US IR for UK IMC qualified pilots
Player of Games
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Flatland
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just passed my UK IMC test today...
I've a touring aircraft (SR-22), that the variability of the
UK weather makes distinctly unreliable as a mode of
transport without the ability to climb and descend
through clouds.
I'm keeping N741CD on the the US register and
am planning to take a US IR course next year as
hopefully that will develop my flying skills significantly.
slim_slag
Yes, IMC is sub-IR, but it is set at a level where it is
genuinely useful and realistically maintainable by non
commercial pilots.
-- Andrew
I've a touring aircraft (SR-22), that the variability of the
UK weather makes distinctly unreliable as a mode of
transport without the ability to climb and descend
through clouds.
I'm keeping N741CD on the the US register and
am planning to take a US IR course next year as
hopefully that will develop my flying skills significantly.
slim_slag
Yes, IMC is sub-IR, but it is set at a level where it is
genuinely useful and realistically maintainable by non
commercial pilots.
-- Andrew
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bored with this now - last post (which should please some of you!!).
Romeo - I really don't give a stuff, go ahead, spend your $6,000. I've already got mine, so don't care. You asked for opinions - and I still say, an FAA I/R in your pocket will be worthless for what you are currently doing. The TRAINING will be invaluable.
I thought I had read somewhere on this thread - that you intended to put an aircraft on the US register...then that would be a different proposition - and even the rating may be of great value (though I still wonder as to why you would want to fly a pleasure trip in weather that requires an I/R. One of the things that I/R training teaches you is when NOT to fly).
If you decide to use the rating as a stepping stone towards the JAA rating (as mentioned by QNH) then don't forget to take into account that you still require the written exams and they are very similar to the commercial ones that you do not want to take.
andrewc - congrats on your rating, if you do decide to go ahead with the I/R (which does make sense for you, if you have access to an N reg aircraft [assuming it is suitably equipped]), I would also recommend Naples Air Center. I've seen them - and their instructors and examiners - in action. Keef and Cusco are right.
Julian/slim slag - I never suggested that the 15 hours minimum flown on an IMC rating was enough....and
slim slag - the profile written by englishal was clearly for a multi engine aircraft. I admit I'm reading between the lines, but I don't get the feeling from Romeos message that he/she is an experienced multi engine pilot. You are right, however, 15 hours would not be anywhere near enough to fly that profile.
Interested to note, however, that ratings now seem to be graded on how many hours it takes to do the course. Up until now, any comments about the difference between JAA and FAA ratings has always been countered with "an ILS is the same in any country" - but now you have changed it to hours flown.....
Are you now saying that the 40 hours FAA course is less than 80% as good as the 55 hour JAA course??
- then I feel you may not be qualified to discuss the merits of the two flight test standards.
A and C - I ask again,
Keef -
...then you are an idiot. The IMC rating is not designed for you to PLAN to fly in weather that requires you to hold one.....and I'm sorry that your original flying school, in the UK, let you down so badly -
....they should have expected the same. Perhaps you looked around to find the school that would give you the rating for the least financial outlay. As you have read, so many times, on these message boards "cheapest is not the best" - and the school obviously let you down.
Romeo - I really don't give a stuff, go ahead, spend your $6,000. I've already got mine, so don't care. You asked for opinions - and I still say, an FAA I/R in your pocket will be worthless for what you are currently doing. The TRAINING will be invaluable.
I thought I had read somewhere on this thread - that you intended to put an aircraft on the US register...then that would be a different proposition - and even the rating may be of great value (though I still wonder as to why you would want to fly a pleasure trip in weather that requires an I/R. One of the things that I/R training teaches you is when NOT to fly).
If you decide to use the rating as a stepping stone towards the JAA rating (as mentioned by QNH) then don't forget to take into account that you still require the written exams and they are very similar to the commercial ones that you do not want to take.
andrewc - congrats on your rating, if you do decide to go ahead with the I/R (which does make sense for you, if you have access to an N reg aircraft [assuming it is suitably equipped]), I would also recommend Naples Air Center. I've seen them - and their instructors and examiners - in action. Keef and Cusco are right.
Julian/slim slag - I never suggested that the 15 hours minimum flown on an IMC rating was enough....and
slim slag - the profile written by englishal was clearly for a multi engine aircraft. I admit I'm reading between the lines, but I don't get the feeling from Romeos message that he/she is an experienced multi engine pilot. You are right, however, 15 hours would not be anywhere near enough to fly that profile.
