UK Pilot thinking of IMC
 

Hey all,

AS above low hours PPL but thinking about going down the IMC route. Is it really worth all the time effort and money?

Also can anyone tell me what books/CBT videos are best to use?

Had a search but couldnt see much on it.

Cheers

Kev

By all means. It'll improve your flying ability to no end, and gives you a way out in case of deteriorating weather. And I don't know the exact status, but there's on-and-off talk about a deadline, maybe April 2015, after which the IMC/IR(R) is no longer issued. (I'm sure some other forumite will be able to provide chapter and verse on this.)

One of the Trevor Thom books is about instruments/instrument flying and if you don't have anything else, it's probably a good start. I actually started with the two FAA books (8083 and 8261) on instrument flight, and I found a book online "The IMC Rating Pilot's Notes" from www.writek.co.uk.

You may also want to read up on the ANO (and recent ANO changes - check CAP393 and CAP804) to determine the recommendations and actual legal limits on the IMC rating.

Do. It.


I just can't recommend the IR(R) enough and I'm very glad I've done it (at just 150 hours total flying time). A few points:

• I would have thought that the IR(R) will be issued in the UK at least until 8 April 2019
• I think that the Trevor Thom vol. 5 on instrument flying should be sufficient - not just for the theory exam but also for the background knowledge for flying training
• With EIR and competency-based modular way towards the full IR(A) now available the IMC course/IR(R) rating is a very good start

You'll enjoy it!



/h88

Is there still a reason to do the IR(R) if you can do the EIR? The IR(R) will give you approaches in OCAS, limited to UK but EIR will give you CAS (airways, etc) but no approaches all over Europe; it seems to me the EIR is a better stepping stone towards a full IR.
I am sending my daughter off to do the EIR as soon as she finishes the PPL.

@dirkdj
 

For me the plan is IR(R), then EIR, then IR(A). I fully understand that for your daughter or someone else the plan can be different. The OP wanted to know whether it's worth to do IMCr/IR(R) and I provided my point of view.

And as soon as there is a school offering the EIR course :}



/h88

IR(R) is not a option here, UK only.

My current best bet is - the UK special way of IMC/IR(R) will fade away quite soon. I saw the first approved EIR and CB-IR syllabus docs now published and my feeling tells me that this is the future. As CB-IR is now much easier compared to the former IR and it is EASA-wide, I do not see the IMC making sense.

Yes do it. Apart from all of the good safety aspect stuff it sharpens up your flying. Don't worry about the amount of hours you have, I started mine not long after I passed my PPL skills test while the brain was still in training mode. TBH I always saw the PPL as being incomplete without the IMC and night qualification anyway, the PPL bit was just part of the overall package.

The one thing you do have to think about is staying current; I don't mean legally but from a safety point of view. There's not much point getting it and then the next time you fly on instruments is on the renewal. Try and get a couple of approaches in every month; if you're off on a trip go IFR occasionally instead of VFR even if it's a gin clear day; fly VMC on top if it's a crappy overcast day down below instead of plodding through the murk, that sort of thing.

Good luck with it, personally I found it very enjoyable.

The dirty little secret is that IFR is really much easier than VFR for long distance touring. At the time I got my IR a minimum of 200 hours was required, this is no longer the case.

Just after I got my PPL I flew my aircraft into a fog bank.
I got out alive (just) but that motivated me to do the IMC.

Yes flying is not only safer but easier using instruments. (not just GPS!)

Do it !
 

I rushed into mine very soon after PPL as it was being abolished. It took a little longer than if I'd been more experienced

But I know I'm a seriously better pilot with it than I was before, not just from an instrument flying point of view but heading, height and speed control and general plane management even in VFR.

And I agree about cross country, I'd rather fly under IFR even in VMC

Still got loads to learn but so glad I did it

Thanks all. Think Im pretty convinced.

So how much harder is it to the PPL? Is it around 15 hours?

Ok found the Thom book version 5 what will I need for Test knowledge and practice tests?

IMCR........ A must do !
 

The IMC is the most important bit of training that a PPL holder can do, the safety benifits are the main reason but it requires a lot of application to get the most from it.

