Campaign for a proper instrument rating
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I prompt the discussion back a step.
My concern is do we want an obtainable JAA IR for the private pilot?
I have found the comments so far very interesting. It prompts me to ask who would want a PPL IR and why? It occurs to me that within the GA community, and I exclude by design commercial pilots who may fly privately, there are a reasonable number of us with current IMCs and far far fewer of us with IRs. Of the latter, it would be interesting to know how many JAA PPL IR holders there are compared with PPL FAA IR holders who fly in Europe. Of all those I beg to suggest that many with IMC ratings do not use the rating in earnest. That leaves a small group with IMC ratings or IRs who use the rating occasionally or regularly. Those who use the rating are unlikely to be operating into or out of any of our major airports regularly (not least because of the expense, but often because there are more convenient local airports to our destination). However, there are occasions when we would like to have the flexibility and security of operating in the lower airways and operating in Europe in IMC.
I suspect to be realistic that is not going to have an enormous impact on the airways infrastructure. Moreover let us not forget if the JAA or the GA community do nothing, more will migrate to operating on the N reg., thus putting the same number of movements into the system.
It seems to me that the number of private pilots who operate on the N register is proof enough that the JAA PPL IR is unduly restrictive – if that were not true why bother to pursue the FAA route which presents its own problems.
Should we be allowed into this hallowed airspace? It seems to me two themes emerge. There are those who would say that is the preserve of the commercial operators. Well, it is if we let it be. I still believe we contribute more than our share to the Government coffers who ultimately are responsible for operating the airspace – so if we can prove we are safe to be there let it be so.
And are we safe. It seems to me the old elitism enemy now sets to work. The argument seems to be we need a tougher IR than the rest of the world to keep the private pilots out! Who are you kidding? There has been much discussion on this web about the merits of the FAA IR compared its JAA counterpart. I detect there is little if any evidence to suggest a JAA IR holder is any more or less competent that one with an FAA IR.
THERE IS ONE BIG DIFFERENCE HOWEVER. PRIVATE PILOTS IN EUROPE AND IN THE STATES ARE PREPARED TO UNDERTAKE THE FAA IR TRAINING BECAUSE THEY SEE IT RELEVANT, REALISTICALLY MAINTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD AS A COMMUNITY SEEK TO HAVE INTRODUCED A JAA IR FOR THE PRIVATE PILOT THAT WOULD PERSUADE THE GA COMMUNITY TO HOLD A EUROPEAN RATING AND NOT AN FAA RATING.
Finally whilst the idea of various types of instrument ratings has merit the danger is again unduly complicating the issue. Airspace is used by two groups of operators – the private pilot and the commercial airline. We each have different needs. I suggest this should be recognised so have a pan European PPL IR for the private pilot modelled on the FAA IR – in other words a theoretical exam that cover what is necessary and relevant the syllabus for which can be covered by home study, flight training that is accessible for most, and renewal requirements that at least recognise a current pilot is as safe as any.
My concern is do we want an obtainable JAA IR for the private pilot?
I have found the comments so far very interesting. It prompts me to ask who would want a PPL IR and why? It occurs to me that within the GA community, and I exclude by design commercial pilots who may fly privately, there are a reasonable number of us with current IMCs and far far fewer of us with IRs. Of the latter, it would be interesting to know how many JAA PPL IR holders there are compared with PPL FAA IR holders who fly in Europe. Of all those I beg to suggest that many with IMC ratings do not use the rating in earnest. That leaves a small group with IMC ratings or IRs who use the rating occasionally or regularly. Those who use the rating are unlikely to be operating into or out of any of our major airports regularly (not least because of the expense, but often because there are more convenient local airports to our destination). However, there are occasions when we would like to have the flexibility and security of operating in the lower airways and operating in Europe in IMC.
I suspect to be realistic that is not going to have an enormous impact on the airways infrastructure. Moreover let us not forget if the JAA or the GA community do nothing, more will migrate to operating on the N reg., thus putting the same number of movements into the system.
It seems to me that the number of private pilots who operate on the N register is proof enough that the JAA PPL IR is unduly restrictive – if that were not true why bother to pursue the FAA route which presents its own problems.