Interested to note, however, that ratings now seem to be graded on how many hours it takes to do the course. Up until now, any comments about the difference between JAA and FAA ratings has always been countered with "an ILS is the same in any country" - but now you have changed it to hours flown.....
How do you reconcile the fact that the IMC requires 15 hours and the FAA IR 40 hours?
I don't have a CAA IMC rating,
A and C - I ask again,
what "theoretical bull" did you encounter when you did your own CAA IMC test - and secondly, what aircraft type did you use for the test...can I slide in a third question.....what altitude did you go down to on one engine during the approaches, before the Go Around??
I did the IMC rating, and used it in anger and frequently (deliberately).
but they certainly expected far better than the IMC rating examiner and renewal CFIs here.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
andrewc
I am with gonewest in congratulating you on your new rating.
Yes, IMC is sub-IR, but it is set at a level where it is genuinely useful and realistically maintainable by non commercial pilots.
I think it is a pragmatic response from a regulatory regime in a cloudy country that does not want PPLs mixing it up with jets. Don't get impressed because somebody has a CPL, it's no big deal, you can do it too
gonewest
you ask too many questions for somebody who is bored with this subject
I'll let englishal speak for himself, but the flight he described is pretty standard for a FAA single engine IR practical.
Around here, you might get IFR clearance from class D, depart, over to Approach, ILS into class D, missed, cancel IFR, back to Approach, NDB into class D, missed, steep turns, unusual attitudes, whatever the DE want to throw at you, back to Approach, VOR into untowered, missed, holds, back home. It's the workload that will cause you to fail, all that having to work with the guy who himself is busy working the airlines coming into the Class B. All it takes is not identing the ILS and you bust!
All single engine stuff too! If englishal was doing a multi-rating IR he would have mentioned something like the DE failing an engine when just established in the localiser. Reading between the lines of course
Are you now saying that the 40 hours FAA course is less than 80% as good as the 55 hour JAA course??
Who knows, I have seen CAA IR students fly perfect figure of eights around an NDB in the sim, there is no way an FAA IR student could do that. So maybe in JAA land you need the extra hours to perfect procedures you will never do in FAA land I do know that you will not get an FAA IR unless you are pretty damned good. Same for a CAA IR I am sure.
I think I said 15-20 hours is enough to teach the procedures, but not to FAA standards. Maybe CAA IMC standards are such that you can do it in 15 hours. Wouldn't surprise me, it is not an ICAO IR. I do know that I would not get in a plane in IMC with a 15 hour hood guy - well I would if I sat in the front
then I feel you may not be qualified to discuss the merits of the two flight test standards.
OK by me if you want to to think that way.
So can anybody tell me what the definition of a control zone in the UK system is?
Found it!
ANO Definition of control zone
I am with gonewest in congratulating you on your new rating.
Yes, IMC is sub-IR, but it is set at a level where it is genuinely useful and realistically maintainable by non commercial pilots.
I think it is a pragmatic response from a regulatory regime in a cloudy country that does not want PPLs mixing it up with jets. Don't get impressed because somebody has a CPL, it's no big deal, you can do it too
gonewest
you ask too many questions for somebody who is bored with this subject
I'll let englishal speak for himself, but the flight he described is pretty standard for a FAA single engine IR practical.
Around here, you might get IFR clearance from class D, depart, over to Approach, ILS into class D, missed, cancel IFR, back to Approach, NDB into class D, missed, steep turns, unusual attitudes, whatever the DE want to throw at you, back to Approach, VOR into untowered, missed, holds, back home. It's the workload that will cause you to fail, all that having to work with the guy who himself is busy working the airlines coming into the Class B. All it takes is not identing the ILS and you bust!
All single engine stuff too! If englishal was doing a multi-rating IR he would have mentioned something like the DE failing an engine when just established in the localiser. Reading between the lines of course
Are you now saying that the 40 hours FAA course is less than 80% as good as the 55 hour JAA course??
