Timothy wrote:
Bathman wrote:This is not specific to the UK, I have heard it in my corner of Europe too. Low-budget PPL who only want to add a CBIR is too much effort for too little income. It’s much more profitable to copy-paste PPL-CPL-ME-MCC one after the other. They are private companies like any other, they are in the business of making money.
Unfortunately my local ATO refuses to do CBIR and has said they won’t do the BIR either basically due to the time, effort and cost of gaining all their approvals means they have to make the students do 55 hours to make a profit.
I have sent students to ATOs all over the UK and have never experienced this attitude.
Arne wrote:
This is not specific to the UK, I have heard it in my corner of Europe too. Low-budget PPL who only want to add a CBIR is too much effort for too little income. It’s much more profitable to copy-paste PPL-CPL-ME-MCC one after the other. They are private companies like any other, they are in the business of making money.
It only shows once again that one of the main reason people don’t do IR is the lack of availability. This translates to low “bang for the buck”. Too much nonsensical effort needed for too little. This is a hobby for most of us (99.9%), not an investment in future income.
Just been reading some stuff about the BIR in FTN – a UK training industry newsletter. Some of the political background is interesting…
Why would the airlines and ATC particularly require training to be done only at what are largely airline pilot training establishments? That will cripple the BIR, just like it has helped to cripple every other “private IR” since “for ever”, in Europe.
Here one can see Ryanair’s concern, which would be valid if BIR holders were to fly around Europe without ELP, but non ELP4 holders can’t do that anyway. Domestically they might speak the local language but nearly all VFR pilots do that anyway and most of the airports in question are accessible to VFR traffic too
It may surprise some that an “IR” which is usable only within the country of issue could be seen as a problem for the airlines. France has had that (a full IR which didn’t need ELP) for many years, losing it only in 2018. The non-English comms in France at big airline airports have always been highly controversial in the airline business, and this is probably what Ryanair is concerned about, but BIR holders are hardly going to be going to CDG or Orly, for simple cost reasons.
Interesting find Peter. Ryanair’s objection is of course total nonsense, as AFAIK German LP is sufficient for flying to basically all of their German bases and destinations, and it will be similar in other countries. I dunno any airport in Germany where ELP would be required at all, possibly EDDF?
Peter wrote:
Ryanair is concerned about, but BIR holders are hardly going to be going to CDG or Orly, for simple cost reasons.
AFAIK I think they operate from accessible GA airports (I literally did Stansted-Bergerac route 30000ft bellow and I landed 5min after with the airline tickets in my hand 
), but the argument is flawed again, they already mix with VFR French speaking only traffic in the circuit (including those speaking French by choice 
) but I think we are talking holds/ils here?
Peter wrote:
The non-English comms in France at big airline airports have always been highly controversial in the airline business, and this is probably what Ryanair is concerned about, but BIR holders are hardly going to be going to CDG or Orly, for simple cost reasons.
Neither will Ryanair fly to CDF or Orly, for the very same cost reasons. ;-)
Timothy wrote:
I sometime wonder if some forumites (not just here, everywhere) will object to anything on principal. If you don’t want a BIR, don’t get one; but don’t try to prevent others from having it.
Hear! Hear!
Timothy wrote:
In an ideal world you could have a BIR(R) with “differences training” to remove the 200’ restriction. The 1500m might also be reduced to, say 1200m.As this is properly competence based, I wonder why not train and test to 200’ and then grant that privilege? How long can it possibly take any IRI worth their salt to train someone who can fly to 400’ to fly 200’? An extra couple of hours? I get them doing it on the sim before we ever get near an aircraft. If they do it right, the last 200’ is no more difficult than the previous 200’
Sounds like a pragmatic approach, so will probably remain in the ideal world.
@Peter’s comment about currency is surely the key. A BIR who has built recent hours in the system, including approaches to BIR limits, is likely better able achieve what you’re suggesting than someone with a CBIR or even full IR who has gone most of a year without and needs a revalidation (old greybeard IR pilots with 1000’s of hours perhaps excepted).
Peter wrote:
Why would the airlines and ATC particularly require training to be done only at what are largely airline pilot training establishments? That will cripple the BIR, just like it has helped to cripple every other “private IR” since “for ever”, in Europe
I think you answered your own question. ATC and the airlines want it crippled, to keep GA out.
The BIR as described would suit me well.
