FAA IR instead of IMC?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly I can't be arsed to do all your work for you. If you see no value (i.e. something constructive) in understanding just one of many issues faced then more fool you.
I think the IMCR is very well worth while trying to save. Trying to do so might well fail - bit surely it has to be worth a shot?
I have always believed the FAA IR is not the answer - but as more than a few pilots have found, it is the only practical alternative. Just do not be surprised if in Euroland once the IMCR is gone, next on the list will be the FAA IR.
cjboy
Exactly right, and we should all congratulate Bose for his efforts and give him every support.
I think this illustrates very well another aspect of the dreadful current state of affairs - EASA has brought with it uncertainty. No one is sure whether the IMCR will go, whether EASA will target Euro based N reg aircraft, or whether an accessable PPL IR can be negotiated by Bose and others. It is a muddle, completely unsatisfactory in a business were certainty is a pre-requisite.
What a shambles.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rustle
You could try being a bit less aggressive in your postings. I've just looked at that 2002 thread you link to, and I note that some people had the same "I've done it so can't see why everybody else can't" attitude as they have today. I also note that there is the same bu11sh1t in there as we hear today e.g.
For starters, the TMA's are already full, as are the airways feeding them - hence slot times and height capping
which is nonsense. You can do a flight at FL100-FL200 right across any bit of Europe and you are very unlikely to get visual with anything, short of FL350 traffic high above. I've already explained why this is and won't do it again. Anybody who actually flies airways at GA levels knows this anyway; the extreme scarcity of traffic in that height band is quite evident enough.
Slot times do exist but they are merely an artefact of the Eurocontrol computer. They almost always mean nothing in the context of any real bottlenecks. Height capping? I'd love to be height capped to FL200
There should be less aggression in these discussions.
Pprune has a lot wider expertise on it, and a lot fewer nonstop meaningless one-liner generators, than Flyer.co.uk (which is a good thing) but it has a lot more people who behave aggressively (which is very bad).
Fuji
Very true, but has there ever been "certainty" in this game? I know you have been flying far longer than I have, but I have never seen any stability. Everything is up for grabs, and we pilots (well, anybody who is after anything beyond the simplest UK-only-VFR capability) live a constant paper chase.
Uncertainty is also created deliberately by regulatory bodies. Nobody is going to propose a hard-hitting and extremely controversial regulation in a half hearted manner.
You could try being a bit less aggressive in your postings. I've just looked at that 2002 thread you link to, and I note that some people had the same "I've done it so can't see why everybody else can't" attitude as they have today. I also note that there is the same bu11sh1t in there as we hear today e.g.
For starters, the TMA's are already full, as are the airways feeding them - hence slot times and height capping
which is nonsense. You can do a flight at FL100-FL200 right across any bit of Europe and you are very unlikely to get visual with anything, short of FL350 traffic high above. I've already explained why this is and won't do it again. Anybody who actually flies airways at GA levels knows this anyway; the extreme scarcity of traffic in that height band is quite evident enough.
Slot times do exist but they are merely an artefact of the Eurocontrol computer. They almost always mean nothing in the context of any real bottlenecks. Height capping? I'd love to be height capped to FL200
There should be less aggression in these discussions.
Pprune has a lot wider expertise on it, and a lot fewer nonstop meaningless one-liner generators, than Flyer.co.uk (which is a good thing) but it has a lot more people who behave aggressively (which is very bad).
Fuji
Very true, but has there ever been "certainty" in this game? I know you have been flying far longer than I have, but I have never seen any stability. Everything is up for grabs, and we pilots (well, anybody who is after anything beyond the simplest UK-only-VFR capability) live a constant paper chase.
Uncertainty is also created deliberately by regulatory bodies. Nobody is going to propose a hard-hitting and extremely controversial regulation in a half hearted manner.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji wrote:
I don't follow your logic here, are you suggesting that taken to its extreme all US airlines will be banned from flying to Europe because the crews have FAA IRs?
