CB-IR / CB IR / CBIR (merged)

Thanks for the info, someone confirmed CAA does the same to LAPL FI without CPL theory, so not surprising to get “CB/CBIR” with CBIR theory…

Ibra wrote:

Thanks for the info, someone confirmed CAA does the same to LAPL FI without CPL theory, so not surprising to get “CB/CBIR” with CBIR theory…

Actually, it is surprising. If an FI lacks the CPL theory, there is a restriction on what (s)he can do with the FI rating. It makes sense that this is visible on the license.

The CB-IR theory in no way restricts what you can do with the IR or other ratings you have. It only means that you have to do some extra theory if you need to take the HPA course.

Airborne_Again wrote:

It only means that you have to do some extra theory if you need to take the HPA course

Pure semantics, I know, but you do not have to do extra theory, but rather get a credit for the IR part of the HPA course if you have taken the modular IR-route or the ATPL theory. So the standard is actually based on the CB-IR-route.
Germany for sure does not label a “CB-IR” as such – but they certainly state the restriction for a LAPL-only-FI on the license.

The CB-IR theory in no way restricts what you can do with the IR or other ratings you have. It only means that you have to do some extra theory if you need to take the HPA course.

Yes that is the mechanics but at the end of the day you can’t fly the aircraft unless you remove that restriction (doing the theory that is not even enough you need to send the licence to get it printed without it)

Can one fly TBM on using FAA61.75 with FAA SEL & FAA IR (based on FAA IFP exam and EASA IR with CBIR theory), there is one at my home airfield on the N-reg

Ibra wrote:

unless you remove that restriction

You cannot remove that restriction. An IR obtained via the CB-route will always and forever be one the has been, ahem , obtained via the CB-route.

Nowadays, no one in their right mind would take the modular IR. If your goal is professional flying, you would do the ATPL theory right away instead of the CB-IR, but for the practical training there is no reason not to make use of the advantages of the CB-IR training.

Not sure about that? I was told by DGAC, I can get that restriction removed on PPL by sending ATPL pass exams, it may come handy if a friend has a CJ4 to loan (for CPL holders, yes I agree it’s a different story you are not even allowed to do CB-IR on it: you need to get ATPL or IR theory)

So it’s not “forever and never”

Yes I agree for anyone looking to fly professionally, the modular routes can be a big waste of time and money…

tschnell wrote:

Pure semantics, I know, but you do not have to do extra theory, but rather get a credit for the IR part of the HPA course if you have taken the modular IR-route or the ATPL theory. So the standard is actually based on the CB-IR-route.

You’re right of course.

Ibra wrote:

Yes that is the mechanics but at the end of the day you can’t fly the aircraft unless you remove that restriction (doing the theory that is not even enough you need to send the licence to get it printed without it)

At the end of the day you can’t fly that aircraft unless you have the proper SET class rating in you license and you won’t get that unless you have the HPA! So the CB comment is pointless.

Ibra wrote:

I can get that restriction removed on PPL by sending ATPL pass exams

or CPL holders, yes I agree it’s a different story you are not even allowed to do CB-IR on it:

This is not the case. Certainly you can add an IR via a CB-course to a CPL.

Can CPL licence holders add an IR with CBIR theory & CB-course?

To fly privately IFR in C172 to say Cannes