What do you make of it, bookworm?
Flight time under IFR for the purpose of converting an ICAO IR to EASA is exactly that. The only issue is the intention in crediting PIC time towards the CBM IR, where it’s possible (looking at the draft AMC) that the hours to be counted are the instrument time rather than the flight time under IFR. We’ll find out more when the final AMC is published next week.
But UK pilots will also be well aware that flight in VMC, on simple PPL privileges, in Class G, in accordance with IFR rules, can be logged as IFR time.
Whilst that is true for a UK National (pre 1999) licence, it has never been the case for a UK JAA licence which has always been subject to JAR-FCL 1.175 with the exception of night flying.
JAR–FCL 1.175 Circumstances in which
an IR is required
(a) The holder of a pilot licence (A) shall
not act in any capacity as a pilot of an aeroplane
under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), except as a
pilot undergoing skill testing or dual training,
unless the holder has an instrument rating
(IR) appropriate to the category of aircraft
issued in accordance with JAR–FCL.
I stand corrected (not the 1st time 
) but that just means anybody who got their PPL before 1999 can just open their old logbooks and nominate loads of VMC flights as “IFR”.
Not that I am complaining but sometimes it does pay to look a gift horse in the mouth.
I guess the biggest applicability of this is to
When I added the IR(R) to my EASA PPL, I had to nominate “IFR” time. I couldn’t be bothered to total all the IFR flights that were actually in VMC so I took the actual = simulated instrument time and just doubled it.
… I am not sure where this discussion is going but ..
The change from ACTUAL instrument time to UNDER IFR FLIGHT PLAN was a very deliberate discussion and subsequently choice.
It has now officially become law.. This has taken a very long time to achieve.
I am not sure how close your source is Peter .. But to change a law as suggested…. An act of god would be just as likely.
.. Why do you think an FTO has any role in this conversion? For initial yes.. But for conversion I fail to see why there would be any role for a fto for the conversion. Wether you need recurrency training is a different discussion.
The change from ACTUAL instrument time to UNDER IFR FLIGHT PLAN
AFAICS, it is not “under IFR flightplan” but “under instrument flight rules” which are two very different things (see the UK case).
The “under IFR flight plan” used to be used for example by the german LBA in pre-JAR times when they still used to convert third country instrument ratings. But now under EASA, for the conversion, it is “under instrument flight rules”.
What is the difference?
?
One can be IFR without any flightplan.
A flight shall be conducted either under the Visual Flight Rules or the Instrument Flight Rules. Two choices, the pilot decides. If you opt to fly IFR then you are IFR there are no other op[tions, it is a set of rules that has nothing whatsoever to do with the weather, flight plans etc. You may be required to file a flight plan but that can vary locally, it has no bearing on which set of rules you adopt..
In the UK there is no legal requirement to log IFR flight time however there is a requirement to log special conditions:
Art 79 (3) The information recorded in accordance with paragraph (2) must include:
(d) information about any special conditions under which the flight was conducted,
including night flying and instrument flying;
Traditionally, this has beeen flight by sole reference to instruments defined un EASA as Instrument Flight Time
‘Instrument flight time’ means the time during which a pilot is controlling an aircraft in flight solely by reference to instruments.
IFR Flight Time is largely meaningless as it has no correlation with skilll or experience, two of the paramaters used in the licensing process. It is the product of bureaucrats who have no conception of what the difference or relevance is.
This is an interesting thread however, I’m sure we’ve covered it before and the conclusion was that instrument flight time was, as Tumbleweed says, flight which is solely by reference to the instruments. When I first got my IMCR, I used to log instrument flight time when vmc top, on the basis that i wasn’t VFR (ie in sight of of the surface) and therefore by default, it had to be instrument flight time. I now only log in actual IMC, which clearly is far less.
it does beg the question though, if the definition is correct and it is flight which is in IMC ONLY, then how are the airline crews logging so much “instrument flight time” when in all likelihood, only a few minutes here and there will be in IMC? A friend of mine flies for Jet2, he always logs every minute of every flight as instrument flight time. His explanation? Because he’s flying on a flight plan. Whilst this is technically incorrect, he couldn’t possibly be logging “VFR” time flying a 737 could he?
