IMC on the road to CPL/IR...??

[Fancy Navigator]

Hi
I am just thinking about doing an IMC course as part of the hour building process leading to CPL/IR....
Do you think the IMC course is an advantage and gives you good skills/experience if you then do your CPL/IR, or is the IMC course totally irrelevant to CPL/IR and not of much use?
Is the IMC rating a good introduction to instrument flying and to the real IR, and does it give you an idea of your abilities for a real IR?
Thanks for your suggestions
Cheers

[Northern Highflyer]

I think the IMC is a very good introduction to the IR training. Although not as in-depth, it is a good starting point to give an insight into what is to come and allow you to get some experience with some of the basics.

I am at a similar stage and am about to start the IMC in preparation for the IR. Having asked around on this myself, the overwhelming opinion is that the IR is probably the hardest thing to pass, and a first time pass is important when seeking that elusive first job. The IMC is a great way to give yourself every opportunity of achieving that, as well as improving your flying skills at the same time.

Besides it's a good way to build hours and experience so why not give it a go ?

best of luck

NH

[No. 2]

I agree with NH. As I understand it, in order to do well at the IR, your instrument flying has to be instinctive so that you can use the extra mental capacity for operating the aircraft. Doing an IMC will give you that extra practice in developing your scan and general instrument handling abilities. However, I guess that the major caveat in all this is to ensure that the IMC training is to a high standard, so that you don't develop bad habits that end up costing you more in the long term to remove.

No. 2

[onehunga]

This is definately like de je vu? In fact I remember posting something about this only about a month ago so try searching on IMC and see what pops up.

General consensus though was:-

(1) Any QUALITY training has to be beneficial
(2) Makes you a safer pilot
(3) Teaches you skills that will enable you to make better use of your hour building eg: VOR tracking, fixing, holds, ILS approaches etc.
(4) The list goes on.....Try the search.

Good luck you will enjoy it.

PS: Just finished my training and passed the theoretical test. Only the practical to go when I return from some hour building in the US.

[FlyingForFun]

I assume you're now hour-building, prior to CPL/IR, right? In which case, you need to fly a certain number of hours in order to meet the minimum requirements for CPL issue. Since you have to fly those hours, you may as well learn as much as you can whilst doing so - and the IMC rating is a brilliant way of doing that (as well as letting you hour-build with more ease since you won't be so restricted by weather).

On the other hand, if you've finished your hour-building, and you're now in a position where you could either start an IR course straight away, or do an IMC course followed by an IR course, then I'd suggest that the IMC probably doesn't have any real benefit.

So I guess I agree with the other posters so far, but with a caveat that it's only useful because you have to build up your hours in any case.

FFF
--------------

[cortilla]

No doubt that any good training is well worth the money and could someday save your life. Just one question though. I'm assuming most people have jaa licences. In that case does the IMC rating still exist???? Like i said i think the training is well worth it whether you get the rating or not, but does the piece of paper it's written on still come through the mail and get stamped onto your licence. Are you allowed to use that rating legally???

[FlyingForFun]

Cortilla,

Yes, the IMC does still exist. It is not a JAA license, and is not recognised anywhere in the world outside of the UK. But you can still add it to a UK-issued JAA license. I know - I did exactly that a few months ago.

FFF
----------

[High Wing Drifter]

Hi there!

Just my tupence worth

I think there has to be a point of diminishing returns. As the IR is the IMC but much more, are you really, in reality giving yourself a headstart worth the extra cost? Surely one will be covering all the issues covered in the IMC in the IR. If the IR mindset is a difficult conversion then for me I would prefer to learn directly through the IR. If I can't complete the IR in 50-55hrs...well thats another discussion!

Whilst on this road I fancy trying something off-route...an aerobatics course

Well, that is my decision, each to their own

[FlyingForFun]

HWD - I agree. Which is why I only suggest doing an IMC en route to an IR if you need to hour-build anyway, in which case the cost of an IMC versus the cost of doing some solo flying is very small.

As for aeros - go for it! I did, it was fantastic, I don't regret it at all. The only thing I regret is not being able to afford to remain (or even get) proficient enough to be able to do it regularly!

FFF
----------------

[GJB]

This topic has been discussed in the past.

My advice - go do it. If you like flying, you like a challenge and want to add a bit of variety to your hour building then I say go for it.

[Chris Wannabe]

It is without doubt something that will make you a more complete pilot and potentially save the day during your hour building if the weather turns.

But.....it comes down to whether you budget allows it. Personally I didnt want to pay out £500-600 more than I needed to.

I've just completed the IR (first time) and previously had only the PPL instrument stuff (i.e. none) under my belt. Remember 50 hours on the IR is a long time especially when in the SIM and you can be reset!!

[Fancy Navigator]

Hi folks, thank you for your answers... I agree with you when you say it is a useful way to hour build (still a long way to go for me!) as long as it is done properly, and that it could save your life one day!
One other point is that I would like to "test myself" on an IMC course to see if I am good at instrument flying - with the IR in mind.... Althought the IMC and IR are different (first because the IMC is on a Single and the IR on a Twin), I feel it requires the same skills (I might be wrong- correct me ) and would therefore be a good test for the IR....
I would not like to go through all the expense of an IR, etc... just to fail or pass after fifty attempts!!
I did some instrument flying during my PPL training and even did a simulated SRA given by the instructor right down to 300 feet (I was almost lined up with the runway...), but what is the relevance of it???
So my final question will be: "If you do well at the IMC course, will you have a good chance to do well at the IR? Anybody in the forum who did the IMC and then did well at the IR?
Thank you

[FlyingForFun]

Just a quick point - you say that the IR is "on a twin". Doesn't have to be. Obviously you need it on a twin before you can apply for the airlines. But if you plan on, say, instructing for a couple of years before applying to the airlines, you can do the IR on a single. The advantage is that I'd imagine it's easier, it's certainly cheaper, and you're very unlikely to be able to keep a twin rating current, IR or not, if you're doing PPL instructing. But as long as you get an IR within 3 years of the exams, and renew it at least every 7 years thereafter, your ATPL exam credits are still valid, whether the IR is on a single or a multi.

FFF
----------------

[GJB]

Fancy Nav:

If you are a newly qualified PPL then go and have a bit of fun first, like try some touring and visit different aerodromes.

Before you start the course, get the book and read it. That will tell you all you need to know. Alternatively, drop me a PM and I will email you detals of the syllabus.

Cheers,

GJB