Just read on one of the domestic forums that somebody did the CBIR exams and found the theory has been changed around and the QBs, notably Aviationexam, were of little use.
Peter wrote:
Just read on one of the domestic forums that somebody did the CBIR exams and found the theory has been changed around and the QBs, notably Aviationexam, were of little use.
Peter, in which country? UK? I’ve passed mine in the spring this year, and HPL was different, not many questions matched, most of the other exams were like on aviationexam.
CBIR will not be a factor anymore anyway since the availability of the excellent (because very private pilot friendly) EASA BIR provides a much more practical solution to obtain IFR flying privileges and if desired a fully ICAO compliant IR.
Option 1:
Finish BIR and while doing Modul 1/2/3 fly 10 hours at ATO + Skill Test = CBIR completed = full ICAO IR.
Applicants for the competency-based modular IR who hold a BIR and who have received at least 10 hours of instrument flight time under instruction at
an ATO may be credited towards the CBIR training course, provided that
all competency-based instrument rating topics have been included in that BIR training, and
assessed by the ATO that provides the competency-based modular flying training course.
Option 2:
BIR. Then 50 hrs IFR PIC + Skill Test = CBIR completed = full ICAO IR.
Applicants for the competency-based modular IR who hold a BIR and have experience of at
least 50 hours of flight time under IFR as PIC on aeroplanes, shall:
(a) at an ATO:
(i) be assessed as having an acceptable standard of competency-based instrument
rating theoretical knowledge;
(ii) receive appropriate flight training to extend IFR privileges in accordance with
FCL.605.IR;
(b) after completion of (a);
(i) successfully complete the skill test for the IR in accordance with Appendix 7;
(ii) demonstrate orally to the examiner during the skill test that they have acquired an
adequate level of theoretical knowledge of air law, meteorology, and flight
planning and performance.
Feel free to reach out via PN for questions about getting a BIR and then CBIR (= ICAO IR) without the tedious 7 theory exams!
Snoopy wrote:
CBIR will not be a factor anymore anyway since the availability of the excellent (because very private pilot friendly) EASA BIR provides a much more practical solution to obtain IFR flying privileges and if desired a fully ICAO compliant IR.
@Snoopy, yes, that is valid in the EU! Unfortunately, the UK CAA decided to say very loudly “F$^& YOU” to the interested pilots and NOT incorporate the BIR into the UK law. :(((
In the EU it works better in a sense that if you get your BIR, log your 50hr IFR PIC XC, then all you need to do is just pass the skills tests, that is if you want to fly IFR ouside the EU airspace. Otherwise, you could stay on BIR for ever (or until you need to upgrade), especially if you fly SEP – many pilots don’t fly SEPs in IMC when the RVR and/or cloud base are very low.
Fly310 wrote:
@Snoopy, but what are the theoretical requirements for the BIR?
@Fly310 it is three exams, not seven, and reduced Learning Objectives. Full comparison is here:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/appendix_to_amc_gm_to_part-fcl_-_issue_1_amendment_10_ed_decision_2020-018-r.pdf
Snoopy wrote:
CBIR will not be a factor anymore anyway since the availability of the excellent (because very private pilot friendly) EASA BIR provides a much more practical solution to obtain IFR flying privileges and if desired a fully ICAO compliant IR.
I don’t doubt that and it may be reality in some geographies but definitely not throughout Europe – I’ve not even managed to find a single school in BE willing to do CBIR with the 10h ATO only arrangement (would already qualify as pilot friendly) let alone one that is interested in BIR, for reasons discussed earlier in this thread I guess. If I mention BIR half of them pretends they don’t know what I’m talking about. Should you have a suggestion for an ATO/DTO willing to do CBIR with a freelance instructor in BE (or reasonably close to the NE/NW borders for the 10h ATO part) I’m all ears.
Unrelated to the above but on topic: I’ve been advised that for a beginner pilot (don’t yet have the 50h PIC needed to start training) the practical aspect of BIR is not much of an improvement over CBIR because I’ll need roughly the same amount of practical training anyway to get proficient enough (ignoring the potential theory benefits of BIR for a second). Would you agree?
Tango wrote:
Unrelated to the above but on topic: I’ve been advised that for a beginner pilot (don’t yet have the 50h PIC needed to start training) the practical aspect of BIR is not much of an improvement over CBIR because I’ll need roughly the same amount of practical training anyway to get proficient enough (ignoring the potential theory benefits of BIR for a second). Would you agree?
@Tango, it depends! If you have access to any sim (like the one at @Snoopy’s home/office :) ), then no – the hours required in a real a/c could be much lower. Please also note that the BIR minima are susbtantially higher and it is easier to fly any aproach under BIR comparing to full IR/CBIR.
The difference between CBIR and BIR course is the latter is less unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles.
Practically, wether flying IFR on a full IR (via CBIR course) or on a BIR is the same.
I’d not work with someone who aspires to fly IFR without attaining the skills.
The good thing about the BIR is your valuable time can now be spent learning those skills, rather than clicking question banks. No amount of memorized multiple choice questions will ever be a substitute for flying airplanes IFR and in IMC.Please also note that the BIR minima are susbtantially higher and it is easier to fly any aproach under BIR comparing to full IR/CBIR.
I doubt that is true? flying needles once you are stable 1000-500 is no different than 500-200 (those are my call-outs)
People make that statement all day along but likely never flown on IMCR, BIR or CBIR down to legal limits
Here is a bit of summary,
- NO SBAS LNAV, the lateral sensitivity is identical even down to 0ft, if you see what I mean 
- SBAS GPS LNAV/LPV, gets sensitive near 200ft but signal is smooth and if things are stable 500ft they work to 200ft or even under
- ILS gets a bit hectic near 200ft but I doubt the 500ft skill is different from 200ft? as long as the basic are similar (flying heading & attitude rather than chasing the signal)
There are some considerations on width of runway you are practicing on but they only matter if you keep flying to touchdown
VOR/NDB with distance, angle offsets, backward, timed….you may need 100h of IFR training to be able to nail it to 300ft agl in an exam with 10G20 wind, afterwards, you need to fly them 6 times a month to keep current and safe, still one day you will kill yourself (or get near to killing yourself), I think they are only useable in practice to 600ft-800ft agl, anything bellow will not help when it comes to life expectancy
People don’t fly VOR/NDB in real life even instructors & examiners who teach & examin them don’t have skills or b***s to fly them in weather, even Golf VMC with 500ft & 1500m would be dangerous on ADF, some would even go as far as lying and tell you they do them to minima but they are only add to IR syllabus as they help making 50h training worth it or justified (indeed you need 100h of dual flying be hold the ADF/VOR black belt)
In real life, I think with less than 15h training you can fly direct LPV or radar ILS down to 200ft minima using your hand or autopilot (even 50ft-100ft under minima to sneak the landing)