I have always believed the FAA IR is not the answer - but as more than a few pilots have found, it is the only practical alternative. Just do not be surprised if in Euroland once the IMCR is gone, next on the list will be the FAA IR.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
I also note that there is the same bu11sh1t in there as we hear today e.g.
For starters, the TMA's are already full, as are the airways feeding them - hence slot times and height capping
which is nonsense.
For starters, the TMA's are already full, as are the airways feeding them - hence slot times and height capping
which is nonsense.
Originally Posted by Me
...I would have thought my comment about TMAs being "full" was clearly tongue in cheek...
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't follow your logic here, are you suggesting that all US airlines will be banned from flying to Europe because the crews have FAA IRs?
Many do though and I'll probably be one of them soon. The loss of an automatic IMC rating from the FAA IR might see the numbers doing it from the UK reduce though.
Last edited by Contacttower; 2nd Dec 2007 at 21:56.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uncertainty is also created deliberately by regulatory bodies. Nobody is going to propose a hard-hitting and extremely controversial regulation in a half hearted manner.
I suppose my point was that under the auspices of the CAA so far as FCL was concerned we have had a long period of stability. Pilots knew the requirments - and they knew where they stood.
EASA has caused much instability. Pilots do not know whether to train towards an IMCR. They dont know whether there might be further challenges to the FAA IR (although I dont it) and they dont know whether thier will be other widespread changes.
Perhaps EASA was a great mistake but it is too late for that.
However if EASA is not aware how strongly we feel about certain of the proposed changes then we shouldnt be surprised if changes there will be - and we will not like them
Returning to the issue, given that the life of an IMCR is 25 months, can anyone tell me if this means the CAA will have to cease issueing the rating or instructors have to cease signing off the renewal at leat 25 months before the rating is abolished (if that comes too pass)?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No don't think Fuji was saying that...I think the FAA IR isn't the answer because it just seems so silly to go to another country to do a rating that isn't valid in the aircraft of your home country.
Apologies if my "TMA is full" gag caused FA's PPL-IR campaign to fail
PS You are not on the EASA committee are you?
PPS .. .. .. but I like it - it just makes everyone else realise it is worth trying to do something about it
If you posted under two different names one name would be me and one owuld be you 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA IR will always be completely safe. The only body which can mess with it is the USA and they won't do that since most of the world flies under FAA licenses/ratings. Every U.S. airliner has an FAA ATPL in the LHS and either an ATPL or an FAA CPL/IR (like I have) in the RHS.
A particular country has some control over who flies through its airspace, but this isn't politically possible to mess with. Angola can do that for example (and shoot down anybody flying without permission) but one can't do that sort of thing in Europe.
What this comes down to in the end is control over long term parking of aircraft, according to their registration. Trying to work out how this control could be implemented and enforced is a mind bending exercise, particularly given the very low numbers involved (very low 4 digits for all of Europe). The main population (foreign reg jets etc) will escape simply through mobility - no parking control is possible on them.
There is a side issue involving the use of foreign (FAA) licenses in domestic (G-reg) aircraft (and this could be stopped easily through a change to the ANO) but this is largely moot anyway since very few pilots fly a G-reg on an FAA PPL, and anyway the UK is the only country in Europe that automatically validates ICAO PPLs for use in a G-reg.... The N-reg issue is mostly over the FAA IR and then you are flying an N-reg anyway.
A particular country has some control over who flies through its airspace, but this isn't politically possible to mess with. Angola can do that for example (and shoot down anybody flying without permission) but one can't do that sort of thing in Europe.
What this comes down to in the end is control over long term parking of aircraft, according to their registration. Trying to work out how this control could be implemented and enforced is a mind bending exercise, particularly given the very low numbers involved (very low 4 digits for all of Europe). The main population (foreign reg jets etc) will escape simply through mobility - no parking control is possible on them.
