Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: EFR rating: When VFR rating is not anough and IFR rating is too much.

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    Training, training, training is the way to go we have no other choice. In the hope to reduce LOC (Loss Of Control) some airline pilots receive aerobatic training but as you said this sometimes gives a false sense of security.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    You are right, getting an IFR rating is the best a pilot can go for and I wish one for every pilot.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Auburntsts View Post
    The difference in Franks example is if things go bad, the instrument rated pilot has the option of retaining the IFR clearance and concluding the flight safely IFR and without having to resort to trying to descend through a sucker hole or scud run.
    I agree with you. I wish an IFR rating to all pilots.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Auburntsts View Post
    Well at this point well just have to agree to disagree. Without seeing some stats, Im not buying that this EFR would truly enhance safety. My rationale is that without data to the contrary Im thinking that for every pilot that might benefit there will be another that will make poor decisions based upon a false sense of security because theyve had some additional training.
    Here is what I found on the web: The training for the full Instrument Rating (IR) is vey stringent and costly. Because of this, the UK CAA also issues the Instrument Rating (Restricted), IR(R), which is a simplified version of the IR with fewer privileges. Formely know as the IMC Rating the IR(R) allows flight in IMC but only in certain classes of airspaces and with restrictions on conditions for take-off and landing

  5. #15
    Auburntsts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Dumfries, VA
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Durocher View Post
    Here is what I found on the web: The training for the full Instrument Rating (IR) is vey stringent and costly. Because of this, the UK CAA also issues the Instrument Rating (Restricted), IR(R), which is a simplified version of the IR with fewer privileges. Formely know as the IMC Rating the IR(R) allows flight in IMC but only in certain classes of airspaces and with restrictions on conditions for take-off and landing
    I meant stats that shows that the IR(R) or its equivalent enhances safety. The fact it is cheaper is obvious due to reduced training requirements but cost is but a single variable. I’m still not sold on the benefit of such a rating but it really doesn’t matter what I think. However I’d be shocked if the FAA would adopt it.
    Todd Stovall
    PP ASEL - IA
    RV-10 N728TT - Flying
    My builder's log (which is woefully out of date): www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
    WAR DAMN EAGLE!

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Auburntsts View Post
    I meant stats that shows that the IR(R) or its equivalent enhances safety. The fact it is cheaper is obvious due to reduced training requirements but cost is but a single variable. I’m still not sold on the benefit of such a rating but it really doesn’t matter what I think. However I’d be shocked if the FAA would adopt it.
    I didn't find stats and I don't know since when this IR(R) exists. I don't know if studies were done about safety. My guess is that this IR(R) rating still exists today because it was not a problem in reducing safety. Thanks for sharing.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Durocher View Post
    Sometimes, often, lower than Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) shows up between your departure and your destination. Sometimes this is forecasted and sometimes this is not. Then, VFR pilots will turn back, continue, deviate, fly illegally in the clouds or worse hit mother Earth. After 1 or 2 years of fying around, too many VFR pilots will stop flying and many will not even start flying. Taking the IFR rating is a solution but this is a big step (training, cost, time, recurrencies, etc). What if an EFR (Enroute Flight Rules) rating could be obtain? Then, you could take-off in VMC conditions, fly in the clouds and land in VMC conditions. This type of rating exists in Europe and in Australia. This rating wuold increase Safety and Utility of GA aircraft. Any takers?
    i disagree with your premise that an instrument rating is more costly than necessary. You only need 40 hours of SIMULATED IMC. We still have instrument rated pilots getting disoriented in IMC. Some enroute clouds have a lot of turbulence inside, and you have to be able to recover from an upset by reference to instruments while maintaining maneuvering speed.

    Moreover, the EFR rating you suggest would encourage those pilots to undertake more long cross-countries. The longer the flight, the more time for the weather to diverge from the forecast. If it gets worse, or you need to make an unplanned stop, you might be glad you learned to make an instrument approach.

    I think you'd be better off looking for ways to simplify IFR.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Durocher View Post
    Sometimes, often, lower than Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) shows up between your departure and your destination. Sometimes this is forecasted and sometimes this is not.....
    You just explained why an aviator venturing into IMC must be fully qualified to mix it up with the other traffic on full IFR clearances. One never knows when the weather forecast will "fail" or some of the equipment will fail and one will be on one's own in the goo. It's absurd to think a minimally trained, inexperienced, non-current aviator will always be able to just follow ATC directions to a safe landing.

  9. #19
    Auburntsts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Dumfries, VA
    Posts
    250
    Andre, just curious but are you instrument rated?
    Todd Stovall
    PP ASEL - IA
    RV-10 N728TT - Flying
    My builder's log (which is woefully out of date): www.mykitlog.com/auburntsts
    WAR DAMN EAGLE!

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Gatineau, Qc, Canada
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by dougbush View Post
    i disagree with your premise that an instrument rating is more costly than necessary. You only need 40 hours of SIMULATED IMC. We still have instrument rated pilots getting disoriented in IMC. Some enroute clouds have a lot of turbulence inside, and you have to be able to recover from an upset by reference to instruments while maintaining maneuvering speed.

    Moreover, the EFR rating you suggest would encourage those pilots to undertake more long cross-countries. The longer the flight, the more time for the weather to diverge from the forecast. If it gets worse, or you need to make an unplanned stop, you might be glad you learned to make an instrument approach.

    I think you'd be better off looking for ways to simplify IFR.
    Well, I didn't read back all of my posts but I don't think I said that IR is more costly than necessary and if I did this is not what I meant. IR is more expensive compare to an EFR rating. The pilot always has to be up to the task (VFR, EFR, IFR, floats, glider, etc) and more ratings (aerobatic, glider, etc) is the best. By the way, there is an IFR glider rating in Europe and nothing to do with take-off and landing rules and training.

    I agree with you, a Private IFR (PIFR) rating not a Commercial IFR (CIFR) rating (the actual rating) would be more usefull to the weekend pilot. Example: MDA (Minimum Descent Altitude) 1500 feet AGL and 3 miles visibility.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •