We have a C172 in our club which was “IFR” while it still lived on the N-register in FAA land. Since it is in France under the F register, I have been told it is “not IFR”. When I look into section 2 of the POH, I read:
L’avion est équipé pour le VFR de jour, le VFR de nuit et/ou l’IFR lorsqu’il comporte à bord les équipements définis par l’arrêté du 24 Juillet 1991. Le vol en conditions givrantes connues est interdit.
My translation:
The aircraft is equipped for day VFR, night VFR and/or IFR if it carries on board all equipment defined by the decree of July 24, 1991. Flight in known icing conditions is not permitted.
It has a lovely KAP140 2 axis autopilot, KLN94 GPS which hasn’t been updated for years (maybe Peter can help us out there?) and KMD550 moving map as well as a double vacuum pump, one attitude indicator, one directional gyro, one turn coordinator, 1 VOR/ILS and a DME (from memory). To me, this should be enough to do at least some enroute IFR, but I think I would meet some objections in our club if I said I’m going to do some IFR with that plane. But you guys said it is OK, so can I go? 
by the decree of July 24, 1991
What is that? That pre-dates any GA GPS (practically speaking).
An IFR GPS installation is not legal for IFR unless the GPS AFMS says so. 99.345% of people don’t know this but sadly that is the strictly legal position if somebody wants to give you hassle. However I doubt those trying to give you hassle know this, either
And yes the AFMS will state the database requirements.
The situation for an N-reg KLN94 is here
Peter wrote:
An IFR GPS installation is not legal for IFR unless the GPS AFMS says so.
OK, I’ll try to locate the AFM supplement next time I am at the club. Since it has been installed at the time of construction in the US and it was “IFR” back then, I am pretty optimistic to find something to this effect. Also, I could use the VOR for navigation and then could legally fly enroute IFR without the GPS. But how much is a database update for the KLN94, and how can you do it (card reader etc.)?
I have just gone through the Swiss document that Mooney_Driver posted, and this really says it all:
And since PART.NCO supersedes all previous national regulations, it must be the same situation in France. I have also verified the equipment required for IFR according to NCO.IDE.A.125 and it is all there. So my club has an IFR aircraft again starting today. They will be stunned! Already looking forward to the green “Pilot fliegt IFR” box.
Rwy20 wrote:
So my club has an IFR aircraft again starting today.
I was led to believe that having the equipment is not enough. You also need to make sure everything you need works with the correct performance level. NCO replaces our “arrêtés 1991 and 2001” for the minimum required equipement but unless someone can find a text that contradicts my current interpretation, in France I am afraid we are still bound by this local copy in order to do assess the actual legal IFR capability of our equipment.
Still hoping for someone to contradict me as that would instantly transform a VFR plane into a IFR plane in my club too :-)
boscomantico wrote:
Some CAAs simply have the habit of denoting the status in some kind of required documents, and IMHO, Part-NCO will not stop them from doing so…
Question is on what basis. If it’s a periodic avionics check, I would expect it to belong under maintenance (= continuing airworthiness). Not under operations.
The place where you find the basic certification capability (VFR/IFR) is in the Kind of Operations section within the limitations chapter of the Aircraft Flight Manual or POH.
wigglyamp wrote:
The place where you find the basic certification capability (VFR/IFR) is in the Kind of Operations section within the limitations chapter of the Aircraft Flight Manual or POH.
That was mentioned here before. So if you find the following in the said limitations chapter of your POH:
The aircraft is equipped for day VFR, night VFR and/or IFR if it carries on board all equipment defined by the decree of July 24, 1991. Flight in known icing conditions is not permitted.
Can you fly IFR with this plane?
I think our problem as pilots lies in NCO.IDE.A.100:
Instruments and equipment required by this Subpart shall be approved in accordance with the applicable airworthiness requirements if they are:
(1) used by the flight crew to control the flight path;
(2) used to comply with NCO.IDE.A.190;
(3) used to comply with NCO.IDE.A.195; or
(4) installed in the aeroplane
These airworthiness requirements are still found in Part M, right? And those in turn are interpreted by documents such as the one from OSAC that @AlexG linked to? How am I, as a pilot renting the plane from my club, supposed to verify that the equipment has been verified according to IFR airworthiness requirements and not VFR airworthiness requirements, short of speaking to the mechanic or taking someone’s word for it? How am I supposed to prove it during a ramp check?
Rwy20 wrote:
These airworthiness requirements are still found in Part M, right?
Those are initial airworthiness requirements (not continuing which is maintenance). For EU registered aircraft, this is governed by regulation No 748/2012 (which covers certification of aircraft and also related equipment in Part-21). In other words, those instruments and equipment have to be certified. I believe AMC/ GM will support my interpretation.
Rwy20 wrote:
How am I, as a pilot renting the plane from my club, supposed to verify that the equipment has been verified according to IFR airworthiness requirements and not VFR airworthiness requirements
There is the list of equipment/instruments in Part NCO and there are required avionics for any particular airspace. As long as it is certified (and operational) it makes no difference. There are no “IFR airworthiness requirements” as such, except for IFR avionics obviously (GPS, VOR, etc), but none of the IFR avionics is what makes the aircraft OK for IFR, it’s the list in Part NCO. The list is just instruments and equipment with certain functions. Pitot for IFR must be heated etc There are initial airworthiness requirements particularly for IFR, but as I understand, this is about defogging the windscreen and stuff like that.
Re ramp checks, I think once IFR “certification” is removed as a periodic maintenance concept, so does the possibility of a ramp check on that basis. That aside, in the US where the concept has never existed, pilot pre-flight responsibility is the same as for VFR except for different equipment required and a different biennial check: pitot static is added to the VFR encoder check for transponder equipped planes. Either is indicated by a note in the airframe maintenance log. That’s all the paperwork you need to be legal, you don’t carry the maintenance logs in plane regardless, and in any case it’s a ramp check, not a how did you get here check.
I have to smile about the Limitations Section of the POH being a guide as to whether IFR is prohibited. On the one hand you have people flying light duty IFR in Class E or higher in 1946 Cessna 140s with a very minimal non-standard handbook (likely including no mention of flight rules) and vacuum gyros powered by a venturi. On the other hand you have people getting psycho about whether law enforcement knows their newer aircraft’s POH explicitly allows IFR in a particular section. I may not understand that issue completely, but if that’s the case it’s because I have neither the time or patience to care about nonsense. Another reason to fly an older airplane, certified under obsolete regulations by a long since defunct manufacturer