Who knows, I have seen CAA IR students fly perfect figure of eights around an NDB in the sim, there is no way an FAA IR student could do that. So maybe in JAA land you need the extra hours to perfect procedures you will never do in FAA land
I do know that you will not get an FAA IR unless you are pretty damned good. Same for a CAA IR I am sure.I think I said 15-20 hours is enough to teach the procedures, but not to FAA standards. Maybe CAA IMC standards are such that you can do it in 15 hours. Wouldn't surprise me, it is not an ICAO IR. I do know that I would not get in a plane in IMC with a 15 hour hood guy - well I would if I sat in the front
then I feel you may not be qualified to discuss the merits of the two flight test standards.
OK by me if you want to to think that way.
So can anybody tell me what the definition of a control zone in the UK system is?
Found it!
ANO Definition of control zone
'Control zone' means controlled airspace which has been further notified as a control zone and which extends upwards from the surface;
Last edited by slim_slag; 26th Jun 2002 at 07:00.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonewest - I was referring to my experience during the IR course in general terms, the fact that I would not have gone into IMC after 15 hours. I am glad I did the full FAA IR course for just a bit more money than the IMC would have cost here in the UK.
Confused as to why you think it was aimed at you?
Julian.
Confused as to why you think it was aimed at you?
Julian.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not sure if it is a bit of topic but I think some practical appraisal of the IMC is useful. Some of the contributors suggest it is a “get you out of trouble” rating and certainly not to be used in earnest. Now accepting for a moment the training required is some way short of an IR, you should at least be safe to transit a cloud layer. Moreover you should be safe to set up for a hold and a descent in circumstances where you become visual with a comfortable margin above terra firma. How well whilst making your transition through IMC you might cope with a complete vac failure maybe is questionable but it seems to me it is questionable for IR holders as well particularly if the flight is to continue in IMC. (See the recent report about a group of IR holders subject to just this in the sim and note their poor ability to cope). There are many occasions in the UK where the flight can be conducted in far greater comfort on top of an inversion or on top of a static overcast between 1500 and 2500 agl out of all the clag beneath. With an IMC in my view this becomes possible and safe with reliable destination weather information. In short if you chose your day carefully, plan well and are prepared to accept you might be more comfortable ending up at a suitable alternate the IMC rating is of great use. It all seems to me like anything the more experience you gain, the more you fly with others of greater experience with whom you extend the boundaries, the greater your ability to cope with weather. I wonder whether an IMC holder who does just this, and is very current, is as good, or better than some IR holders. Now I am not suggesting some one with an IMC is as well able to cope as his IR counterpart after having completed the course. I am suggesting that maybe if he has sought out sound continuation training to get him up to a similar standard and that with practice and experience he may end up better. For what it is worth I know when I completed my IMC I would have felt happy transiting layers to VMC on top (and we all know about making sure the weather doesn’t close in beneath), I would not have felt happy about an hour or more in solid IMC but probably would have coped so long as nothing failed, and I would have felt very unhappy about having to execute an unexpected diversion that ended up requiring a procedure with which I was not familiar down to minimum. And finally by "better" what I mean is ones ability to cope safely and comfortably with the situation, I am not about getting into a discussion as to whether one pilot is any better, after all we all just want to be safe in the circumstances in which we fly.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 26th Jun 2002 at 10:16.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gone west
It was a long time ago when I did my IMC test and that was very practical as was the ground exam.
My comments are for the benifit of the people who see the FAA as the easy option for an IR , in terms of a flying test the FAA IR is a much harder practical flying test than the very contrived structure CAA IR test.
How ever the ground exams for the CAA IR include fuel flight planing based on the VC 10 and a whole lot of other theoetical stuff of little practical use like plotting.
I would encorage all pilots to improve there flying skills by doing an IR but the european authoritys seem to want to put as meny things in the way of the PPL IR as they can , some on this side of the atlantic see the FAA IR as second class , this it is NOT except in terms of cash spent to get it , use the american system to improve your skills at a cost that you can afford and then fly an american registered aircraft in europe and forget the JAA and all its burocratic bull.
My comments are for the benifit of the people who see the FAA as the easy option for an IR , in terms of a flying test the FAA IR is a much harder practical flying test than the very contrived structure CAA IR test.
How ever the ground exams for the CAA IR include fuel flight planing based on the VC 10 and a whole lot of other theoetical stuff of little practical use like plotting.
