Very good advice, sums it all up very well.

Duchess Driver/Pilot DAR

My comment about flying 'illegally' in IMC (as I put it) referred to flying behind a full panel of certified avionics in a strongly built kitplane such as a Vans (which is at present illegal in the UK, legal in the US, but I don't know about Canada). I wasn't for a moment thinking about some flimsy fibreglass contraption with a cheap Chinese 'glass panel'. Nor was I advocating flying in IMC without an IR - proven time and again to be suicide.

I don't know if this changes your views about my post, but you are certainly right that I should have been more cautious, lest it be misinterpreted by a novice pilot, so thank you. A culture of rule-breaking is something to be avoided. However, I stand by the idea that flying behind a new certified panel fit in a decent kitplane is no more dangerous than in many Group A aircraft - anyone who has seen an ageing Cherokee flying in to the unknown with a panel full of U/S stickers, creaky gyro instruments and lying engine gauges will know what I'm talking about.

As for the argument against flight in IMC in singles, Canadian weather is doubtless more volatile and extreme at times than in the UK. IFR in singles is routine here, although it is true that a twin with deicing kit is no bad thing anywhere. If icing or turbulence is kept in mind and avoided, then it would seem to me that for flying in the UK the safety gap between twins and singles is not too much more significant than in VMC, although obviously an engine failure in a single in IMC is a scary prospect.

“but there are loads of in-flight structural failures in these categories,”

OK give us a reference!

In a recent study covering 20 years of accidents in the UK the CAA accepted that there were less structural failures in LAA permit aircraft than C of A. The result of this was to remove the over flight restriction.

I am sure there will never be a blanket approval for IFR, just as there is no blanket approval for Mogas. My expectation is that initially there will be a small list of types, which will be allowed provided certain conditions are met. For example, the Falco has been factory built and fully approved. It is perfectly possible to build an exact replica of a factory built Falco with a certified instrument fit (you can do this right now under LAA rules). Very hard to justify not allowing such a machine to do what it was originally designed to do.

Rod1

Very interesting post. I have an RV6 which is well equipped including a full 2 axis auto pilot linked to the GPS. I recently completed the IMC course and can now fly VFR on top quite legally in it. Would be just nice to be able to carry out an approach if I had to. Not suggesting I want to start doing airways flights but IFR OCAS would be very handy for those days when most VFR flights end up scud running when just popping above a thin overcast would be much safer.

Still wishfull thinking and reality are two different things and im sure I will be old and grey before that happens.

I've just read the flight test in Pilot of the Ravin 500, a kit based on the old PA24 Comanche, it looks very good and has a claimed cruise speed of 220mph at 75% power. I reckon you could just pass it off as an original PA24 and fly it IFR without anyone noticing....:E

Does anyone have any infomation on the current status of the talks to enable us to use the IMC rating in a Permit to Fly aircraft?

Im assuming that we are waiting for the inital decision of whether the IMC rating is here to stay and then it will be decided whether the above is possible?

Anybody with any info?