Rumour has it that when JAR was introduced "the French" wanted a ban on PPL+IR requiring at minimum CPL or preferrably ATPL level through University to be allowed IFR...
Don't know of it was true, I did mine just before the transition anyway, but that would've spelled the end for sure! Perhaps we should be glad it isn't any worse than it is already.
By the way, has anyone taken notice of the requirements and resulting cost for a Helo IR? It's being advertized at around 40000 EUR in Sweden...
Krister,
interesting, have not heard that one yet. If they indeed wanted that, boy have they reversed their stance. First they want to ban the IR and now they are largely responsible for EASA to finally reckognize that IR is not something which requires rocket science...
It could well be one reason however why the French GA scene basically voted with their feet and went predominantly FAA/N-Reg. That in itself now more and more proves like a very useful protest and seems to produce at least some results. I am not holding my breath but maybe if the momentum now gained via the IR-NP can be held up, we might see more of the same.
By the way, has anyone taken notice of the requirements and resulting cost for a Helo IR? It's being advertized at around 40000 EUR in Sweden...
Its probably cheaper - and in the long run much more productive - to emigrate.
I had thought about transitioning to helos with an IR, a relatively reasonable move in JAR-FCL. But with the new regs you're not credited for any time so to go from CPL/ME/IR fixed wing to rotor is like buying a Mansion with a Rolls-Royce and sugar on top.
What in the world are these legislators on? Meth? The FAA must be looking forward to tons of helopilots in the future...
Emigrate indeed.
IFR in helis requires a twin turbine in Europe. There are very few exceptions that sneaked in under the wire years ago (I believe 1 or 2 Jet Rangers in the UK).
So, if you can't afford €40k then ... 
Even in the USA there are almost no single turbines certified for IFR. A bloke I know who went around the world bought one of these just for the trip - a Hughes 500 I think. It is parked where I am based, painted bright orange.
That's correct Peter. It's a niche market so what better than using the experience one has to add an advantage. Sadly not possible with Part-FCL. Training is normally done on single engine turbines, so not quite as expensive as the twin option.
My own interest was in rescue or ambulance ops, but offshore could be of interest as well. Not gonna happen I fear...
we operate a 172n and I have to say its a great aeroplane. it will make 12000. however as peter says it is a bit range limited.
however I am now starting to get alot of hanger experience from the 172 centurion operator who is based at our field. with it being turbocharged 14000 is no problem and the rate of climb doesnt drop off as you get up high. also with it being much more fuel efficent the problem with reduced range is also much reduced.
I suspect the biggest problem using a 172 or 28 as an ifr tourer is ice