Should we be allowed into this hallowed airspace? It seems to me two themes emerge. There are those who would say that is the preserve of the commercial operators. Well, it is if we let it be. I still believe we contribute more than our share to the Government coffers who ultimately are responsible for operating the airspace – so if we can prove we are safe to be there let it be so.
And are we safe. It seems to me the old elitism enemy now sets to work. The argument seems to be we need a tougher IR than the rest of the world to keep the private pilots out! Who are you kidding? There has been much discussion on this web about the merits of the FAA IR compared its JAA counterpart. I detect there is little if any evidence to suggest a JAA IR holder is any more or less competent that one with an FAA IR.
THERE IS ONE BIG DIFFERENCE HOWEVER. PRIVATE PILOTS IN EUROPE AND IN THE STATES ARE PREPARED TO UNDERTAKE THE FAA IR TRAINING BECAUSE THEY SEE IT RELEVANT, REALISTICALLY MAINTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD AS A COMMUNITY SEEK TO HAVE INTRODUCED A JAA IR FOR THE PRIVATE PILOT THAT WOULD PERSUADE THE GA COMMUNITY TO HOLD A EUROPEAN RATING AND NOT AN FAA RATING.
Finally whilst the idea of various types of instrument ratings has merit the danger is again unduly complicating the issue. Airspace is used by two groups of operators – the private pilot and the commercial airline. We each have different needs. I suggest this should be recognised so have a pan European PPL IR for the private pilot modelled on the FAA IR – in other words a theoretical exam that cover what is necessary and relevant the syllabus for which can be covered by home study, flight training that is accessible for most, and renewal requirements that at least recognise a current pilot is as safe as any.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree with you Fuji. The problem seems to be that anything beyond PPL level in the UK and Europe seems to be aimed at Commercial wanabee's. Take the ME rating. The currecny requirements are stated in "route sectors". I don't know about other people out there, but I don't fly "route sectors". I fly from A to B because I want to.
The IMC rating is a good rating, BUT it has been limited to disallow a holder into certain airspace. The UK authorities seem terrified at the idea of a PPL holder anywhere near "busy TMA's". An IR now de-restricts this PPL, and hence in order to keep PPL's out the IR has been horribly blown out of proportion. There is no real difference between the JAA and FAA IR's. If there was, then Billy Bob Jr. wouldn't be allowed to fly his United 777 into LHR.
One big difference in obtaining the FAA IR is that allowance is made for previous instrument time. I'm sure that out there there are many very capable IMC holders with loads of hours 'actual'. However in order to qualify for a JAA IR, they are required to undergo a full JAA course [bar a few hours]. The FAA on the other hand would take these hours in to count, and your 'minimum' requirements would be reduced. You need a written authorisation to take the knowledge exams, and then another to state you standard is good enough to take the skills test.
It seems crazy to me that although we are all in the ICAO, I cannot fly a G registered aircraft, IFR to France, or let alone anywhere near Heathrow, yet should I be in an N reg then I would be perfectly legal......
Cheers
EA
The IMC rating is a good rating, BUT it has been limited to disallow a holder into certain airspace. The UK authorities seem terrified at the idea of a PPL holder anywhere near "busy TMA's". An IR now de-restricts this PPL, and hence in order to keep PPL's out the IR has been horribly blown out of proportion. There is no real difference between the JAA and FAA IR's. If there was, then Billy Bob Jr. wouldn't be allowed to fly his United 777 into LHR.
One big difference in obtaining the FAA IR is that allowance is made for previous instrument time. I'm sure that out there there are many very capable IMC holders with loads of hours 'actual'. However in order to qualify for a JAA IR, they are required to undergo a full JAA course [bar a few hours]. The FAA on the other hand would take these hours in to count, and your 'minimum' requirements would be reduced. You need a written authorisation to take the knowledge exams, and then another to state you standard is good enough to take the skills test.
It seems crazy to me that although we are all in the ICAO, I cannot fly a G registered aircraft, IFR to France, or let alone anywhere near Heathrow, yet should I be in an N reg then I would be perfectly legal......
Cheers
EA
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So get that FAA IR and enjoy the freedom it gives.
Only problem at the moment is that there are not yet many N registered mounts available either for hire or as syndicated aircraft.
However the longer this JAR lark carries on the more people will see the light and go that route.
Currently not many replies to my earlier posting in which I ask if anyone knows any N machines for hire.
