You have to pass the renewals though! Would be a bit inconvenient to have to go back to this particular examiner every year!
Have a nice English speaking examiner who works from Limoges.
I don't think the JAA IR skills test is an issue. The possible ability to use foreign examiners is IMHO a redherring.
Folklore has it that the CAA examiners look like this
but that isn't the case 
The CAA IR staff examiner I had this year was a great bloke, absolutely proper and professional - similar to the FAA DPE (a visiting one from Kansas) who did my FAA CPL. Those two tests were totally relaxed - unlike some others...
Well, there are still 1 or 2 sadists around, but I happen to know that they are possibly more likely to be the new "industry" examiners than CAA staff examiners.
The issue is the whole route towards the IR. There is no single outstanding option. Every way you look at has tradeoffs. I've written a long tome on it but - to give a little example - most of the "nice" options in southern Europe do not allow the use of own aircraft.
There is little doubt that the absolutely cheapest route (totally ignoring any level of hassle and assuming your time is worth little) is the FAA IR followed by the conversion to the JAA IR, though paradoxically the proposed "50hrs IFR time as PIC" route actually makes that harder because those 50hrs will cost you real money!
Every other aspect is a highly personal choice.
Some people would do anything to avoid the 7 IR exams, and they have my sympathy
There are certain malpractices in the UK FTO business; notably the "170A flight test" stuff. But for most people an FTO means staying in a hotel, which is a hassle.
Yes there is an FTO in Spain (FIS at Jerez) which trains but does not examine NDB procedures, which helps substantially with achieving the project in the minimum time. Not to be confused with FTE at Jerez which is operated from the UK and which does the NDB stuff! But are you going to fly your plane down there? ~20hrs in the air total. And if one can't do it in one's plane then might as well go to Egnatia in Greece where one can get decent food
And if you haven't got your own plane, or are in a suitable syndicate, then it is very unlikely you will have any use for an IR - frankly...
The proposed new route promises to avoid the exams for FAA IR holders, and probably (though nobody actually knows, and nobody will know till much later) promises to maybe halve the exams for everybody else. But the question bank will not be of a good quality till some time later, and this could substantially jack up the workload in the "dry" topics like Air Law, Met, and some others depending on how sensibly the dross is trimmed from them.
I could ramble on but you get the idea
PiperArcher, Peter, just to clarify my belief about logging "instrument flight time". I've questioned this elsewhere before and was told that ONLY_ flight which is by sole reference to the instruments_ can be logged as instrument flight time. I'm afraid I can't find a reference for this but there is a legal definition somewhere. I'll post it if I find it.
Until that explanation, I thought that by flying on top could be logged because it wasn't technically VFR (ie not within sight of the ground), so therefore had to be "instrument flight time" - albeit you could actually be flying "VFR" in VMC.
I have always logged as "instrument time PIC" only flight in IMC.
This seems like the most stringent means of compliance - notwithstanding the obvious fact that nobody can know your actual flight conditions so the truth of such logging will never be verifiable, whereas "IFR time" might be to some extent verifiable (though really only for holders of an existing IR) by looking at Eurocontrol flight records (and I happen to know they do keep them, for years).
Aviation is full of "king has no clothes" concepts but everybody just goes along with it.
I shall be retiring in the not too distant future from a career in Europe working with an FAA ATP. I'm past the age of doing twelve exams to satisfy the EASA regulators, but I was thinking of obtaining a European PPL so that I could continue flying the aircraft from time to time without remuneration.
The aircraft is a corporate jet so obviously I would require an IR to add to the PPL. Having looked into this recently I understand this can be done by taking seven IR papers, training in a SINGLE engine piston type, and a type rating test in the jet which will take care of the multi engine part.
Would I be right to assume that this recent initiative will absolve me from taking the seven IR exams that I was considering? Also, am I correct in assuming that as the holder of an FAA ATP, which has IR privileges, I am classified as the holder of an IR?
PS. I like the look of the forum - I wish it every success.
Would I be right to assume that this recent initiative will absolve me from taking the seven IR exams that I was considering? Also, am I correct in assuming that as the holder of an FAA ATP, which has IR privileges, I am classified as the holder of an IR?
Yes that should work with the current CBM IR proposal.
The FAA ATP is an FAA CPL/IR, with 1500hrs (incl 100 night), the ATP written, oral, and checkride.
The "big unknown" is who is going to get their teeth stuck into the proposal before it becomes law, and the time scales.
My view is that if you need the IR now, you should get it now. You are looking at the 15hr conversion route (7 exams, etc) which apart from the irritating exams is not onerous.
If you wanted an ME IR, I think the ME IR conversion is 20hrs, or at least doable as such by doing the SE IR and then converting.
FWIW, if you have any type ratings, last I read about this, EASA will recognise those directly; no need to re-do them in Europe. Whether they would be meaningful on the back of an SE IR is another matter.
Thanks. I went to my local CAA who unlike the UK CAA were good enough to confirm everything I needed to do PRIOR to this latest news. (The UK CAA told me to email my question, but after six weeks and three emails I have not yet heard anything back from them).
My local CAA did not mention any minimum flight training time, but told me I should take the seven IR exams. When I questioned them about the multiple engine IR they said that the type rating check ride would cover that in the sim, and that I only need to train and take the initial IR check ride in a single.
The more I look into this the more confused I become. Do I now wait and take this new route, or go for what is on the table now?
Until that explanation, I thought that by flying on top could be logged because it wasn't technically VFR (ie not within sight of the ground), so therefore had to be "instrument flight time" - albeit you could actually be flying "VFR" in VMC.
VMC on Top,
Be careful not to get mixed up with licensing conditions and VFR rules. VFR rules has no requirement to be in sight of the surface (even in the UK). It's mainly about cloud distance requirements and cruising levels.
The UK requirement about being in sight of the surface was a requirement on UK JAR PPLs. Those flying on non-UK PPL's could quite happily fly VFR on top in the UK, as there is nothing in the VFR rules to stop it.
My local CAA did not mention any minimum flight training time
From vague memory, the only JAA country which does an FAA IR to JAA IR conversion with zero minimum training hours is Switzerland. Is that where you are?
When I questioned them about the multiple engine IR they said that the type rating check ride would cover that in the sim, and that I only need to train and take the initial IR check ride in a single.
What you are saying is that if you have a JAA SE IR and you take a jet TR checkride, that will give you an ME IR conversion. That may be - I have no idea. Sounds plausible.
Do I now wait and take this new route, or go for what is on the table now?
Unfortunately that is a decision only you can make.
If you want the capability now, you need to do what is on the table now. The CBM IR is perhaps 2 years away. Then you will be 2 years older, and you will be 2 years closer to death Also 2 years closer to failing your medical.
Ever since I started my original PPL (July 2000) it was said that a more practical IR is "just around the corner". Now, maybe, it really is a couple of years around the corner. But there are powerful interests that don't want any dilution of the requirements and these have yet to get stuck in.
It took me a fair while to get around to doing the IR, and I originally got the FAA one in 2006. That's given me 6+ years of fantastic flying around Europe which I am grateful for. In the meantime, loads of people I know are still "thinking about it" and going to Le Touquet on sunny Sundays I have since got myself the "EASA insurance policy" but even if I did absolutely nothing I would be good till 2014 which is 8 years of IFR. A number of people reading this will be dead 8 years from now...
