Peter wrote:
A 500ft DH has a poor utility, especially in a modern aircraft i.e. anything built in the last 30 years and in which most of the stuff actually works. It devalues ILS and LPV. The 1500m min vis is also of poor utility value especially for departures.
I do not agree. I think this is plenty. It is quite rare that we need to perform an ILS all the way down to 200’ AAL. Also the revalidation requirements are less stringent than for the IR. The only blocker is the requirement to train at at an ATO.
My take is that htis is yet another good improvement over the past situation and it deserves a chance. We’ll see what the uptake is. If there is no uptake it probably means that there is no significant market for a PPL/IR in which case there is no point in wasting additional energy in coming up with even more regulation.
If there is no uptake it probably means that there is no significant market for a PPL/IR
It seems a sacrilege to say this but I think that is the real issue – there is only a very small market for a PPL/IR.
You need people in the right situation and probably in the right “stage of life” to get value out of an IR. Of course that could be a circular argument i.e. only semi-retired people have the time and money and freedom from family committments to do it…
IMHO the industry in Europe will never accept the blindingly obvious lessons from the USA i.e.
I guess the BIR will formalise the UK IMCR (probably with a flight test) into a Europe-wide version. There are thousands of IMCR holders. What the take-up will be elsewhere in Europe is anyone’s guess but unless the above points are addressed it won’t make any difference IMHO.
I am doing my MEIR training based at an airfield where there is no ATO based, in “own” (I rent from someone else) aircraft (And that’s not in the states!)
Another problem with the CBIR is the miss information spread by ATO’s. Airlines dont like the CBIR, you never get an airline job with a CBIR, your licence is marked differently.
When in reality they dont you going to some independent IRI. They want you to spend 55 hours with them.
However givern time and feedback on how much money you can save, how much more convenient it is and the fact that’s its no hindrance to getting an airline job I think this will change.
I don’t think it will change because “since for ever” it has been very obviously possible to get a CPL/IR (which is all you get out of the 80k-100k FTO) for far less than the 80k-100k. I reckon about 50% off if you know how. The CB IR route saves only a little bit compared to that, because most people need about 50hrs to reach the IRT standard anyway, so the CBIR versus the full EASA IR saving is just the saving from the 30hrs you can fly with a freelance IRI… maybe 3k?
Yet only a few of those heading for the airlines are doing that.
Just a few private pilots have done that route, but they were initially private pilots (even though some I have known actually did very little flying, after getting their PPL).
So the “no airline will want you unless you graduate from a proper FTO course” FUD seems to work pretty well. There is a notorious well known UK airline forum with a section for this topic and most of the people in there saying this are FTO owners or instructors, posting covertly.
In reality the way to get an airline job is to be really good and do really well in the interview (they need to “like” you) and do really well in the sim check.
Bathman I freelance at an IR ATO and today all students (mainly working towards frozen ATPLs) avail themselves of the CBIR route. The CAA is more careful in issuing the rating so you can’t go to Gatwick and pick up the rating in a morning, but possibly because the front desk staff need a higher permission to issue it. The airlines do not care, although typically you need a first time pass on your IR to get an assessment.
oday all students (mainly working towards frozen ATPLs) avail themselves of the CBIR route
The Q I would ask is whether they actually fly 30hrs with an external freelance IRI.
Otherwise, it probably doesn’t make a whole lot of difference to the overall cost.
Peter negative, the 30 hours, or 20 hours if they hold a CPL, is carried out in the SIM, so if there is a saving by going with a non-ATO IRI, I can’t imagine it is significant if any.
Peter wrote:
it has been very obviously possible to get a CPL/IR (which is all you get out of the 80k-100k FTO) for far less than the 80k-100k.
A well-established commercial Swedish ATO states on their web page that a Frozen ATPL will cost you in the order of €61k-67k. (Or £52k-57k, if that’s what you mean.) They claim this covers everything including CAA fees.
A_A quite competitive – UK providers are more in the £65-75k range, admittedly there are much more expensive providers as well.