Never mind, I will keep putting those pennies away.
FD
Only problem at the moment is that there are not yet many N registered mounts available either for hire or as syndicated aircraft.
However the longer this JAR lark carries on the more people will see the light and go that route.
Currently not many replies to my earlier posting in which I ask if anyone knows any N machines for hire.
Never mind, I will keep putting those pennies away.
FD
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Dutch
You hit the crux of the post on the head.
Why should we on this side of the atlantic have to duck and dive by getting American qualifications.
Why can not GB,, if not Europe as a whole, readjust the regs so that they who want to do not have to enrich the coffers of the US to do what they can do if they want to. (enrich the coffers of the US)
Sorry about the sentence construction, regard it as a challenge.
You hit the crux of the post on the head.
Why should we on this side of the atlantic have to duck and dive by getting American qualifications.
Why can not GB,, if not Europe as a whole, readjust the regs so that they who want to do not have to enrich the coffers of the US to do what they can do if they want to. (enrich the coffers of the US)
Sorry about the sentence construction, regard it as a challenge.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fuji
My concern is do we want an obtainable JAA IR for the private pilot?
That is the real question. From where I sit, I see the IMC as a pragmatic real world solution for PPLs who live in a a cloudy country with barely the ATC infrastructure to support airline operations. Given the low esteem that GA is held by commercial operations in the UK, I actually think the CAA should be applauded for having an IMC. I guess the airlines etc go along with it because you are kept outside of 'their' airspace.
It prompts me to ask who would want a PPL IR and why?
OK, let me stick my head out. Why do PPLs get an IR in the US? Several reasons come to mind, I am just throwing this out and there may be others.
1) Rating collection. People get bored drilling holes in the sky, and a new rating provides another reason to fly. Also means you don't need a BFR FAA encourage it as it improves your piloting skills (though you have to re-teach people to stop looking at their instruments while flying VFR). You get the rating but never use it in anger.
2) Actually need it to get from A->B. This is probably the same reason as the IMC is needed in the UK. Plenty of places in the US have cloud most of the year. Even places like CA have marine layers which might only be a few hundred feet thick, but you need an IR to punch through them.
3) Need it for your commercial certificate and you need your commercial certificate because you want to teach. You might also want your commercial ticket because you are collecting ratings.
4) Need it for insurance purposes to fly a twin or something.
Of course in the US, it is a very obtainable ticket. There would be no point in doing an IMC for the same reasons there is no point in most people getting a recreational licence. You may as well get the 'real thing'.
FWIW. For me it was (3) because I wanted to get my CFI so needed a CPL. I had no need to get an IR because I either lived in a part of the world where clouds mean level 5 thunderstorms, or in a part of the world where the MEA means supplemental oxygen. An IR is definitely a 'use it or lose it' type ticket, no point in spending money on it when you could spend it on something useful like a taildragger. If I lived elsewhere I would get it for (2).
If I wanted to fly in the UK I would probably be happy with an IMC. I would object strongly to the fact that getting an IR was made unreasonably unattainable by what appears to be bloody mindedness by the powers that be to keep the PPL out of airspace which is owned by all. I think you should have the option of getting an FAA type IR in Europe if you want one.
My concern is do we want an obtainable JAA IR for the private pilot?
That is the real question. From where I sit, I see the IMC as a pragmatic real world solution for PPLs who live in a a cloudy country with barely the ATC infrastructure to support airline operations. Given the low esteem that GA is held by commercial operations in the UK, I actually think the CAA should be applauded for having an IMC. I guess the airlines etc go along with it because you are kept outside of 'their' airspace.
It prompts me to ask who would want a PPL IR and why?
OK, let me stick my head out. Why do PPLs get an IR in the US? Several reasons come to mind, I am just throwing this out and there may be others.
1) Rating collection. People get bored drilling holes in the sky, and a new rating provides another reason to fly. Also means you don't need a BFR
FAA encourage it as it improves your piloting skills (though you have to re-teach people to stop looking at their instruments while flying VFR). You get the rating but never use it in anger.2) Actually need it to get from A->B. This is probably the same reason as the IMC is needed in the UK. Plenty of places in the US have cloud most of the year. Even places like CA have marine layers which might only be a few hundred feet thick, but you need an IR to punch through them.