As a new PPL holder with the minimum hours I found the thing an uphill struggle, I think that this was because my instructors were all ex-RAF or ex- Airline and for them there was only one standard. About five years down the line I found the IR to be much less of a problem than the IMC but this was because of the high standard of training I received on the IMC course.

On reflection the IMC was right up there with the Airbus A320 ground engineers course as the most difficult thing I have ever done in aviation................... Apart from getting a Gatwick airside pass but that is a process ( unlike the rest of aviation ) that defies any attempt at reason, logic or common sence !

Why do the IMC rating? It's not recognized outside the UK and will never be.
And it'll be extinct in a few years from now.

Go do the IR instead.

Did you not read any of the posts after the first one?

It was explained in exhaustive detail why it's a good idea.

What a mess of opinions ... Please all, keep in mind that the educational level received during PPL is VERY different. Only lately have I started to talk with others about it and the insights were dramatic. About 5h of my PPL (education according to JAR-FCL) was dedicated to identify, avoid and cope with IMC. I thought this to be normal, BUT it ain't. I found many never hearing anything about IMC other then "do not go" - especially chaps with no NFQ.

It is indisputable that receiving IR education is of value. With EASA part-FCL we now even have a common route to go EIR -> CB-IR. Why should one follow a special IMC/IR(R) route only applicable in the UK?
Reason One: you only fly in the UK. Ok, makes sense.
Reason Two: you have an opportunity to get cheap IMC. OK, if you have a local chap to get it, why not.
Reason Three: you take a bet EASA will have a conversion later. Hmm, I won't bet this happens during our lifetime.

Opinions differ obviously but the only difficult thing I found were NDB approaches, and then it depends how your particular aircraft is equiped. If it has an RMI it's not too bad, if it's a fixed card then it requires a lot of spatial awareness and mental maths guff while you're trying to fly the approach correctly. NDB holds aren't tested during the skills test but you'll no doubt do them. Not too bad in a slight wind but in a strong off axis wind they can be tricky. I keep hoping they'll do away with NDB approaches between one renewal and the next but haven't been lucky so far...

Took me around 18 hours I think with the test. It's knackering for the first few hours because you are continually maxed out but once things become second nature you can start thinking that you may just get the hang of it. Very intensive and very enjoyable.

IR(r) / IMC rating? 15 hours is doable. But then the aircraft I have isn't fitted with an ADF so that means I'm doing it without all the NDB stuff (which is fine).

The 15 hours of IR(r) or IMC rating instruction can go towards the CBM IR (and potentially more if your IMC instructor has a full IRI rating). Therefore there is every reason (in the UK) to do that rather than the EIR as a stepping stone to a full IR.

The issue with the EIR is that you can't do approaches with it - you need to essentially make sure both departure and destination are CAVOK before you leave. What if you've a problem or a diversion mid-route? You need a way to traverse into VFR for your take off / arrival. Does it not make a lot more sense to be able to follow the standard approaches instead? Makes ATC's job much easier!

If you are in the UK - a sensible route is IR(r) + experience -> CBM IR.

About education during a PPL? Training to deal with inadvertent IMC is required now. You are only tested on doing a safe 180 out of cloud, but the EASA mandated syllabus includes climbing / descending and turns under the hood. I understand this is one of the bits missing from some of the lesser qualifications (LAPL / NPPL).

Oh - and the IR(r) can be added to an EASA licence for at least the next 5 years (the deadline mentioned has been removed) and once you have it - they can't take if off you.

Not sure you can get away with that, you have to do two pilot interpreted approaches which as far as I'm aware are an ILS and NDB approach. Don't quote me I'm not an instructor, I'm sure someone who knows better than I will be along to quote you chapter and verse.

It may be fine while you are doing the course but, as most ILS approach procedures have an NDB as an initial approach fix, the fix for the hold, and the fix for the standard missed approach, as well as the NDB approach being the most common alternative approach when the ILS goes off, then your 15 hour IMC Rating isn't of much practical use.


MJ:ok:

Ps Kevin, Just do the IMC, you will never regret it, but insist that you do both ILS and NDB approaches as part of your training, then you will be proficient in the two most common approaches. If you do this though, it will take you 20-25 hours in my experience.
MJ