Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Can any kind of IR ever be added to the LAPL?

From here

Balliol wrote:

Instrument qualifications can only be added to PPL or higher, not LAPL or NPPL

But will this be true also of the BIR?

EGKB Biggin Hill

@Timothy

Yes – LAPL is VFR only, one of the reasons Night VFR was introduced in UK with SERA. It is because conceptually it is a ‘leisure licence’ and sub ICAO in terms of medical and training I believe.

Now retired from forums best wishes

Balliol wrote:

Yes – LAPL is VFR only, one of the reasons Night VFR was introduced in UK with SERA. It is because conceptually it is a ‘leisure licence’ and sub ICAO in terms of medical and training I believe.

Is it decided finally that you can’t have BIR with a LAPL? BIR is also “sub ICAO”.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Well. I guess nothing is forever. But right now, you can’t have any IR on the LAPL, and the BIR is some kind of an IR.
I guess it would take a change of the Basic Regulation to change that, and since we just had a new one, I assume the next revision won’t be until at least 10 years from now. Maybe even more…

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

I guess it would take a change of the Basic Regulation to change that, and since we just had a new one,

That’s interesting! I can’t find any such detailed rules in the Basic Regulation. Can you point me to where it says you can’t have any kind of IR with the LAPL?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Nope, I can’t. I merely assumed this is regulated at the Basic Regulation level, but I might be wrong.

Anyway, I think it isn’t desired by the powers that be to do this. Despite all promises by Patrick Ky et alia to make the IR more accessible and more widespread, there still is a very distinct dividing line in the heads of the authorities, i.e. leisure flying = VFR, professional flying = IFR. Plus: leisure pilot schools = RF/DTO, professional pilot Schools = ATO. At least in Europe. In the UK, where they have had the IMC rating for decades, this is different. But the BIR is very different from the IMC rating, mainly in that the former will allow access to some of the busiest airpaces in Europe. Hence, they will want to put the bar quite a bit higher than with the IMC rating.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

boscomantico wrote:

But the BIR is very different from the IMC rating, mainly in that the former will allow access to some of the busiest airpace in Europe. Hence, they will want to put the bar quite a bit higher than with the IMC rating.

I don’t really agree with this.

Firstly, the IMCR already gives access to some of the busiest airspace in Europe (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Manchester CTRs, for example.)

Secondly, the enroute levels at which most (all?) BIRs will operate are Class E in most of Europe.

Thirdly, even where they are Class A (UK and Netherlands (anywhere else?)) at those enroute levels (say 60-120) there is virtually no CAT traffic and precious little commercial traffic, certainly not enough to get anywhere near “busiest airspace”.

EGKB Biggin Hill

Firstly, the IMCR already gives access to some of the busiest airspace in Europe (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Manchester CTRs, for example.)

Not really; you have no implied enroute clearance (like what you get on a normal Eurocontrol flight) so you are basically a VFR flight in all but name, subject to the whim of ATC.

That is why ATC and all the regulators get so emotional about the IR. It enables, as they see it, “amateur” pilots to fly in the “professionals’” airspace, so they have to make it hard. That the airspace is mostly empty (and the routings take you away from most terminal areas anyway) is not the point; the point is that you “could” (e.g. ask for a 20 deg left to avoid) and they can’t refuse.

This is why the IMCR is limited to Class D-G and you cannot (practically) file a Eurocontrol flight plan with it; keeping “amateurs” out of the “professionals’” airspace was the political quid pro quo done c. 1969. There is no implied clearance. And this crippling continues, because of the ban on Class A (most of UK CAS). But the BIR would have full privileges AFAIK, which is the usual stick of dynamite lobbed into the CAA House With the IMCR, ATC can always say NO; with any “full IR” they cannot (because you have a flight plan in the system).

Secondly, the enroute levels at which most (all?) BIRs will operate are Class E in most of Europe.

That’s a most puzzling statement!

Thirdly, even where they are Class A (UK and Netherlands (anywhere else?))

Most of Italy…

Would the BIR be airspace class restricted?

at those enroute levels (say 60-120)

Not many fly there because it puts you into icing conditions most of the year; you generally need to go higher or have the immediate ability to do so to maintain VMC enroute.

there is virtually no CAT traffic and precious little commercial traffic, certainly not enough to get anywhere near “busiest airspace”.

That’s true, and it’s equally true for why one can’t just fly VFR in these airspaces Europe has sooo much airspace which is virtually empty, yet to get into it you need to be on a Eurocontrol flight plan.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

High standards of training and testing. Despite the focus on GA needs, practical training and testing standards will be similar to those of the current Part-FCL CB-IR and EIR, particularly with regard to interaction with other airspace users. It is very important that GA pilots flying under IFR have the required competencies for this.

From the NPA on the BIR so you can see the thinking

Last Edited by Balliol at 05 Sep 10:47
Now retired from forums best wishes

BIR thread which includes the original proposal.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
47 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top