Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

The EIR - beginning to end (merged)

Yes, how true but nearly all new PPL holders chuck the bit of paper away before the 1st 2-yearly revalidation, and most importantly they do so without doing a single challenging flight.

So there is no safety issue…

So the emperor’s trousers can remain all the way down to his ankles and everybody is happy. Well, maybe not those who sunk 10k into a PPL and find they can’t do anything with it, but the majority of them did it only to tick a box on their “lifestyle achievement” list.

But the EIR (like the IR) is a much bigger investment in time and money (and needs a much greater tolerance for hassle and sheer frustration) than a PPL. It is likely to get used for real – simply because so much effort will have been sunk into it.

So there is a need to train pilots to actually use it.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

But the EIR (like the IR) is a much bigger investment in time and money

Is it? It took me more hours to get the PPL than the full IR afterwards, and the whole point of the EIR is that it takes less hours than the full IR, surely?

You keep claiming that the distinction between VFR and IFR is largely artificial, that kind of implies that it can’t be that difficult to learn IR once you can handle the aircraft, so it seems to me you’re contradicting yourself here.

(and needs a much greater tolerance for hassle and sheer frustration)

For me, the PPL required significantly more frustration tolerance than the full IR.

LSZK, Switzerland

But the EIR (like the IR) is a much bigger investment in time and money

15 minimum hours + a large chunk of theory (with some previous knowledge) for the E-IR vs. 45 minimum hours + a considerable chunk of theory (starting from scratch) for the PPL?

Where do you see the bigger investment?

It is likely to get used for real – simply because so much effort will have been sunk into it.

I’m afraid the E-IR is likely to be used less for real than the PPL. The character of the PPL who gets the ticket for 10k as a life achievement who then drops it after a year or two comes up in this forum at regular intervalls (and numbers have been quoted for the UK), but I have yet to meet such a person. I know those who are on their way to ATPL etc. and those who fly for leisure. Maybe I’m in touch with too many enthusiasts and I don’t see all those drop-outs, but I’m just not so sure it is that bad really.

What I’m trying to say is most PPLs I know use their PPL to do what it is there for: Fly aeroplanes.

The E-IR, in contrast: the reason why I’m hesitant about it is that I fear I’ll go through all the effort (and spend all that money) and I won’t be using it so I won’t be able to keep in shape. In the last two years of flying, I rarely would have NEEDED it.

The reason why I would do it regardless is the “learning experience” itself (which comes close to the PPL as a life achievement, of course) and the added safety for emergency situations. As indicated above, airspace clearance hasn’t been an issue on any of my continental European VFR flights.

Hungriger Wolf (EDHF), Germany

Not to cause thread drift here, but I know plenty of microlight pilots that have put more effort into their hobby than most airline pilots have put into their jobs.

You have to be severely limited in your thoughts if the only “true” pilotage is “going places” by IFR.

Anyway. The EIR is more of an extension of the VFR, than it is a limited IFR. At least what practical operations are concerned. But it is also a step on the way to full IR rating.

Last Edited by LeSving at 27 Nov 13:23
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Crazy idea…
Let say if instead of coming up with EIR, EASA came up with IMC (the uk rating) but valid across all Europe. This would allow you to fly outside controlled airspace in IMC and land using instruments. How many people and authors would have said it’s useless, probably giving theoretical scenarios like the one in the article? Even though it works pretty well in the UK.

I’m kind of tired of reading so many negative comments (mostly on other forums) saying everything EASA does is bad. EIR is a stepping stone towards the CB-IR (although maybe not a great one) and it does give you the ability to fly class A. Is EASA really getting everything wrong?

but I know plenty of microlight pilots that have put more effort into their hobby than most airline pilots have put into their jobs

Have you been an airline pilot to be in a position to judge it?.

EDxx, Germany

This would allow you to fly outside controlled airspace in IMC and land using instruments.

Then that would be almost totally useless, as in europe controlled airspace typically starts at 2000ft AGL. There is no weather system occuring with any frequency known to me where this would help. It would be of no useful use enroute as I wouldn’t want to fly for any extended time in IMC in “terrain following mode”, and it would be of no use when there is low stratus as it mostly extends above 2000ft AGL, so such a rating couldn’t be used to get above the stratus.

LSZK, Switzerland

@geekyflyer: The UK IMC rating is useful only in the specific context of the UK ATS system which is very different from what you find in the rest of Europe with basically two different “worlds” (airways and otherwise). You won’t find that in other European countries.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

The IFR privileges of the UK IMCR work in Classes D,E,F,G and in UK airspace only.

It is a full IR in every respect otherwise, except that it needs 1800m vis for takeoff and landing. SIDs and STARs are also not trained.

So if Europe adopted the IMCR, it would be virtually a full IR – except

  • in the UK (lots of Class A)
  • in Italy (lots of Class A)
  • a little bit of France around Paris IIRC (bits of Class A)

So there is zero chance of the IMCR being accepted around Europe generally, ever, because it would totally undermine the IR system.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Thanks Peter for clarify… by ‘outside controlled’ I actually meant what Peter said…

Of course it would never be accepted around Europe… mine was a purely hypothetical exercise to say that even if we got a really useful/sensible rating someone will still complain and say it’s useless.

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top