I would encorage all pilots to improve there flying skills by doing an IR but the european authoritys seem to want to put as meny things in the way of the PPL IR as they can , some on this side of the atlantic see the FAA IR as second class , this it is NOT except in terms of cash spent to get it , use the american system to improve your skills at a cost that you can afford and then fly an american registered aircraft in europe and forget the JAA and all its burocratic bull.
Last edited by A and C; 26th Jun 2002 at 16:27.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonewest
Thanks for your opinion. You aren't the first to call me an idiot, and assuredly won't be the last.
My IMC instructor (one of the most experienced in the UK) trained me to fly in IMC with the IMC rating, which is what the rating is for.
The fact that some self-appointed experts have decided to call it a "get out of trouble rating" is their problem, not mine. That's not what the CAA says.
Nor did I shop around for the cheapest - I prefer quality. Which is why I chose NAC when I went to the US for the IR.
But the facts remain: the standards and level of the FAA IR are way higher than the UK IMC rating. Sorry if you don't like that. Start by looking at the height-keeping and track-keeping requirements.
Thanks for your opinion. You aren't the first to call me an idiot, and assuredly won't be the last.
My IMC instructor (one of the most experienced in the UK) trained me to fly in IMC with the IMC rating, which is what the rating is for.
The fact that some self-appointed experts have decided to call it a "get out of trouble rating" is their problem, not mine. That's not what the CAA says.
Nor did I shop around for the cheapest - I prefer quality. Which is why I chose NAC when I went to the US for the IR.
But the facts remain: the standards and level of the FAA IR are way higher than the UK IMC rating. Sorry if you don't like that. Start by looking at the height-keeping and track-keeping requirements.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the facts remain: the standards and level of the FAA IR are way higher than the UK IMC rating. Sorry if you don't like that. Start by looking at the height-keeping and track-keeping requirements.
I was trying to work out what the IMC rating lets you do in practice, but that 'control zone' thing confused me. Seems like the definition of a 'control zone' is something that has been defined to be a 'control zone'.
So if I was to get permission to shoot an ILS into Gatwick (class D) with my IMC rating, what would the cloud/visibility/DH/RVR be?
If I was in the States, a PPL with IR could shoot an ILS with DH of 200ft and RVR of 1800ft. It is also possible for a PPL with IR to get a Cat II waiver - 100ft DH and 1200ft RVR. Believe it or not, you can even get to do that in your putz around Warrior! Essentially you just go shoot an approach with an FAA inspector.
Can a CAA PPL I/R shoot Cat II in a warrior??
I was trying to work out what the IMC rating lets you do in practice, but that 'control zone' thing confused me. Seems like the definition of a 'control zone' is something that has been defined to be a 'control zone'.
So if I was to get permission to shoot an ILS into Gatwick (class D) with my IMC rating, what would the cloud/visibility/DH/RVR be?
If I was in the States, a PPL with IR could shoot an ILS with DH of 200ft and RVR of 1800ft. It is also possible for a PPL with IR to get a Cat II waiver - 100ft DH and 1200ft RVR. Believe it or not, you can even get to do that in your putz around Warrior! Essentially you just go shoot an approach with an FAA inspector.
Can a CAA PPL I/R shoot Cat II in a warrior??
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imc app limits
The limits for an aproach for an IMC holder are what ever is states on the approach plate +px error corection (if eny).
The CAA "recomend" not below 500 ft/agl for a precision app and 600 ft/agl for a non-precision app ,this i think is a good idea.
To answer the question above if the PA28 met the equipment requirments for CAT2/3 and the pilots had passed an aproved training course for the aircraft then an IMC rating holder could make a CAT2/3 aproach , however the this is not a practical reality.
The CAA "recomend" not below 500 ft/agl for a precision app and 600 ft/agl for a non-precision app ,this i think is a good idea.
To answer the question above if the PA28 met the equipment requirments for CAT2/3 and the pilots had passed an aproved training course for the aircraft then an IMC rating holder could make a CAT2/3 aproach , however the this is not a practical reality.
Resident Brewer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: .
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just received my GASCO mag. and it has an article in it about keeping an IMC current. They are recommending going out and deliberately flying IMC. The rationale appears to be that a current IMC is valuable, whereas having one but not using it is practically worthless. So where does this leave the "it's for getting out of trouble only" viewpoint? Is the GASCO article fairly representative of the CAA's viewpoint?
