

I may have read this wrong but the implication seems to be that if you have an imc rating you will have an ir(r) which gives you the same privileges as current imc rating. But for no more training you will also be able to get an enroute ir which will allow you to fly in airways across Europe including in the uk.
Have I read this right? If so a current imc holder has pretty much all the priveges of an ir holder in the uk with the only restriction being the ability to fly approaches in mainland Europe.
Correct?
Will there be a training requirement for imc holders to get an enroute ir?

[AN2 Driver]

Pace,

the most exciting part is conversion of 3rd country IRs to EASA. As most PPL IRs are based around N reg it would appear sensible to put something in place which is attractive making the need to fly N reg in Europe less attractive.

The conversion is only part of it, arguably an important one, but the far more significant part is the proposed new IR rating for PPL's which is supposed to get a much reduced and changed theoretical part, similar to the French national IR, which in turn was inspired by the FAA IR. So the idea behind it is to get people to do their training in Europe in the first place rather than going abroad and then converting.

We have to see Whether this runs the course or whether negative influences in Europe put a spanner in the works and damage it.

I am very pessimistic on that issue after seeing that there are even FTO's here (who would profit massively from a realistic IR) who are against it as they feel they can make more money with the 7 subject current test Equally, there is a VERY strong lobby against having more "insects" flying IFR in Europe from ATC, who wish GA to go away and not possibly to "intrude" into "their" airspace!!

This has to happen as GA in Europe is dying through over regulation and high costs a point the training industry lobbying against these changes fail to see!

They have two vital issues in their argumentation, both of which will eventually kill them. A) The training industry is NOT interested in PPL and PPL/IR students but focus almost 100% on future Multi Crew "Pay to Fly" airline pilots. B) Those who still have a few PPL/IR candidates going, want to milk the few they have, not seeing that they would get a lot more if regulations were changed to encourage much more people to go for the IR.

GA dying is just what a lot of regulators and also some ATC exponents hope for. For them, GA is just a disturbing influence. Not to speak of lots of politicians who have made GA their pet hate as they feel fighting it will bring them votes while offending a negligable quantity of voters.

I never wished so much that I am wrong, but fear that developments will prove me right... Personally, for me the decision on the IR will be the stop or go decision whether to continue flying or to hang it all up. Flying without an IR in Europe is nonsense and a waste of time if you want to do any travelling.

[Pace]

Daxwax

That would appear to be the case! In the UK you would have the approach and landing ability of the IMCR topped with the enroute airway privalages of the IR R enroute so basically an IR with higher minima

Pace

[tmmorris]

One thing I think wasn't clear in the PPLIR paper was: is there a requirement for an IR(R) holder to get the EIR before applying for the IR?

If not, an IMCR holder with plenty of hours IFR (e.g. me!) would only require to complete the 10 hours at an ATO followed by IRT, and the writtens, to be issued with a full IR.

The paper appears to assume you'd want to complete an EIR on the way but I can't see why I would...

Also, what are the renewal requirements of the EIR? I don't go abroad, so if IR(R)+EIR offers everything I want and a biennial renewal, I'd be inclined to stick with it rather than go through the IR upgrade process.

Tim

[bookworm]

I may have read this wrong but the implication seems to be that if you have an imc rating you will have an ir(r) which gives you the same privileges as current imc rating. But for no more training you will also be able to get an enroute ir which will allow you to fly in airways across Europe including in the uk.

No, you have read that wrong. There are no credits towards the EIR for the IMC rating -- you have to do the full 15 hours. There are credits towards the CBM route to the IR, to the extent that an IMC-rated pilot may require as little as 10 hours.

I've seen this complicated EIR+IMC thing mentioned a lot in the discussions on FCL.008 over the years. Keep it simple: if you want to fly approaches and the IMC rating alone doesn't give you what you need, do the IR.

[bookworm]

Also, what are the renewal requirements of the EIR?

It's a prof check every year, like the IR, just without the approaches.

[BEagle]

It's a prof check every year, like the IR, just without the approaches.

Really? What happened to:

(g) Validity, revalidation, and renewal.

(1) An EIR shall be valid for 1 year.

(2) Applicants for the revalidation of an EIR shall:

(i) pass a proficiency check in an aeroplane within a period of 3 months immediately preceding the expiry date of the rating; or

(ii) within 12 months preceding the expiry date of the rating, complete 6 hours as PIC under IFR and a training flight of at least 1 hour with an instructor holding privileges to provide training for the IR(A) or EIR.

(3) For each alternate subsequent revalidation, the holder of the EIR shall pass a proficiency check in accordance with point (g)(2)(i).