3) Need it for your commercial certificate and you need your commercial certificate because you want to teach. You might also want your commercial ticket because you are collecting ratings.
4) Need it for insurance purposes to fly a twin or something.
Of course in the US, it is a very obtainable ticket. There would be no point in doing an IMC for the same reasons there is no point in most people getting a recreational licence. You may as well get the 'real thing'.
FWIW. For me it was (3) because I wanted to get my CFI so needed a CPL. I had no need to get an IR because I either lived in a part of the world where clouds mean level 5 thunderstorms, or in a part of the world where the MEA means supplemental oxygen
. An IR is definitely a 'use it or lose it' type ticket, no point in spending money on it when you could spend it on something useful like a taildragger. If I lived elsewhere I would get it for (2). If I wanted to fly in the UK I would probably be happy with an IMC. I would object strongly to the fact that getting an IR was made unreasonably unattainable by what appears to be bloody mindedness by the powers that be to keep the PPL out of airspace which is owned by all. I think you should have the option of getting an FAA type IR in Europe if you want one.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It prompts me to ask who would want a PPL IR and why?
Without an IR, a PPL is just for fun. With an IR, you can use your PPL for private and business travel. (Or can you....? If I'm honest, I'd have to say I'd rather sit in the back of a Boeing than fly myself home after most business trips.)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi slim_slag,
Your reason 3 doesn't apply here. You can do a CPL and become a paid instructor without an IR.
I also don't see this "bloody-mindedness" you refer to.
I thought the "problem" was one of cost which, except for the initial IRT, is nothing to do with the CAA.
Bluskis,
You do not have to go stateside to get an IR, and nor do you have to "enrich the US coffers" - this is a myth.
Your reason 3 doesn't apply here. You can do a CPL and become a paid instructor without an IR.
I also don't see this "bloody-mindedness" you refer to.
I thought the "problem" was one of cost which, except for the initial IRT, is nothing to do with the CAA.
Bluskis,
You do not have to go stateside to get an IR, and nor do you have to "enrich the US coffers" - this is a myth.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turned into an interesting debate.
For me Fuji just about summed it up, not only is the JAA IR an unrealistic rating to obtain due to the cost implications but once you have got it its bloody expensive to keep! I knew I needed the IMC experience under my belt in case things got hairy one day and looked at the IMC Rating, when I realised for a few quid more I could get the FAA IR and get GIVEN the IMC Rating when I passed I thought why not.
It opens up a completely new aspect of flying once you do get it. I have just spent 3 weeks flying round California and the weather could have been describe at best as absolute crap!! It was IFR in and out of LGB most of the time and for a lot of the time I was there the PPL students were grounded, one guy had been there 5 wks and managed 30hours flying due to bad weather.
Its interesting about the point of view that certain areas in the UK are hallowed ground for the big boys, finding yourself in lower airspace and stuck there is pretty poor really. The US has a completely outlook on it - the sky is there for everyone who has the appropriate rating, if you have an IR you can use it pretty much where you want. Anyone who has flown in the US will know its not uncommon for them to hold up a full passenger carrying flight for you in your PA28, everyone in an aircraft is treated as an equal. I fly SOCAL quite a bit and with quite a dense cluster of airports around (Long Beach, San Diego, John Wayne) and Los Angeles not far away the traffic routing can get very busy. The SOCAL staff hold it all together pretty much impecably though with you rarely orbiting and very rarely going into the hold.
Im with Gengis, a basic IR rating for the PPL and then bolt on ratings if you want to use for anything more, such as an ME IR. Revalidation through currency firstly and option to recertify through a IR INSTRUCTOR rather than an examiner if you bust your currency requirements.
For me Fuji just about summed it up, not only is the JAA IR an unrealistic rating to obtain due to the cost implications but once you have got it its bloody expensive to keep! I knew I needed the IMC experience under my belt in case things got hairy one day and looked at the IMC Rating, when I realised for a few quid more I could get the FAA IR and get GIVEN the IMC Rating when I passed I thought why not.
It opens up a completely new aspect of flying once you do get it. I have just spent 3 weeks flying round California and the weather could have been describe at best as absolute crap!! It was IFR in and out of LGB most of the time and for a lot of the time I was there the PPL students were grounded, one guy had been there 5 wks and managed 30hours flying due to bad weather.
