Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

CB-IR / CB IR / CBIR (merged)

CB IR – any FTOs preparing to run it?

Apparently it is now heading for EU parliament approval and it looks like it will go through, which would be great news.

Does anybody know of any FTOs likely to be running the ground school and/or the flying portion?

And when will the online question banks be generated? I believe the syllabus is a cut down version of the JAA IR one i.e. no new questions.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

It will take more time. Once the regulation has “gone through”, ATOs wil probably have to get their courses approved by their controlling authorities. And these will defo be totally unprepared…

Last Edited by boscomantico at 19 Feb 09:32
Mainz (EDFZ), Germany

http://rateoneaviation.com/ (Jim Thorpe) is working towards the flying side.

For the TK, EASA plans to generate the new question categories within 2-3 months of the rule being published. I don’t know what ground schools are planning yet.

As the test standards are the same as any other IR, one might have hoped that the flying part of the syllabus requires little or no tweaking.

The Theoretical Knowledge is a different game but the professional ground schools like CATS are fairly on the ball, and I’m sure they have their computers at the ready to delete the bits no longer needed.

Does there have to be some Acceptable Means of Compliance rules written by EASA? Whichever way, the longest wait will be for the approvals.

Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)

Bookworm knows far more but AIUI the IRT is the same i.e. NDB stuff still there (in the UK, for sure).

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

As the test standards are the same as any other IR, one might have hoped that the flying part of the syllabus requires little or no tweaking.

But the philosophy is different. The ATO has to assess competence across the skills needed based on prior experience, and then fill in the gaps, which is radically different to a classic 50-hour start-with-exercise-1 course.

Does there have to be some Acceptable Means of Compliance rules written by EASA?

The draft AMC came out with the CRD. It will be updated to reflect any changes to the implementing rules in EASA Committee, but it’s usually ready to go within days of the regulation being published.

I believe the syllabus is a cut down version of the JAA IR one

Have a look at the AMC to Part FCL, there is no published syllabus for the IR! That is probably because the JAA never published an IR syllabus either, so they had nothing to copy.
It has always been up to the FTO/ATO to produce their own IR syllabus.

But the philosophy is different. The ATO has to assess competence across the skills needed based on prior experience, and then fill in the gaps, which is radically different to a classic 50-hour start-with-exercise-1 course.

So it will presumably be rather more like the current conversion of an ICAO IR, which is more along the lines of “training as required by the head of training”; the main point it that one has to pass the test!

As the holder of an FAA IR I am more interested in the substitution of an oral examination by the examiner, which means I don’t have to go and sit exams in Gatwick. I wonder how that part of the test will be done, presumably the procedure will be somewhat prescribed by the CAA or EASA?

Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)

The current conversion route still requires you to log 15hrs.

My view, disputed by some (often the case ) is that almost nobody will reach the UK CAA IRT standard in the 15hrs. I know of just one (relatively genuine) skygod who did it in 15 at Bournemouth, and a few who did it in 15 in Spain. I took about 20-25 and in the end it was still touch and go whether I could fly the NDB approach to the required 5 degrees, at any of the coastal airports which were guaranteed to be the test location. So the “zero FTO time” is an illusion – unless you know an instructor, or somebody, who works “in the system” and who can train you up. If NDBs weren’t in there, the picture would change dramatically.

As the holder of an FAA IR I am more interested in the substitution of an oral examination by the examiner, which means I don’t have to go and sit exams in Gatwick.

I agree – that’s a massive advantage for anybody who actually flies IFR for real, because the examiner should (hopefully!) not be able to challenge him/her on anything of substance.

I wonder how that part of the test will be done, presumably the procedure will be somewhat prescribed by the CAA or EASA?

That’s something else for which a standard will need to be drawn up. There must be a written standard, otherwise – with some of the examiners – we will be back to the “170A flight test” route where the “170A examiner” can fail you for just about anything and (£500-1000 down the drain) there isn’t anything you can do. The examiner I had for the IRT (a CAA staff FE) was outstandingly professional but I know they aren’t all like that, especially given some of the “aviation characters” who have managed to become “industry examiners”.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I was just on the phone to an industry IR examiner and the oral part is still not defined, though the concept of an oral test is already in existence for some other areas. It seems that things are moving though; a few months ago this CB IR course and associated conversions were only being talked about on the internet forums, not so now.
The chap I was talking to is also very professional.

Last Edited by Neil at 19 Feb 16:11
Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)
495 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top