[bookworm]

I am very pessimistic on that issue after seeing that there are even FTO's here (who would profit massively from a realistic IR) who are against it as they feel they can make more money with the 7 subject current test Equally, there is a VERY strong lobby against having more "insects" flying IFR in Europe from ATC, who wish GA to go away and not possibly to "intrude" into "their" airspace!!

The chair of FCL.008 was nominated by IAAPS.

I've seen a fair amount written here about both of these "lobbies". I've never seen any evidence that they exist. They didn't comment on the NPA, didn't react to the CRD, and apparently didn't manage to get a single member state to vote against the proposals. When are they going to come crawling out of the woodwork, and what exactly are they going to do to get their way?

[BEagle]

No, you have read that wrong. There are no credits towards the EIR for the IMC rating -- you have to do the full 15 hours. There are credits towards the CBM route to the IR, to the extent that an IMC-rated pilot may require as little as 10 hours.

If the EIR is accepted by the European Parliament, of course credit for pilots granted IFR authorisation in accordance with draft Article 4 (8) will be sought towards the requirements of FCL.825 (c) (2) (i).

[bookworm]

Really? What happened to:

You're right, for revalidation it's a prof check or training flight (with currency) each year, with every other year having to be a prof check. For renewal it is a prof check, but I doubt Tim intended that.

[bookworm]

of course credit for pilots granted IFR authorisation in accordance with draft Article 4 (8) will be sought towards the requirements of FCL.825 (c) (2) (i).

I'm not having a good reading evening, am I? Yes, 5 of the 15 hours can be prior instrument instruction.

[Pace]

maybe I am not reading this right but we are not talking about the EIR but the restricted IR which will be issued to IMCR Holders.
Unless something has changed ( would not surprise me in the mess of EASA regulating) An IMCR will be validated onto a EASA licence as an IR restricted to enroute airways only?
With the IMCR in the Uk giving departure approach and instrument landing ability and the EIR( R) giving enroute airway privileges then a UK IMCR will get the best of both world in UK airspace being able to fly airways and fly an instrument approach?

Pace

[BEagle]

maybe I am not reading this right but we are not talking about the EIR but the restricted IR which will be issued to IMCR Holders.
Unless something has changed ( would not surprise me in the mess of EASA regulating) An IMCR will be validated onto a EASA licence as an IR restricted to enroute airways only?

An IMCr included in a non-EASA licence will become an IR(R) upon conversion. The IR(R) is identical to the IMCr in all respects; for example, it is only valid in UK airspace. It has nothing at all to do with the 'EIR'.

If accepted, the EIR will be an EASA-only rating which grants en-route IFR privileges in all classes of airspace within the airspace of 'EASA' nations.

[Pace]

I think the posters question was if he has the enroute airway EASA rating which does not allow the flying of SIDS or STARS or instrument approaches but holds the UK IMCR will that not effectively in the UK only give him the same privates as a full IR albeit with IMCR instrument approach minima ?

Pace

[BEagle]

I think the posters question was if he has the enroute airway EASA rating which does not allow the flying of SIDS or STARS or instrument approaches but holds the UK IMCR will that not effectively in the UK only give him the same privates as a full IR albeit with IMCR instrument approach minima ?

But it was you who posted the question?

Neither the IMCr/IR(R) nor the EIR include privileges to fly a SID/STAR in Class A airspace. The IMCr/IR(R) does not include privileges to fly IFR in Class A airspace and the EIR does not include privileges to fly any SID/STAR - even in VMC.

[mad_jock]

Are the IMC recommended minima now hard minima if using the rating?

Sorry I never instructed for the IMC and got mine off the back of my SPA-IR. I know they were only recommended when I initially got it.

[daxwax]

Thanks - I think I've got it now.

IMCr/IR(r) - allows me to fly IFR in class D and above in the UK and fly approaches and takes me 15 hours plus test (no airways flying)

Separately I can gain an EIR which will allow me to fly in class A airways all over Europe and take me another 15 hour (no approaches in mainland Europe)

Then I can do another ten hours to take me to the minimum for a full IR which will allow me to do all of the above plus fly approaches in mainland Europe.
And for the EIR / Full IR I need to do the new IR ground syllabus.

I realise that the above is overly simplistic and based on minimum hours but is that about the size of it?

[Genghis the Engineer]

A clear and useful document - complements to PPL/IR.

However, it's not saying much very new, and doesn't answer the question I've had for at-least a year now.

When, and where, will either the EIR or CBM IR training become available?

G