Passed!

Thanks!

First of all, for the German speakers: I will write it up a bit more in detail in the next issue of P&F.

For the others, a few “notes”:

- I can only speak for how it works in Germany. In theory, it should be the same everywhere else in EASA-land, but practice is different as we know. Switzerland is a bit of special case, since they, not being part of the EU, have had their “own” implementation of the third country IR conversion process. They say it’s tougher there, particularly the oral part, for which the BAZL has made much more precise and strict requirements.

- with the very pragmatic legislation we have had for almost a couple of years now, the IR conversion might be seen (and feels) a bit like “sticking up the middle finger” to the european CAAs and the european FTO industry. After all, I now have an EASA IR without having ever seen an ATO theory classroom from the inside or ever having flown a single minute in an ATO aircraft. CVFR (at the time) was given to me for free after I got the FAA IR. Same with the AZF (English FRTOL in Germany). On the other hand: personally, since I am “flying nuts”, over the last fifteen years, I have spent thousands of hours reading and keeping up with airlaw, weather, flightplanning etc. by reading forums like this one, magazines, etc., which is worth much much more than any ATPL full classroom course. So it really doesn’t feel so much like “sticking up the finger”. For me, it feels more like “justice” that I have now essentially been given the EASA IR “for free”. It may be a different case for people who have only just obtained their (say) FAA IR and maybe accumulated their 50 hours IFR PIC in the States right after the test. These people will have to prepare a bit more for the test.

The “process” is quite easy:

First, you have to fill out a form and fax it to the LBA. On that form, you state your ICAO license number (the one with the IR attached) and request to fly with an examiner of your choice. The form has to be countersigned by either an examiner or an ATO official, certifying that you have >50 hours IFR PIC in your logbook. The LBA usually responds within a few days and confirms the nomination of the requested examiner. You can then schedule the test with the examiner. The test is pretty standard and the content is laid down in the IR test protocol.

One will of course need an audiogram on the class 1 or two medical.

Regarding “preparation” for the test. I would say there are basically three ways of preparing for the test. 1) is to do nothing. This is acceptable for people who are very current and who know they have good (Euro-ATO-like) cockpit procedures and a solid knowledge or airlaw, flightplanning and MET. But it still carries a bit of a risk, because, let’s be honest, when have you last practiced IMC steep turns or holds? 2) Would be to get in contact with an IFR instructor or ATO and have them get you totally up to standard for the test, both on the flying and the oral. This I would recommend this to those who have only just gotten their FAA IR, with little or no experience. But it will cost quite a lot of money. 3) Is the “middle way”, which is what I did. That is: I flew the test program once with a IRI, where he pointed out serveral useful things to me. Then I went out two more times by myself and flew a couple of appoaches (at the place where the test would take place). This really got me confident. Last but not least, one evening, I met that IRI once again and took a couple of hours “groundschool” with him, to anwer a list of theory questions I had (remember, I have never had any formal theory classes on IR stuff).

Regarding NDB approaches / holds: in my case, we flew both an NDB hold and an NDB approach. HOWEVER: most if not all German examiners are very pragmatic and nowadays operate on the “best use of equipment” principle, and since every IFR aircraft in Germany has an IFR GPS, these NDB procedures are flown at least partially “referencing” the GPS overlay, so no worries whatsoever. I also used the autopilot a lot during the test.

Regarding the “oral”: a rather short, pleasant conversation on the flight that I had pre-planned, today’s weather, NOTAMs, IFR minimums, IFR procedures in general, W&B. But again: I am probably an exception since I devoured everything “GA” over the last 15 years, so again: don’t take it too lightly if you are not as “involved”.

P.S. The weather was interesting by the way. A cold front had just moved through the moment I landed at the airport where the flight test was done. So, I ended up flying solo IFR to my IFR checkride appointment.

But it is pragmatic because somebody who doesn’t know the stuff will never pass the oral.

Yes, but don’t think of this a a full blown “exam”. In fact, EASA-FCL says something like “the applicant must demonstrate adequate knowledge of airlaw, meteorology and flightplanning”, which clearly implies that the knowledge level expected is very different then from someone who is going the ATO route.

So yes, if you don’t know anything, you will probalby fail, but if you know “something”, you will probably pass.

how long in a casual conversation would it take you (or me) to work out if someone really knows how to fly from say Stuttgart to Biarritz, IFR? 30 minutes?

The examiner is not interested in these things. Under flightplanning, they still seem to subsumize “creating a flight log” and not “getting a complex IFR FPL into the system”.

In general, I think they are not much interested (at least during the exam) in what your routine flying is like. But then I have only had one exam.

I did tell him just briefly that I got my IR 15 years ago, but didn’t tell him what I did after that. He didn’t seem to be interested and I didn’t want to unduly raise expectations.