Its interesting about the point of view that certain areas in the UK are hallowed ground for the big boys, finding yourself in lower airspace and stuck there is pretty poor really. The US has a completely outlook on it - the sky is there for everyone who has the appropriate rating, if you have an IR you can use it pretty much where you want. Anyone who has flown in the US will know its not uncommon for them to hold up a full passenger carrying flight for you in your PA28, everyone in an aircraft is treated as an equal. I fly SOCAL quite a bit and with quite a dense cluster of airports around (Long Beach, San Diego, John Wayne) and Los Angeles not far away the traffic routing can get very busy. The SOCAL staff hold it all together pretty much impecably though with you rarely orbiting and very rarely going into the hold.
Im with Gengis, a basic IR rating for the PPL and then bolt on ratings if you want to use for anything more, such as an ME IR. Revalidation through currency firstly and option to recertify through a IR INSTRUCTOR rather than an examiner if you bust your currency requirements.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another myth
Can we kill off this ridiculous assumption that the airspace in UK/Europe is "reserved" for commercial traffic.
IT ISN'T.
If you and the aircraft you're flying are rated/certified for IFR in CAS then you can fly IFR in CAS. If not, you cannot. Simple.
Maybe there is a view that there's too much Class A in the UK, but that's a different argument
Something else, conveniently forgotten at present:
What are you going to do in 2003, when to fly IFR in Europe you require Mode S. (FAA IR and N Reg. or not.) More expense.
What about vertical expansion of 8.33 - all ready to pay for new avionics? It will come, it will affect lower airways. N reg or otherwise.
By 2008, the cost of getting your JAA IR will be dwarfed by the costs of keeping your aircraft IFR-ready. (N reg or otherwise)
(Who will be first to tell me that the money you would save doing an FAA IR could be used to buy all this kit
)
IT ISN'T.
If you and the aircraft you're flying are rated/certified for IFR in CAS then you can fly IFR in CAS. If not, you cannot. Simple.
Maybe there is a view that there's too much Class A in the UK, but that's a different argument
Something else, conveniently forgotten at present:
What are you going to do in 2003, when to fly IFR in Europe you require Mode S. (FAA IR and N Reg. or not.) More expense.
What about vertical expansion of 8.33 - all ready to pay for new avionics? It will come, it will affect lower airways. N reg or otherwise.
By 2008, the cost of getting your JAA IR will be dwarfed by the costs of keeping your aircraft IFR-ready. (N reg or otherwise)
(Who will be first to tell me that the money you would save doing an FAA IR could be used to buy all this kit
)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rustle
I don't suppose anyone will.
However, if a European IR was accessible to PPL holders in a similar way to an FAA IR, there would be a bigger market for sale of compliant avionics, and the cost might come down!
I've now had two consecutive optimistic days.... something must be wrong!
(Who will be first to tell me that the money you would save doing an FAA IR could be used to buy all this kit )
However, if a European IR was accessible to PPL holders in a similar way to an FAA IR, there would be a bigger market for sale of compliant avionics, and the cost might come down!
I've now had two consecutive optimistic days.... something must be wrong!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CAA needs to liase with the JAA and get the "IMC" rating recognised throughout Europe. Class A floors need to be raised and then a new system of low level class D airways, say up to 12,000' could be introduced allowing IMC holders to fly airways...including class D airway 'corridors' through Class A TMA's. Allow 'IFR certified' GPS to be used as primary nav in light aircraft, have a mode S dispensation (how much are these BTW? a few grand?) for private flights below 12k'. Now we've got an affordable Private IR in Europe....
Ah, the only problem I can see is a complete shake up of the European ATC system. Oh well, back to the drawing board
Cheers
EA
Ah, the only problem I can see is a complete shake up of the European ATC system. Oh well, back to the drawing board
Cheers
EA
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the real issue here is we cant really agree amongst ourselves what changes are needed (if any), although I detect some good support for a revised PPL IR, and even if we could, we don’t think our views will be taken seriously, so we are not prepared to do anything about it. In short, we have no united point of view to put forward, and so despite GA being a huge part of the aviation industry, changes will continue to be made like the introduction of mode S, reduced frequency spacing, more TMAs., etc all of which will impact on us. Am I too cynical?
I think this is one on which the Americans have got it absolutely right; GA is strongly represented and, on the whole, speaks with one voice.
