Page 1 of 1

IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:09 pm
by mark
Hi all,

I'm not sure if many people have been following developments in Europe with regard to the implementation of Part-FCL and other legislation coming from Europe over the next couple of years (too many to go into detail!). Only for the work of some very good people our flying would already have been seriously curtailed (VFR flight charges, Mode S transponders etc.).

The latest hot topic is the rentention of the IMC rating in the UK. This may be retained in the UK as the IR(R) but Europe is also talking about an Enroute Instrument Rating (EIR) that could be used accross Europe. A valuable tool for the GA pilot who does a lot of travelling. Almost everybody in the UK would agree that the IMC rating has lead to a huge decrease in accidents and helped vastly improve UK General Aviation Safety. That's why I was very dissappointed to read about comments from the IAA over this issue at a meeting late last year in Europe. The extract below came from the December issue of the AOPA magazine.

Should we really have people like this regulating us? With that kind of attitude they will only be happy when we are all grounded. Comments Anyone?

Regards,
Mark
SES and instrument flying
In his report on progress (or lack of it) towards the Single European Sky, Dr Michael Erb, Managing Director of AOPA Germany, said the authorities wanted to reduce the priority of what working group FCL-008 had been proposing, including the En Route Instrument Rating (EIR) which would supposedly improve access to the IFR system for GA.

Some national aviation authorities considered the EIR to be dangerous, but he had countered by saying that very few people would get one, so it wasn't a problem. "We finally had a meeting with some national CAAs who raised concerns about this project," Dr Erb said. "The strongest language came from Ireland, who said the EIR should be renamed the 'Suicide Rating' and believed it would endanger their IFR system.

"I asked how many private pilots they had - they said about 1,500. How many would want this rating? Perhaps ten percent. And maybe they'd each fly ten hours a year. So in a year, only a tiny number of hours would be flown with an EIR.

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:33 pm
by aviatorsguide
Well said Mark!
Fail to see how cruising on top of the layers, normally FL060 to FL010 for most situations is going to cause chaos in the airways. You can rely on our boys in green there to put a "tabloid style spin" on what's been the norm in the real world for years. Nice to see the editorial position of FII not bowing down to the powers that be. Fair play.

Keep calm and carry on,

W

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:45 pm
by willo
A shocking quote.

If an officer made a comment as such wholst acting as agent for a reputable company, there would be a complaint & subsequent investigation. Any chance this happening?

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:36 pm
by Demonduck
What a stupid comment to make.Only an idiot would utter such nonsense.
Does anyone have a link to the full article ?

William

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:01 am
by Tolka
The person in the IAA should have been asked if he had any evidence to support his opinion. That would have shown him up because the evidence from the UK and the US would have proved the opposite. His opinion should therefore have been totally discounted.

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:48 pm
by Pilot
Tolka wrote:The person in the IAA should have been asked if he had any evidence to support his opinion. That would have shown him up because the evidence from the UK and the US would have proved the opposite. His opinion should therefore have been totally discounted.
Indeed the evidence from *IRELAND* would prove him wrong, where VFR on top of a solid layer is currently perfectly legal. I don't seem to recall may accidents as a result. Probably because pilots are rightly very cautious about using such a privlidge and will only do so where they have a clear way out.

P

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:58 pm
by bumitch
Pilot wrote:Indeed the evidence from *IRELAND* would prove him wrong, where VFR on top of a solid layer is currently perfectly legal.
P
Could you point to the basis for this view?

Re: IAA Comments on SES and Intrument Flying

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:57 pm
by Pilot
bumitch wrote:
Pilot wrote:Indeed the evidence from *IRELAND* would prove him wrong, where VFR on top of a solid layer is currently perfectly legal.
P
Could you point to the basis for this view?
Rather could you point to the basis for it NOT being allowed?

In the UK, there is a restriction on a JAR PPL licence (actually there used to be, but it has changed since licences changed to EASA) which required flight to be in sight of the surface. (This restriction could be removed by getting an IMC rating or an IR.

There is no such restriction on IAA issued licences, nor as far as I'm aware on any other JAR/EASA licences.

I can't you at where it says "There are no restrictions". If it's not prohibited then it's allowed.

P