Qalupalik wrote:
Unfortunately the Irish Aviation Authority has decided that the IR theory exams are necessary even for ICAO IR holders who have 50 PIC IFR hours
On the backside of it this relates to missing “PBN training” for ICAO holders, it’s understood that load of FAA IR holders lack PBN basics, at least a high level impression from reading US centric forums but they are not falling out of the sky neither 
I would be more concerned about those who are taught 25h of NDB hold and 25h of conventional SID/STAR that involve 9 frequencies and think that is the real flying, I doubt UK CAA would insist on that much PBN for ICAO IR conversion? after all there is not that much IAP to train on, NDB is still flown on IR tests and “real pilots” don’t use GPS, those who fly on NDB/VOR are told their recommended minima are 600ft agl and are hell scared of 200ft DH (which is very sensible IMHO: 200ft is damn easy on ILS & LPV but bloody scary on NDB/VOR, who did ever fly these for real down to 300ft in 2km visbility?)
PS: AFAIK, DGAC does insist on “load of PBN training” during ICAO IR holders conversion, however, that was left at IRI/IRE discretion rather than re-inventing the wheel on CBIR TK exams !
load of FAA IR holders lack PBN basics, at least a high level impression from reading US centric forums
That’s nonsense. Flying GPS procedures is trivial – unless you invent some huge manual full of BS that’s irrelevant to flying a plane. All been done before.
But I may not have understood your post.
Peter wrote:
That’s nonsense. Flying GPS procedures is trivial – unless you invent some huge manual full of BS that’s irrelevant to flying a plane
Of course, it’s trivial and no need to make a university degree out of it but people getting lost is not unheard of: load or activate? direct or vector-to-final? GPS/VLOC not switching? LPV approach vs LPV minima? LNAV+V approach? approach & missed not sequencing when nothing to sequence…
OK looking practically,
- Some have panel IFR GPS but don’t use it as it’s too complicated: I better have an ATC to vector me out to an ILS
- Some are hell scared “to PBN themselves in/out” without published RNAV SID/IAP: maybe too much pilot wisdom? or just lack of understanding of the topic and margins/risks involved?
As I said one rarely fall out of the sky “without PBN BS” but I think it’s useful knowledge for IFR when GPS is the only game in town and ATC/ILS are not around…
And because of that, it is entirely justified to do all theory subjects? How exactly is Meteorology, IFR Communications, or Human Performance different? Or Air Law, for that matter? Do you really have to do all the Flight Planning exams again just to prove you know when to do a pre-departure RAIM check and where to get the relevant NOTAMS?
This action by the Irish CAA is completely illegal, but the problem as with Customs/Immigration PPR for airfields with customs presence in France (which is also not backed up by any law) it is impossible to fight that sort of arbitrary administration…
people getting lost is not unheard of: load or activate? direct or vector-to-final? GPS/VLOC not switching? LPV approach vs LPV minima? LNAV+V approach?
We did this all before in the PBN threads I linked, That is a wholly different discussion. It is a de facto “type rating for avionics”.
Which “nobody wants” because it would open a can of worms, making it illegal to use a GPS even with a PPL. It would also be difficult to train because most instructors don’t fly a plane for real and/or their training fleet is standardised so they could train the innermost details of a G1000 but not an IFD540, etc. Also, the FTO business rarely caters for owners (most FTOs will not train in a customer plane).
The PBN stuff that’s been put together, into huge manuals, is a different thing. It is dry theoretical BS about different kinds of waypoints, etc, etc.
Yes; a lot of pilots don’t understand their GPS, in the same way that a large % (probably most) Skydemon users don’t know how to configure and use that program, but that is a failure of a different area of flight training.
None of this is related to Ireland not implementing the ICAO IR to CB IR conversion as per EU law – or perhaps more accurately, interpreting an ambiguity to their (FTO revenue maximising) advantage. It’s even slightly funny, given the small size of the GA community in Ireland and the absolutely miniscule size of the PPL/IR community in Ireland, which can probably be counted on one’s fingers.
This action by the Irish CAA is completely illegal, but the problem as with Customs/Immigration PPR for airfields with customs presence in France (which is also not backed up by any law) it is impossible to fight that sort of arbitrary administration…
Exactly – it is below the EU radar. But I bet you that if Germany did this, somebody would do something about it. In Ireland there is nobody.
Peter wrote:
Flying GPS procedures is trivial
You’re absolutely right. Flying RNP procedures is trivial – but managing them are not. (It is the opposite with traditional approaches.)
Everyone who ever got an IR know what can kill you on a traditional approach (like false glidepaths, not checking ids etc.), but unless they’ve taken RNP training they won’t know what can kill you on an RNP approach. Note that this knowledge is general and not dependent on a particular piece of avionics. (As the avionics manufacturers can’t decide for themselves exactly how the boxes will work but have to follow the TSOs.)
All been done before.
Indeed, but some people apparently still don’t understand this.
I am one of them; I don’t get this at all. It looks like another invented subject. I would rather jump off Beachy Head than having to pass an exam on the PPL/IR PBN Manual
But this is totally off topic for this thread, and the latest arrival concerning the Irish CAA making it much harder for Ireland based N-reg owners to comply with EASA FCL.
In fact, having spoken to many many pilots over the years, the written exams which have always been a core feature of the European IR exams, have been a major factor in people going N-reg, and this Irish move just sets everything right back almost 20 years. Not quite 20 years because the 50hr (55hr for ME IR) FTO €€€ extraction process is still avoided.
We can debate if one really needs PBN theory & training to fly RNP procedures (maybe they should, if god forbids they start using GPS magenta guidance in/out of VFR airfields with VFR scud run along terrain or IFR in clouds depending on their personal taste) and also if they need to be familiar with their avionics (after all no excuse as they put their life on it)
However, we agree using “PBN ticket” to smash a pilots with 7 TK exams is out of proportion, probably illegal interpretation of EU laws?
I understand this ICAO/FAA IR to FCL conversion business is highly NAA/ATO/IRE dependent (some think it should involve handflown NDB on raw data while the other thinks it’s reckless & dangerous and prefer GPS), I am glad I have gone for EASA IR on day one !
there is btw nothing stopping you from getting (through the conversion route) an IR in let’s say France on an Irish PPL… I’m unsure of the legalities of the Irish ’’banning’’ the conversion using the 50h but I do get why Europe wants to become less tolerant of third country (US, UK etc…) licenses being valid in the Union.