I suppose it is out with the black paint. N - - - - -
I think this is one on which the Americans have got it absolutely right; GA is strongly represented and, on the whole, speaks with one voice.
I suppose it is out with the black paint. N - - - - -
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, the problem is even clearer.
With respect:
You asked the question on November 20.
Most of the posters to this thread have agreed with you.
I have tendered about 2% of the arguments likely to be put to your request by JAA/CAA/EASA etc.
Less than 24 hours later, you're giving up on the idea.
(you posted the edited question at 13:41 yesterday)
With respect:
You asked the question on November 20.
Most of the posters to this thread have agreed with you.
I have tendered about 2% of the arguments likely to be put to your request by JAA/CAA/EASA etc.
Less than 24 hours later, you're giving up on the idea.
(you posted the edited question at 13:41 yesterday)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji
Disagree, this time. I think there's fairly good agreement what we want.
A means for PPL holders to fly IFR, not just in the UK, that would enable us to use light aircraft as a serious means of transport.
To get that, there are 5 options:
1. Get a JAA PPL/IR.
Issues: inaccessible, classroom study, few training establishments for private piltos, etc.
2. Try to negotiate a more accessible JAA IR.
Issue: difficult negotiation, various entrenched views or vested interests to overcome, ec.
3. Try to negotiate a JAA-wide version of the UK IMC rating.
Issues: can't use class A airspace, would be valid in JAA countries only, needs probably even more negotation than option 2, etc.
4. Get an FAA PPL/IR, and operate an N-reg aircraft.
Issue: we shouldn't have to, some countries have the French attitude to N-reg aircraft, you're subject to decisions taken in the US (imagine if after some future event, operation of N-reg aircraft was restricted to US citizens or residents.... we'd be stuffed), etc.
5. Try to negotiate Genghis' multi-level IR.
I vote for option 2.
Disagree, this time. I think there's fairly good agreement what we want.
A means for PPL holders to fly IFR, not just in the UK, that would enable us to use light aircraft as a serious means of transport.
To get that, there are 5 options:
1. Get a JAA PPL/IR.
Issues: inaccessible, classroom study, few training establishments for private piltos, etc.
2. Try to negotiate a more accessible JAA IR.
Issue: difficult negotiation, various entrenched views or vested interests to overcome, ec.
3. Try to negotiate a JAA-wide version of the UK IMC rating.
Issues: can't use class A airspace, would be valid in JAA countries only, needs probably even more negotation than option 2, etc.
4. Get an FAA PPL/IR, and operate an N-reg aircraft.
Issue: we shouldn't have to, some countries have the French attitude to N-reg aircraft, you're subject to decisions taken in the US (imagine if after some future event, operation of N-reg aircraft was restricted to US citizens or residents.... we'd be stuffed), etc.
5. Try to negotiate Genghis' multi-level IR.
I vote for option 2.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IMC goes some way to address the PPL IR situation, but it has limitations, though I do feel sorry for some folk abroard who don't even have this option. Why not have a 'cut down' version of the IR, allowing a holder to file IFR here and in Europe, but say capped to 12,500' or so, limited to Private flights only? Call it the IR(restricted) or something, and have a self certification process similar to the FAA IR. During training, previous instrument time should be taken into account, so a previous IMC holder with 50 hrs actual instrument could obtain this rating fairly easily and cheaply.
It has to be accepted at least Europwide and allow flight through Class A TMAs, and airways which shouldn't be a problem. Whether this is done by using 'airway corridors' [IFR prefered routes] through the TMA's or allocating the lower sections of airways as Class D is not for me to say. I think if changes like these were made, then maybe people would be more inclined to spend their hard earned money in Europe rather than take it to the States.
....or maybe Europe sees GA as a pain in the arse and would frankly prefer to see the back of us
Cheers
EA
It has to be accepted at least Europwide and allow flight through Class A TMAs, and airways which shouldn't be a problem. Whether this is done by using 'airway corridors' [IFR prefered routes] through the TMA's or allocating the lower sections of airways as Class D is not for me to say. I think if changes like these were made, then maybe people would be more inclined to spend their hard earned money in Europe rather than take it to the States.
....or maybe Europe sees GA as a pain in the arse and would frankly prefer to see the back of us
Cheers
EA
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rustle - well said!
