Foriegn IR Conversion?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: somewhere but never to long
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foriegn IR Conversion?
Could any ladies/gents please advise me in obtaining a foriegn IR with a view to eventually gaining a JAA IR
I know the ground school element of JAA IR in contained in the JAA ATPL exams, but with regards to the use of a foriegn IR having value/contributing to the JAA flight training is it worth pursuing this route?
I read books and taken advice and I still seem to be unclear on the matter as you can see.
I know the ground school element of JAA IR in contained in the JAA ATPL exams, but with regards to the use of a foriegn IR having value/contributing to the JAA flight training is it worth pursuing this route?
I read books and taken advice and I still seem to be unclear on the matter as you can see.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
I know my Australian command instrument rating was worth nothing here (here being the UK). Oh, I can get 5 hours off the 55 hour JAR IR course.
You get more credit if you have an IMC.
You get more credit if you have an IMC.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
The situation w.r.t. foreign IR recognition is utterly ridiculous ... I thought I was getting ripped off having to pay 4000 quid for my NZ-to-UK IR conversion back in '00, but it is utterly taking the p!ss to go and tell people with thousands of hours of IFR multi engine command time, that they have to go and blow off 12 thousand quid in order to receive 55 hours of compulsory dual on how to fly NDB holds before they can be deemed worthy of a JAA IR.
I'd be up for any protest that was being organised but I can't see it doing a blind bit of good - it's like the requirement they brought in that JAA trainers have their 'main place of business' in Europe. It's got zero to do with flight safety, and plenty to do with protecting European jobs (and by implication, European tax dollars). They want us to spend our training dollars in the UK, they don't want to sacrifice their cash cow by making the cost of flight training competitive with the rest of the civilised world, so they hold us all hostage by the simple method of making it so expensive to convert to UK licences that it's not viable to train elsewhere
I'd be up for any protest that was being organised but I can't see it doing a blind bit of good - it's like the requirement they brought in that JAA trainers have their 'main place of business' in Europe. It's got zero to do with flight safety, and plenty to do with protecting European jobs (and by implication, European tax dollars). They want us to spend our training dollars in the UK, they don't want to sacrifice their cash cow by making the cost of flight training competitive with the rest of the civilised world, so they hold us all hostage by the simple method of making it so expensive to convert to UK licences that it's not viable to train elsewhere
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IR conversion requirements from ICAO to JAR IR are currently being reviewed and I have been told that in the next 3-6 months new terms will be released.
Industry are chewing this one over with a view to getting the course down to about 20-25 hours for ICAO CPL/IR holders with a minimum of 500 hours experience.
Those who meet the JAR ATPL experience requirements still can be exempt the IR course if they have 500+ hours on a Multi Pilot A/C type.
Alternatively, there is a little trick I know involving going to Denmark... but that's another story.
Lots of Love
Wibbly P
Industry are chewing this one over with a view to getting the course down to about 20-25 hours for ICAO CPL/IR holders with a minimum of 500 hours experience.
Those who meet the JAR ATPL experience requirements still can be exempt the IR course if they have 500+ hours on a Multi Pilot A/C type.
Alternatively, there is a little trick I know involving going to Denmark... but that's another story.
Lots of Love
Wibbly P
Last edited by Wibbly P; 30th May 2002 at 10:10.
I say there boy
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS,
You're being a bit unfair on the UK in your little summary - remember that the reason why pre-January 2001 you could convert a foreign IR to a JAA IR (in the UK) without doing the full course was because the CAA were rather liberally interpreting the JARs in the favour of foreign IR holders. That got them a rap on the knuckles from Euro-JAA HQ so now it's the full course or nothing.
Euro protectionism, yes, but you can be sure that that particular little gem in amongst the JARs was not of the UK's making. It's one from some of our more protectionist cousins on the continent no doubt.
cheers!
foggy.
You're being a bit unfair on the UK in your little summary - remember that the reason why pre-January 2001 you could convert a foreign IR to a JAA IR (in the UK) without doing the full course was because the CAA were rather liberally interpreting the JARs in the favour of foreign IR holders. That got them a rap on the knuckles from Euro-JAA HQ so now it's the full course or nothing.
Euro protectionism, yes, but you can be sure that that particular little gem in amongst the JARs was not of the UK's making. It's one from some of our more protectionist cousins on the continent no doubt.
cheers!
foggy.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: somewhere but never to long
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankyou everyone its certainly cleared it up for me
55hours and a shed load cash for IR training, another protectionist racket from the powers that be.
Personally I'd like to see some uniformity in licencing throughout the world being put in place by the ICAO. And a pig just flew past my window.