There is a side issue involving the use of foreign (FAA) licenses in domestic (G-reg) aircraft (and this could be stopped easily through a change to the ANO) but this is largely moot anyway since very few pilots fly a G-reg on an FAA PPL, and anyway the UK is the only country in Europe that automatically validates ICAO PPLs for use in a G-reg.... The N-reg issue is mostly over the FAA IR and then you are flying an N-reg anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
Not funny, just boring. You must have something better to do. We got it - you think it is a complete waste of time. How many more times do you want to tell everyone.
I can't figure out if you are really, really thick or just pretending.
The comment you quoted was so obviously referring to a thread from 5 years ago that I cannot fathom how you think I was referring to this new campaign of yours.
Just for once why don't you open your eyes and mind and read some of the very constructive criticisms and helpful advice posted by bose-x, DFC and myself.
The only time a campaign like yours becomes a waste of time is when it can be shot down in flames immediately because the basics are incorrect or not thought about: Things myself, bose and DFC have all mentioned in the various threads scattered around.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any way I can get IFR privileges in CAS on G-reg with an FAA IR?
Reason I ask is that for South Africa I have a 'foreign licence validation' which clears me to fly ZS (SA) reg planes, if I had an IR (FAA or JAA) I could add that to the validation after passing a flight test and that would clear me to fly IFR in ZS reg planes wherever I wanted to.
Is there a way of doing this in the UK?
Reason I ask is that for South Africa I have a 'foreign licence validation' which clears me to fly ZS (SA) reg planes, if I had an IR (FAA or JAA) I could add that to the validation after passing a flight test and that would clear me to fly IFR in ZS reg planes wherever I wanted to.
Is there a way of doing this in the UK?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not the UK anymore, it is Europe, like it or not. You may take a flight test and some ground school and refresher training. The UK stipulates 15hrs for this but now we are part of one Europe I expect the same standard to be applied which hopefully will just be training as required.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The UK stipulates 15hrs for this but now we are part of one Europe I expect the same standard to be applied which hopefully will just be training as required.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any way I can get IFR privileges in CAS on G-reg with an FAA IR?
No.
The conversion process (if it can be called that) from an ICAO IR to a CAA issued JAA IR is this:
- sit all the applicable JAA IR exams, as appropriate according to whether it is a PPL or a CPL
- do min 15hrs flying
- pass the IR checkride
Elsewhere in Europe, the 15hrs requirement may be missing (it is not a JAA thing) but you still have to pass the checkride.
There is no shortcut. The full ground school has to be studied and passed, even if you have an ICAO ATPL. That is the vast bulk of the work. The 15hrs of flying is probably not a major issue for most - you can knock that off in a week.
No.
The conversion process (if it can be called that) from an ICAO IR to a CAA issued JAA IR is this:
- sit all the applicable JAA IR exams, as appropriate according to whether it is a PPL or a CPL
- do min 15hrs flying
- pass the IR checkride
Elsewhere in Europe, the 15hrs requirement may be missing (it is not a JAA thing) but you still have to pass the checkride.
There is no shortcut. The full ground school has to be studied and passed, even if you have an ICAO ATPL. That is the vast bulk of the work. The 15hrs of flying is probably not a major issue for most - you can knock that off in a week.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment you quoted was so obviously referring to a thread from 5 years ago that I cannot fathom how you think I was referring to this new campaign of yours.
. Good luck.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aberdeen, UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bose - are the proposals put forward availiable in the public domain, or on another thread here, or are they for EASA's consumption only currently? Apologies, I'm sure I've seen it on here already - I'll have a search - unless you have a handy link
For those with the time/availiability, possibly an FAA IR would be a better plan as it'll confer automatic IMCR privalages in G-reg and full IR in N reg. And once EASA take over, if the IMCR is not retained, at best we could hope that for a PPL with an FAA IR, to gain an JAA IR would result in 15hrs training and (hopefully) reduced exam requirements?
I'm just trying to work out which is the best route for me. I'll probably decide to do the IMCR anyway, use it for the 2 years before it gets chucked.