Actually I really do believe in what I have said and really would like to see GA campaign for a JAA IR achievable and useable by private pilots. So if there is wide spread support for the idea - which I believe their is - how do we achieve it? Of course my last comment was provocative but it seems to me without being provocative in our debate and determined in our ambition we definitely haven’t got a hope. I guess GA got through the NPPL legislation though, and I do get the impression that the CAA fight our corner reasonably well.
So I havent given up!
Actually I really do believe in what I have said and really would like to see GA campaign for a JAA IR achievable and useable by private pilots. So if there is wide spread support for the idea - which I believe their is - how do we achieve it? Of course my last comment was provocative but it seems to me without being provocative in our debate and determined in our ambition we definitely haven’t got a hope. I guess GA got through the NPPL legislation though, and I do get the impression that the CAA fight our corner reasonably well.
So I havent given up!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah Rustle,
You wouldn't believe how ones English suffers when one spends several years surrounded by people who cannot speak it
I use the definition "stubbornly obstructive and unwilling to cooperate" (per dictionary.com), which when you see how GA in the UK is treated from my position, might not be as inaccurate as you think.
I think that regulators have a financial impact on the market which goes further than the IRT. Regulation of the IR pilot in the UK tend to be more onerous (unreasonably so), and this costs money. All that expensive extra equipment required just to fly in an airway at a few thousand feet, Mode S and 8.33kHz would be an example. These cost money, which is why they would never be imposed upon the GA community in the US without "unobstructive consultation". The FAA will have one hell of a fight on its hands if it wants people to put this kit it in their warriors because they want to fly through a layer over southern california. But the logic of imposing 8.33kHz AM spacing when digital is here is another subject
You wouldn't believe how ones English suffers when one spends several years surrounded by people who cannot speak it
I use the definition "stubbornly obstructive and unwilling to cooperate" (per dictionary.com), which when you see how GA in the UK is treated from my position, might not be as inaccurate as you think.I think that regulators have a financial impact on the market which goes further than the IRT. Regulation of the IR pilot in the UK tend to be more onerous (unreasonably so), and this costs money. All that expensive extra equipment required just to fly in an airway at a few thousand feet, Mode S and 8.33kHz would be an example. These cost money, which is why they would never be imposed upon the GA community in the US without "unobstructive consultation". The FAA will have one hell of a fight on its hands if it wants people to put this kit it in their warriors because they want to fly through a layer over southern california. But the logic of imposing 8.33kHz AM spacing when digital is here is another subject
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Aerobatic Flyer's last post sums the situations up perfectly. We all want a convenient way of flying IFR in Europe. What we can't agree on is the best way of achieving this - there are lots of suggestions being thrown around, some of which are more achievable than others, but all of which are valid.
FFF
--------------
FFF
--------------
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this point in the discussion perhaps someone from the CAA could step in and give some pointers as to a likely route to success.
They would surely know the impossible and the possible, and the ajenda's hidden or open, of the other European states, for it is they, (the other European states) who will be required to agree to what ever is finally proposed.
I hope they,(the CAA) are interested enough in aviation to be Pprune readers.
They would surely know the impossible and the possible, and the ajenda's hidden or open, of the other European states, for it is they, (the other European states) who will be required to agree to what ever is finally proposed.
I hope they,(the CAA) are interested enough in aviation to be Pprune readers.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is one of the most interesting threads I have had the pleasure of reading on this board or any other for that matter.
As a UK trained PPL of Dutch nationality I am currently training towards my IMC. All I ever want, if it would be legal, is to use the same IMC in Europe. I am not too interested in airways. I want to be able to do a let down in continental Europe legally in exactly the way I am being trained to do it in the UK. Even being able to go above on a return journey and land in the UK would already be a great help.
As this is not legal at the moment all I can practically do is gain experience once I have gained my IMC and eventually go down the FAA route.
As a UK trained PPL of Dutch nationality I am currently training towards my IMC. All I ever want, if it would be legal, is to use the same IMC in Europe. I am not too interested in airways. I want to be able to do a let down in continental Europe legally in exactly the way I am being trained to do it in the UK. Even being able to go above on a return journey and land in the UK would already be a great help.
As this is not legal at the moment all I can practically do is gain experience once I have gained my IMC and eventually go down the FAA route.