I suppose its up to the individual pilots collectively to lobby for this, but it is by the very nature of the game that we are involved in, it will never happen.
My thanks
55hours and a shed load cash for IR training, another protectionist racket from the powers that be.
Personally I'd like to see some uniformity in licencing throughout the world being put in place by the ICAO. And a pig just flew past my window.
I suppose its up to the individual pilots collectively to lobby for this, but it is by the very nature of the game that we are involved in, it will never happen.
My thanks
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grivation,
As I understand it, it is a group called the Flight Training Policy Group and made up of all the big boys from industry and other aviation organisations. it's not an open forum.
Gabu,
If you can, hold fire with your cash until you hear what the changes may be.... unless you are low on hours.
Foggy,
Other JAA states have different views on the IR credit's. Have a read of JAR-FCL1 and compare it to the UK CAA's policy on IR conversion.
As I understand it, it is a group called the Flight Training Policy Group and made up of all the big boys from industry and other aviation organisations. it's not an open forum.
Gabu,
If you can, hold fire with your cash until you hear what the changes may be.... unless you are low on hours.
Foggy,
Other JAA states have different views on the IR credit's. Have a read of JAR-FCL1 and compare it to the UK CAA's policy on IR conversion.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Salop
Age: 57
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread developing here. Also, interested to read that the current IR requirment of 55 hrs (5 hr credit for ICAO foreign IR holder) policy is being reviewed ! However, unfortunately as I have far less than 500 hrs I won't be affected by any potential reductions in the 55 (50) hr requirement.
It certainly will be frustrating however to have to endure the 50 hr IR training - even for me, a soon to be Multi Eng. IR rated CPL (Cdn). Funnily enough, I know a guy from Toronto who holds an ATPL and Instructor Rating, who 12 months ago did the JAR ATPL in the UK (he's currently back in the UK this week renewing his IR
) - anyway, he told me that the JAR stuff is all a bit of a joke really (Like you guys needed telling - right ?). When compared to the Canadian system he told me there is very little practical knowledge learnt (I can't recall what he said about the actual flying part). For example, there are no guidelines for approach minima, no guidelines for what to do comm failure IFR - when he questioned all this the response was, "You don't need to know that - it'll all in the company ops manuals, SOP's etc" ......but as he quite rightly points out, but yes, what if I'm Joe Blow flying my own plane !??. As he told me, JAR seem more concerned that you have the initimate working knowledge of the heating system of the hosties food oven than anything .....god forbid ...practical !!
Anyone who's up for starting a lobby ...... count me in !!
It certainly will be frustrating however to have to endure the 50 hr IR training - even for me, a soon to be Multi Eng. IR rated CPL (Cdn). Funnily enough, I know a guy from Toronto who holds an ATPL and Instructor Rating, who 12 months ago did the JAR ATPL in the UK (he's currently back in the UK this week renewing his IR
) - anyway, he told me that the JAR stuff is all a bit of a joke really (Like you guys needed telling - right ?). When compared to the Canadian system he told me there is very little practical knowledge learnt (I can't recall what he said about the actual flying part). For example, there are no guidelines for approach minima, no guidelines for what to do comm failure IFR - when he questioned all this the response was, "You don't need to know that - it'll all in the company ops manuals, SOP's etc" ......but as he quite rightly points out, but yes, what if I'm Joe Blow flying my own plane !??. As he told me, JAR seem more concerned that you have the initimate working knowledge of the heating system of the hosties food oven than anything .....god forbid ...practical !!Anyone who's up for starting a lobby ...... count me in !!
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canada Goose....can I correct a few things here...
UK Guidelines for approach minima? Pardon? They are rigidly set down in accordance with the a/c capabilities and your licence - if he doesnt know what they are then he shouldnt have the licence IMO.
Comm Failure? Procedures are set out according to ICAO but different countries and airfields have different procedures - as an instuctor he should *KNOW* where this stuff is...For instance Aerad details ALL countires comm failure procedures and often airport/approach specific procedures too.
For UK specific you reference the UK AIP.
Now this is *very* basic IR knowledge - certainly stuff I was taught on my course at OATS.
I can only say that where he did his course obviously not up to scratch. However, I do agree that it is distinctively worrying that the course instructors did not feel this way....
UK Guidelines for approach minima? Pardon? They are rigidly set down in accordance with the a/c capabilities and your licence - if he doesnt know what they are then he shouldnt have the licence IMO.
Comm Failure? Procedures are set out according to ICAO but different countries and airfields have different procedures - as an instuctor he should *KNOW* where this stuff is...For instance Aerad details ALL countires comm failure procedures and often airport/approach specific procedures too.