I don't want to provoke argument, but would like some informed answers. I'm a low time PPL just embarking on my IMC. With very, very limited IMC time indeed, all I can say is that I find it interesting, fun, challenging, and would ultimately love to do an IR, if only for the experience of it (if only the JAA IR was not such a big outlay!). In just a few hours of the IMC course I have already learned stuff that has genuinely improved my VMC flying.
I don't want to provoke argument, but would like some informed answers. I'm a low time PPL just embarking on my IMC. With very, very limited IMC time indeed, all I can say is that I find it interesting, fun, challenging, and would ultimately love to do an IR, if only for the experience of it (if only the JAA IR was not such a big outlay!). In just a few hours of the IMC course I have already learned stuff that has genuinely improved my VMC flying.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IMC rating is a very useful rating to have. Its important whether a person has an IR or an IMC to use it in my opinion, start off slowly with nice marine layer type IMC, and work you way up to frontal stuff....
To drum home the difference between the FAA IR and the IMC rating, ask youself how you would feel about navigating you way
around here in turbulent IMC, with ATC vectoring you off course every few minutes and then getting you to 'resume own navigation', ammending your clearance, and finally finishing up with an approach down to minimums?
Cheers
EA
To drum home the difference between the FAA IR and the IMC rating, ask youself how you would feel about navigating you way
around here in turbulent IMC, with ATC vectoring you off course every few minutes and then getting you to 'resume own navigation', ammending your clearance, and finally finishing up with an approach down to minimums?
Cheers
EA
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think the arguments above ignore currency, which from my own experience is the main factor in flying decently on instruments.
Take two pilots, one passed his IR eleven months ago, it's valid, he can fly airways and ILS down to 200', but hasn't flown for six months.
The other guy has an IMC rating, and has flown IFR and some NDB and ILS approaches in the last week.
If you were a non-pilot pax, who do you want flying you down in pretty standard UK conditions of clouds at 600' asl?
It's not the rating, it's the guy flying and what he's done lately that counts.
Take two pilots, one passed his IR eleven months ago, it's valid, he can fly airways and ILS down to 200', but hasn't flown for six months.
The other guy has an IMC rating, and has flown IFR and some NDB and ILS approaches in the last week.
If you were a non-pilot pax, who do you want flying you down in pretty standard UK conditions of clouds at 600' asl?
It's not the rating, it's the guy flying and what he's done lately that counts.
Policy Information/Update - JAR IR Training/Credits for ICAO IR Holders appears to be very pertinent to this thread.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bookworm, do you think there is a typo in there?
It used to be ICAO ATP and 500 hours on multi pilot planes to get a exemption from full ATPL course, have they bumped this up?
The holder of an ATPL(A) or CPL(A)/IR issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 who meets the 1500 hours flying experience requirements on multi-pilot aeroplanes (as PIC or co-pilot) of Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.015 may be exempted from the requirements of the IR(A) modular course prior to undertaking the theoretical knowledge examinations and the IR(A) Skill Test.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sale
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this is a bit late for this topic but I have just read the following in a CAA "Safety Sense" document i.e. from the Horses mouth.
"Loss of Control in IMC
All but one of the pilots killed when
they lost control in IMC were flying
in instrument conditions without an
Instrument Rating. This is extremely
unwise to say the least. Possibly they
believed that their IMC rating was
sufficient for prolonged, intentional
flight in instrument conditions.
Unfortunately, the IMC rating is not
sufficient for such conditions. It
should only be regarded as a
minimum skill to ‘get out of trouble'"
"Loss of Control in IMC
All but one of the pilots killed when
they lost control in IMC were flying
in instrument conditions without an
Instrument Rating. This is extremely
unwise to say the least. Possibly they
believed that their IMC rating was
sufficient for prolonged, intentional
flight in instrument conditions.
Unfortunately, the IMC rating is not
sufficient for such conditions. It
should only be regarded as a
minimum skill to ‘get out of trouble'"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read that statistic as well. However, I'm not too sure how significant it is. Quite a few pilots have IMC ratings - not many have IR's. Therefore if the ratio of IMC's to IR's is 30:1 (I've no idea what the real figures are), if there are 31 deaths and 30 of them are IMC rated and 1 is an IR, then statistically the IR is just as safe as the IMC.
As others have stated, one of the big factors is how current you are.
As others have stated, one of the big factors is how current you are.
