UK PPL IMC vs. full IR
John Haywood
I am going to add to my licence first, and it's going to an instrument
rating.
But which one? Here in the UK I've got a choice between IMC or full
IR. As far as I can determine the only benefits of the full IR over IMC
are:
1. Can fly in airways
2. Can fly in IFR outside the UK (where IMC is not an accepted
Intrument Rating)
One part of me thinks that I should go the whole hog and get the full
IR, but the course is longer and more expensive. Any comments from UK
IMC/IR holders?
John Haywood
EGTC Cranfield, England
10 hours dual (0.1 hours IFR!)
Julian Scarfe
In article <37B69622...@digitekservices.com>, John Haywood
<john.h...@digitekservices.com> wrote:
> I haven't yet got my PPL, but am already thinking ahead to which rating
> I am going to add to my licence first, and it's going to an instrument
> rating.
>
> But which one? Here in the UK I've got a choice between IMC or full
> IR. As far as I can determine the only benefits of the full IR over IMC
> are:
>
> 1. Can fly in airways
> 2. Can fly in IFR outside the UK (where IMC is not an accepted
> Intrument Rating)
Those are the important ones. It also allows you to legally take-off and
land in visibilities less than 1800 metres (down to whatever the published
approach minima are -- typically RVR 600 metres for an ILS). Surprisingly,
in practice that's not often an issue.
> One part of me thinks that I should go the whole hog and get the full
> IR, but the course is longer and more expensive. Any comments from UK
> IMC/IR holders?
I flew with an IMC rating (acquired just after my PPL) for several years
before getting the IR. The IMC rating gave me a credit of 12 hours towards
the IR course. It also allowed me to get comfortable and familiar with
instrument flying before spending 150 pounds an hour on an approved IR
course. [Check with the CAA that the 12 hour credit is still available --
things may have changed under JAA rules.]
That said, I wouldn't want to fly without an IR these days, mainly because
of the sort of flying that I do -- business and pleasure trips all over
Europe. But if you don't need to fly abroad, the IMC rating will serve you
well for a great deal of operational flying in the UK.
Julian Scarfe
Dave Mould
safer than an IMC rating, so long as you take the IMC rating seriously and
maintain good IMC proficiency. An IR rating will allow you to undertake
flights that you otherwise could not legally contemplate - provided that you
have an IR aircraft available. It really depends on how many such flights
you are likely to want to do.
Some while ago I considered upgrading from an IMC rating to a full IR. In
the end, I did a helicopter course instead and got a PPL(H). Costs about
the same. For me, with the type of flying I do, I consider it was the
better choice. YMMV.
Why not wait till you have the PPL for a few months, and see how many
flights you wanted to do, but missed due to a lack of IR rating? IMHO, an
IMC rating is a definite "must" to strive for after the PPL in the UK,
purely on safety grounds (inadvertent flight into IMC).
=========
Dave Mould
Not a QFI
=========
John Haywood <john.h...@digitekservices.com> wrote in message
news:37B69622...@digitekservices.com...
> I haven't yet got my PPL, but am already thinking ahead to which rating
> I am going to add to my licence first, and it's going to an instrument
> rating.
>
> But which one? Here in the UK I've got a choice between IMC or full
> IR. As far as I can determine the only benefits of the full IR over IMC
> are:
>
> 1. Can fly in airways
> 2. Can fly in IFR outside the UK (where IMC is not an accepted
> Intrument Rating)
>
> One part of me thinks that I should go the whole hog and get the full
> IR, but the course is longer and more expensive. Any comments from UK
> IMC/IR holders?
>