For UK specific you reference the UK AIP.
Now this is *very* basic IR knowledge - certainly stuff I was taught on my course at OATS.
I can only say that where he did his course obviously not up to scratch. However, I do agree that it is distinctively worrying that the course instructors did not feel this way....
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd just like to add my amazement at the CAA/JAR requirement to for overseas ICAO IR holders to have to complete a full 50 hour course. Throughout my 'conversion' my instructors and myself were constantly lobbying FCL to scrap this ridiculous necessity, with little luck. I think the CAA have there hands tied on the issue, it is the JAA saying that the full course has to be done. I don't mean to blow my own trumpet but I could have passed the IR first time with about 5 hours and I'm sure many other well-trained overseas IR's would do the same.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Salop
Age: 57
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Formation Flyer,
Let me a my 2 cents worth ........
"UK Guidelines for approach minima? Pardon? They are rigidly set down in accordance with the a/c capabilities and your licence - if he doesnt know what they are then he shouldnt have the licence IMO. "
O.K. - I'm not familiar with the UK stuff so I can't say, but here in Canada, approach plates for specific airports have different minima for precision and non-precision approaches. Yes, to a degree the minima will be based on the a/c's groundspeed capability for non-precision appchs. However, I can't see what your licence !? has to do with minima guidelines !
Also, maybe I've misunderstood this guy I know, but I feel sure he was making some valid points given he has been though both systems and has over 2500 hrs !!
"Comm Failure? Procedures are set out according to ICAO but different countries and airfields have different procedures - as an instuctor he should *KNOW* where this stuff is...For instance Aerad details ALL countires comm failure procedures and often airport/approach specific procedures too. "
Again, I can't comment. Either I picked up on what he was telling me incorrectly. I have been informed whislt studying IR over here that procedures do differ country to country. I attended a 3 day IFR seminar over here run by a current Atlantic based RCAF SAR C-130 pilot who said he'll never accept a clearance unless it contains a provision to allow him to continue as planned to destination should a comm failure occur.
"Now this is *very* basic IR knowledge - certainly stuff I was taught on my course at OATS. I can only say that where he did his course obviously not up to scratch. However, I do agree that it is distinctively worrying that the course instructors did not feel this way...."
It's perhaps not my place to say where he trained, but let's just say it was somewhere rather close to home ..
Cheers,
C.G.
Let me a my 2 cents worth ........
"UK Guidelines for approach minima? Pardon? They are rigidly set down in accordance with the a/c capabilities and your licence - if he doesnt know what they are then he shouldnt have the licence IMO. "
O.K. - I'm not familiar with the UK stuff so I can't say, but here in Canada, approach plates for specific airports have different minima for precision and non-precision approaches. Yes, to a degree the minima will be based on the a/c's groundspeed capability for non-precision appchs. However, I can't see what your licence !? has to do with minima guidelines !
Also, maybe I've misunderstood this guy I know, but I feel sure he was making some valid points given he has been though both systems and has over 2500 hrs !!
"Comm Failure? Procedures are set out according to ICAO but different countries and airfields have different procedures - as an instuctor he should *KNOW* where this stuff is...For instance Aerad details ALL countires comm failure procedures and often airport/approach specific procedures too. "
Again, I can't comment. Either I picked up on what he was telling me incorrectly. I have been informed whislt studying IR over here that procedures do differ country to country. I attended a 3 day IFR seminar over here run by a current Atlantic based RCAF SAR C-130 pilot who said he'll never accept a clearance unless it contains a provision to allow him to continue as planned to destination should a comm failure occur.
"Now this is *very* basic IR knowledge - certainly stuff I was taught on my course at OATS. I can only say that where he did his course obviously not up to scratch. However, I do agree that it is distinctively worrying that the course instructors did not feel this way...."
It's perhaps not my place to say where he trained, but let's just say it was somewhere rather close to home ..
Cheers,
C.G.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say that there is a very different emphasis between gaining a licence in the UK and US.
The US has a far more practical outlook on training with the theory and flying much more coincident. Here in the UK the theory is generally completed well before the skills test is passed and I found that I had lost alot of the useful practical knowledge that I had remembered so diligently some months before when doing the exams. Sure I can go back and reread the notes, but I still don't think this is as useful as doing the practical and theory side-by-side.
A monkey could be trained to pass the JAR ATPL exams and to pass the skills test - but he would not make a good pilot.
A monkey would not be able to pass an FAA test because he would not pass the oral.
