Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

EASA proposal to simplify private IR

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

EASA proposal to simplify private IR

Old 22nd Feb 2019, 12:52
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lander, WY, USA
Posts: 127
EASA proposal to simplify private IR

EASA proposal to simplify path to private IR:

https://www.EASA.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/Opinion%20No%2001-2019%20%28A%29.pdf
340drvr is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 16:29
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 876
What a load of tosh, when they could have adopted the proven FAA route.
cessnapete is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 17:20
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,937
Originally Posted by cessnapete View Post
What a load of tosh, when they could have adopted the proven FAA route.
What a load of tosh, when would the EASA ever copy the FAA route?

That said, that initiative is probably one of the last ones originating in the UK, it is largely driven by UK experiences and demand for a more lightweight approach to GA IFR training.
Denti is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2019, 20:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: london
Posts: 623
I particularly like the sound of

Module 2:it introduces2D and 3D instrument approach procedures such as non-directional radio bacon (NDB)
nothing like a bacon buttie at the start of the procedure
homonculus is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 08:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 645
Sunny side up.
Kerosene Kraut is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 11:49
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 326
What a load of tosh, when they could have adopted the proven FAA route.
"They" is all the organisations that represent you who have been involved in this including the UK CAA... So what have YOU done apart from moaning from the side line? Filed any comments on this issue?
Global_Global is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 21:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,369
We started the Basic IR concept over 3 years ago. NAA and industry associations supplied the majority of the unpaid RMT.0677 task force to achieve the final FCL.835.A draft documents. We had several occasionally robust meetings before agreeing our draft NPA!

The only 2 issues which remain to be resolved are the rather disproportionate audiometry requirement for initial issue and the reluctance of EASA to accept BIR training at DTOs.

The BIR will also offer an update route for EIR and IR(R) holders.
BEagle is online now  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 08:25
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Live near Cardiff (from Scotland)
Age: 43
Posts: 796
Hi all, any updates on the BIR launch?
Thanks.
pipertommy is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 13:38
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,154
I can only see this as a positive step, for years the UK took the view that he safest thing to do with a PPL holder that got into marginal weather was to have them climb above the MSA, get a bit of time to think and plan and then fly a published approach into a sutable airfield. So the UK CAA introduced the IMC rating to enable formal training for an instrument qualification that was accessible to PPL holders.

Of course this mini IR was an affront to the sky gods at EASA and they tried to kill it but finally faced with the indisputable facts that an instrument qualification for PPL holders is a vital safety tool they are forced to make an IR accessible to the average PPL holder....................... just a pity that it’s twenty years and many deaths too late that the European Aviation SAFTEY Authority makes the decision.
A and C is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2019, 18:42
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: The woods
Posts: 2
If PP can be encouraged to take an IRT that must be positive.
bill fly is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 00:13
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Midlands
Posts: 8
A and C, the IR was always a PPL rating add on. Did you mean that EASA allowed the IMC rating? I had left GA by then, so I don’t know except that I heard there was some difficulty with the IMC rating being accepted.
IcanCmyhousefromhere is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2019, 10:46
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 74
Posts: 1,045
The IMC rating was a UK only rating dating back to before the UK joined EASA. It was very effective in reducing fatalities caused by the unpredictable British weather. It was intended to get private pilots safely on the ground when trapped by weather.
EASA wanted to scrap it in the name of unification but after much argument with member states all having different agendas they came up with the idea of the Basic Instument Rating.
As usual they gold plated a simple idea and added more training hoops to jump through to qualify. When fully implemented the derogation which allowed the UK to retain the IMC rating will end and the same rating will apply throughout EASA.
The Ancient Geek is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2019, 21:54
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Live near Cardiff (from Scotland)
Age: 43
Posts: 796
Will be interested to hear what the requirements are for upgrading an IR r to a BIR.
The proposed BIR sounds like a real positive step for GA, with all the progression in technology now available in the light aircraft level rolling out an IR aimed at the GA level within Europe is quite exciting.
Obviously I am aware of the CBIR route already established.
pipertommy is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2019, 16:53
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by The Ancient Geek View Post
The IMC rating was a UK only rating dating back to before the UK joined EASA. It was very effective in reducing fatalities caused by the unpredictable British weather. It was intended to get private pilots safely on the ground when trapped by weather.
EASA wanted to scrap it in the name of unification but after much argument with member states all having different agendas they came up with the idea of the Basic Instument Rating.
As usual they gold plated a simple idea and added more training hoops to jump through to qualify. When fully implemented the derogation which allowed the UK to retain the IMC rating will end and the same rating will apply throughout EASA.
An excellent summary.

I have long thought that given the vagaries of the UK (and northern European generally) weather which almost guarantee a VFR bust at some stage, basic instrument training should be included in the PPL syllabus. 10 hours under the hood could make a huge difference and add greatly to pilot competence in an area of GA which may neither need nor want more advanced training.
Gipsy Queen is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.