My choices seems to be:
IMCR - in the UK, for around £2k - 15hrs, done up the road, should nail it in a week or two.
FAA IR - in the states, around £4-5k, would take me a good few weeks - wife liable to kill me, if I don't take her with me!
JAA IR - possibly somewhere like Aerodynamics - circa £7k (£10k in blighty), but loads of exams - so many months more studying, take a good few weeks, wife liable to kill me in general.
As much as I want to do something which won't get dumped in 2 years, I want to get on and use the rating as marginal VMC definately keeps me stuck on the ground at the moment. I don't need class A access, and I don't need airways, and I'm not going to have access to an N reg any time soon.
I think ultimately I'll just have to take the IMCR route then become a staunch campaigner against it's removal! And possibly add a personal £5-10 an hour "IR fund" in case the worst happens!
Either way, us PPLs wanting an instrument qual are in limbo. But at least I'd get a couple of years (hopefully) use out of it.
And as someone said previously, it's not necessarily the hours requirement which is irritating, it's the exam requirements which assume I want to be an fATPL. If at least those were removed, it would be a great boon. The UK will always remain very expensive (probably even more with the loss of the IMCR), but at least there's the other european outfits who should be able to fill the gap at a lower rate. I'm surprised no eastern european outfits have got in on the act yet - or are they not part of JAA yet?
For those with the time/availiability, possibly an FAA IR would be a better plan as it'll confer automatic IMCR privalages in G-reg and full IR in N reg. And once EASA take over, if the IMCR is not retained, at best we could hope that for a PPL with an FAA IR, to gain an JAA IR would result in 15hrs training and (hopefully) reduced exam requirements?
I'm just trying to work out which is the best route for me. I'll probably decide to do the IMCR anyway, use it for the 2 years before it gets chucked.
My choices seems to be:
IMCR - in the UK, for around £2k - 15hrs, done up the road, should nail it in a week or two.
FAA IR - in the states, around £4-5k, would take me a good few weeks - wife liable to kill me, if I don't take her with me!
JAA IR - possibly somewhere like Aerodynamics - circa £7k (£10k in blighty), but loads of exams - so many months more studying, take a good few weeks, wife liable to kill me in general.
As much as I want to do something which won't get dumped in 2 years, I want to get on and use the rating as marginal VMC definately keeps me stuck on the ground at the moment. I don't need class A access, and I don't need airways, and I'm not going to have access to an N reg any time soon.
I think ultimately I'll just have to take the IMCR route then become a staunch campaigner against it's removal! And possibly add a personal £5-10 an hour "IR fund" in case the worst happens!
Either way, us PPLs wanting an instrument qual are in limbo. But at least I'd get a couple of years (hopefully) use out of it.
And as someone said previously, it's not necessarily the hours requirement which is irritating, it's the exam requirements which assume I want to be an fATPL. If at least those were removed, it would be a great boon. The UK will always remain very expensive (probably even more with the loss of the IMCR), but at least there's the other european outfits who should be able to fill the gap at a lower rate. I'm surprised no eastern european outfits have got in on the act yet - or are they not part of JAA yet?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you don't want a frozen ATPL why don't you just do the IR exams instead.......
No one has given any timescales for the demise of the IMCR so I would still be doing it now. If nothing else it will sharpen your general flying skills and prepare you for a full IR in the future if you feel your path lies that way.
I did outline the proposals on a thread somewhere, the actual documents are not available for consumption on this website.
No one has given any timescales for the demise of the IMCR so I would still be doing it now. If nothing else it will sharpen your general flying skills and prepare you for a full IR in the future if you feel your path lies that way.
I did outline the proposals on a thread somewhere, the actual documents are not available for consumption on this website.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure how the freedom of information act pertains to this. If you want the stuff if available under the act then you need to write to EASA and the CAA and ask for them.
Distributing them on anonymous forums is not in my remit.
Distributing them on anonymous forums is not in my remit.