The US has a far more practical outlook on training with the theory and flying much more coincident. Here in the UK the theory is generally completed well before the skills test is passed and I found that I had lost alot of the useful practical knowledge that I had remembered so diligently some months before when doing the exams. Sure I can go back and reread the notes, but I still don't think this is as useful as doing the practical and theory side-by-side.
A monkey could be trained to pass the JAR ATPL exams and to pass the skills test - but he would not make a good pilot.
A monkey would not be able to pass an FAA test because he would not pass the oral.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: I wish I knew sometimes
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole IR conversion is a load of B.S. Completing the exams is fair in my mind, but why 50 hours of IFR training. I was trained to fly I.F.R here in Canada and have been doing it for 3 years. I think doing an NDB approach into some puny strip in the Rockies, at night in bad weather should count for something. Oh well.
Does anyone have any more info in the JAA moving on this issue? I will be doing it next spring and would love to save some cash on the deal. I will have 3000 with tons of IFR time.
I have also read that if you have 1500 + 500 multi crew you could get the IR by doing a ride with the CAA on say for example a BE20 or J31 if you are typed on the bird? Does anyone know of any operations in the UK that would allow someone to do a check on a BE20?? Anyone know the cost per hour??
Cheers
Does anyone have any more info in the JAA moving on this issue? I will be doing it next spring and would love to save some cash on the deal. I will have 3000 with tons of IFR time.
I have also read that if you have 1500 + 500 multi crew you could get the IR by doing a ride with the CAA on say for example a BE20 or J31 if you are typed on the bird? Does anyone know of any operations in the UK that would allow someone to do a check on a BE20?? Anyone know the cost per hour??
Cheers
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greaser
A monkey would not be able to pass an FAA test because he would not pass the oral.
How true, the orals are tough and will always weed out the people who do not "understand". CFI orals are a friggen nightmare!!
Canadiankid
I have also read that if you have 1500 + 500 multi crew...
It's ICAO ATP with 500 multi crew.
In other professions, medicine is one I know well, UK medical degrees are not officially recognised by the US, and vice versa. However, seeing as doctors in both countries like to take overseas working holidays, the regulations permit exceptions to the seemingly rigidly enforced rules. Quite right too, sensible people should be able to make exceptions to inflexible rules. So even in a protectionist profession like medicine, they can bend the rules when it suits them.
Not so in aviation, obviously there are JAA members with totally rigid and protectionist attitudes. This is particularly stupid, because a Canadian IR pilot can fly IFR in a C reg plane in JAA airspace. Obviously changing a letter painted on the fuselage changes the proficiency of the pilot, how stupid of me not to realise
A monkey would not be able to pass an FAA test because he would not pass the oral.
How true, the orals are tough and will always weed out the people who do not "understand". CFI orals are a friggen nightmare!!
Canadiankid
I have also read that if you have 1500 + 500 multi crew...
It's ICAO ATP with 500 multi crew.
In other professions, medicine is one I know well, UK medical degrees are not officially recognised by the US, and vice versa. However, seeing as doctors in both countries like to take overseas working holidays, the regulations permit exceptions to the seemingly rigidly enforced rules. Quite right too, sensible people should be able to make exceptions to inflexible rules. So even in a protectionist profession like medicine, they can bend the rules when it suits them.
Not so in aviation, obviously there are JAA members with totally rigid and protectionist attitudes. This is particularly stupid, because a Canadian IR pilot can fly IFR in a C reg plane in JAA airspace. Obviously changing a letter painted on the fuselage changes the proficiency of the pilot, how stupid of me not to realise
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Salop
Age: 57
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slim_slag,
You said it all really "This is particularly stupid, because a Canadian IR pilot can fly IFR in a C reg plane in JAA airspace. Obviously changing a letter painted on the fuselage changes the proficiency of the pilot, how stupid of me not to realise .."
It really does highlight the ridiculousness of it all !! I'd say nothing of say the prospect of having to take a flight test and even perhaps the written exams (which, yes I know are embedded within the 14 ATPL writtens so you couldn't get around that anyway unless you met the 3000 hr (?) + MCC requirements ! ) ......, but I mean, come on, let's be sensible. The 50 hours (assuming 5 hr credit) requirement is 10 hours more than is required to get the Canadian IR in the first place !!
Like I said earlier ........ anyone up for lobbying the CAA/JAA over this, count me in !!
Cheers,
Canada.G.
You said it all really "This is particularly stupid, because a Canadian IR pilot can fly IFR in a C reg plane in JAA airspace. Obviously changing a letter painted on the fuselage changes the proficiency of the pilot, how stupid of me not to realise .."
