dejwu wrote:
Any chance they introduce a lighter version of IFR equipment needed?
Even lighter than today? To satisfy Part NCO, you could argue even dead reckoning with a magnetic compass in addition to an ADF… (although it is very unlikely you should… )
NCO.IDE.A.125 Operations under IFR — flight and navigational instruments and associated
equipment
Aeroplanes operated under IFR shall be equipped with:
(a) a means of measuring and displaying the following:
(1) magnetic heading;
(2) time in hours, minutes and seconds;
(3) pressure altitude;
(4) indicated airspeed;
(5) vertical speed;
(6) turn and slip;
(7) attitude;
(8) stabilised heading;
(9) outside air temperature; and
(10) Mach number, whenever speed limitations are expressed in terms of Mach number;
(b) a means of indicating when the supply of power to the gyroscopic instruments is not adequate;
and
(c) a means of preventing malfunction of the airspeed indicating system required in (a)(4) due to
condensation or icing.
NCO.IDE.A.190 Radio communication equipment
(a) Where required by the airspace being flown aeroplanes shall be equipped with radio
communication equipment capable of conducting two-way communication with those
aeronautical stations and on those frequencies to meet airspace requirements.
(b) Radio communication equipment, if required by (a), shall provide for communication on the
aeronautical emergency frequency 121,5 MHz.
(c) When more than one communication equipment unit is required, each shall be independent of
the other or others to the extent that a failure in any one will not result in failure of any other.
NCO.IDE.A.195 Navigation equipment
(a) Aeroplanes operated over routes that cannot be navigated by reference to visual landmarks
shall be equipped with any navigation equipment necessary to enable them to proceed in
accordance with:
(1) the ATS flight plan; if applicable; and
(2) the applicable airspace requirements.
(b) Aeroplanes shall have sufficient navigation equipment to ensure that, in the event of the failure
of one item of equipment at any stage of the flight, the remaining equipment shall allow safe
navigation in accordance with (a), or an appropriate contingency action, to be completed safely.
(c) Aeroplanes operated on flights in which it is intended to land in IMC shall be equipped with
suitable equipment capable of providing guidance to a point from which a visual landing can be
performed. This equipment shall be capable of providing such guidance for each aerodrome at
which it is intended to land in IMC and for any designated alternate aerodromes.
(d) For PBN operations the aircraft shall meet the airworthiness certification requirements for the
appropriate navigation specification.
Will you be able to fly in airways/class A with this rating?
WilliamF wrote:
Will you be able to fly in airways/class A with this rating?
What makes you think this would be prohibited?
mh wrote:
What makes you think this would be prohibited?
The privileges seemed to mirror the UK IMC or IR(R) that’s all. It was just my first glance at it. Said I’d ask!
matthew_gbr wrote:
If anyone reading this is in a position to lobby / provide feedback for all that, please do. I will send a note to AOPA UK at some stage.
The current proposal has been prepared after public feedback on the initial proposal, so I fear that any attempt to change things now will only delay the process. But maybe @bookworm knows more?
WilliamF wrote:
Will you be able to fly in airways/class A with this rating?
Yes.
Circling Minimum is the lowest height/Alt for a visual manoeuvre to get you from an approach, around to a visual landing on another runway.
One which doesn’t have an instrument procedure.
I.e. fly the ILS to rwy 24 then circle to land, into wind on 06, which doesn’t have an ILS.
Thank you very much for the explaination. Would that typically be around 600ft AGL? Ie not more restrictive then that other conditions?
Here’s the table of lowest circling minima in Part-NCO. Terrain or obstacles might dictate higher in particular cases (see the IAP chart).
dublinpilot wrote:
Would that typically be around 600ft AGL?
That depends very much on the obstacle situation around the airport, but is frequently less than 600 ft. The minimum obstacle clearance for circling is 294 ft for approach category A aircraft and the circling minimum cannot be less than 400 ft above the airport.
Tumbleweed wrote:
Since when have ATOs controlled examinations or tests?. That is down to the NAA.
They control access to the test. You cannot take an IR test without an ATO signing you off as ready – the administrative hurdle is the course completion certificate.
The theory is that you complete the course, as required, and they have to give you the certificate. So they are not really acting as a gatekeeper. The reality is that it was commonplace for an ATO to require you to pass a mock test before issuing the certificate, and thus they were a gatekeeper. Rumour has it that at some establishments the mock test was especially strict, with an almost-routine first-time-fail because of the revenue to be gained from further training and testing. I can’t possibly comment on the notion that some businesses would manipulate things to maximise their own revenue. 
I should be free to waste my money by taking a test for which I am not ready, if I so choose.