It really does highlight the ridiculousness of it all !! I'd say nothing of say the prospect of having to take a flight test and even perhaps the written exams (which, yes I know are embedded within the 14 ATPL writtens so you couldn't get around that anyway unless you met the 3000 hr (?) + MCC requirements ! ) ......, but I mean, come on, let's be sensible. The 50 hours (assuming 5 hr credit) requirement is 10 hours more than is required to get the Canadian IR in the first place !!
Like I said earlier ........ anyone up for lobbying the CAA/JAA over this, count me in !!
Cheers,
Canada.G.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FormationFlyer Said: "UK Guidelines for approach minima? Pardon? They are rigidly set down in accordance with the a/c capabilities and your licence - if he doesnt know what they are then he shouldnt have the licence IMO. "
Canada Goose Said: "O.K. - I'm not familiar with the UK stuff so I can't say, but here in Canada, approach plates for specific airports have different minima for precision and non-precision approaches. Yes, to a degree the minima will be based on the a/c's groundspeed capability for non-precision appchs. However, I can't see what your licence !? has to do with minima guidelines ! "
In a way yes it does. In the UK given an IMC your minima is 1800m and 600' non-prec/500' precision. For an IR you effectively have no minima - it depends on the a/c and ops. For instance single pilot IFR requires a RVR minima of 800m - regardless of the approach plates.
Apart from that we too use the approach plates and minima published in the UK AIP and/or Aera/Jeppeson plates. - yes differing for precision and non-precision approaches.
Even different a/c types have diff minima adjustments - for instance in the UK for a non-precision we allow 50'PEC on most a/c however, on the PA34 I understand that the states use 30' PEC and this is now accepted by examiners in the UK - even if not documented - however - go to another a/c and you should use 50' PEC.
Back to the subject of IR conversions it does seem rather bizarre. On my course at OATS one guy had a canadian IR...he got an assessment from the CAA I believe...well i think..memory of 2 years ago is a bit hazy......Now I dont know if the rule is rigid or whether obtaining an assessment would be possible but if it reduce the time significantly then surely it must be worth the hassle....however, I think it will still depend heavily on experience - I can just see the UK CAA saying to someone who just passed their canadian IR to do the whole course - whilst the airline pilot with 2000 hrs may be given significant reductions...I dont know to be honest - but surely its worth asking the CAA if an assessment would produce clearer requirements?
Hope this helps,
FF
Canada Goose Said: "O.K. - I'm not familiar with the UK stuff so I can't say, but here in Canada, approach plates for specific airports have different minima for precision and non-precision approaches. Yes, to a degree the minima will be based on the a/c's groundspeed capability for non-precision appchs. However, I can't see what your licence !? has to do with minima guidelines ! "
In a way yes it does. In the UK given an IMC your minima is 1800m and 600' non-prec/500' precision. For an IR you effectively have no minima - it depends on the a/c and ops. For instance single pilot IFR requires a RVR minima of 800m - regardless of the approach plates.
Apart from that we too use the approach plates and minima published in the UK AIP and/or Aera/Jeppeson plates. - yes differing for precision and non-precision approaches.
Even different a/c types have diff minima adjustments - for instance in the UK for a non-precision we allow 50'PEC on most a/c however, on the PA34 I understand that the states use 30' PEC and this is now accepted by examiners in the UK - even if not documented - however - go to another a/c and you should use 50' PEC.
Back to the subject of IR conversions it does seem rather bizarre. On my course at OATS one guy had a canadian IR...he got an assessment from the CAA I believe...well i think..memory of 2 years ago is a bit hazy......Now I dont know if the rule is rigid or whether obtaining an assessment would be possible but if it reduce the time significantly then surely it must be worth the hassle....however, I think it will still depend heavily on experience - I can just see the UK CAA saying to someone who just passed their canadian IR to do the whole course - whilst the airline pilot with 2000 hrs may be given significant reductions...I dont know to be honest - but surely its worth asking the CAA if an assessment would produce clearer requirements?
Hope this helps,
FF
PPRuNe Handmaiden
If you hold an ICAO ATPL with +500 hours multi crew, you have to do a type rating or if you have +500 hours on that type, a check ride with a CAA examiner. The check ride more or less encompasses an initial IR.
If you hold an ICAO CPL or ATPL but don't have 500 hours multi crew, tough, you need to do a 55 hour multi IR course. (you get - 5 hours off).
Blame JAR.
If you hold an ICAO CPL or ATPL but don't have 500 hours multi crew, tough, you need to do a 55 hour multi IR course. (you get - 5 hours off).
Blame JAR.