All of the above has got me thinking. Am I unusual? I have a CAA/Jar (presumably will be morphed into an EASA) SEP/IR. I have had the rating since 1984 (yes I am a baby boomer). Renew it every year, and have never thought about how many people hold this rating. Any guess as to how many CAA/JAR SEP/IR’s there are on the British or EASA register?
bq. Any guess as to how many CAA/JAR SEP/IR’s there are on the British or EASA register?
No idea about CAA or EASA (which doesn’t have it’s own register (yet) AFAIK), but in Germany with similar population figures as the UK, there are around 11000 ATPL and 2000 non-ATPL IFR holders.
other than the licensing debacle – what will happen to the N-reg planes themselves? Is one forced to bring them as well on the national register?
Absolutely not (wonder where these doubts come from; there has never been a debate around this in recent years). It would also be impossible to do that with most aircraft, but particularly with oldtimers, warbirds and exotic airplanes in general. It would kill almost every airshow in Europe… 
In recent years I wasn’t particularly interested in buying a N-reg so I didn’t follow the debate… ;-)
UK average 30 PPL (Inc Multi) I/R passes every year x 25 years = 750
Less…Given up flying/ cant be bothered to renew/medical issues 50%
Total UK PPL I/R holders guess @ 375
Actually in reality probably a lot less
what will happen to the N-reg planes themselves? Is one forced to bring them as well on the national register?
There is no indication of plans to restrict N-reg airframes i.e. long term parking or overflight by foreign reg planes. France and the UK tried in in 2004/05 and withdrew the proposals unceremoniously. The UK managed to run with it for a year… FUD works great however and one guy I know who went G to N got scared and went N back to G, spending some 10k in the process… Not sure if he flies anymore so they probably count that as a success. I have details here – search for “The Future of N-reg”.
Long term parking controls are inherently hard to implement and especially overflight controls are a very “African” sort of thing. There are also some slick workarounds for any long term parking limits (the same methods could be used with the current Italian 6 month long term parking limit, which I am sure is unenforceable anyway). IMHO, EASA’s anti N-reg politically motivated project, run by reportedly about 4 individuals, used up so much political capital and brought them so much ridicule, that I can’t see the willpower to have another go. Of course the near meltdown of the EU has been absolutely brilliant for us and without that we would be dealing with a vastly more arrogant EASA.
What there is regarding airframes is the “EASA Complex” requirement for a Part M signoff – this applies to the bigger stuff and you can find details just a bit after the bit above. I don’t know details (or even if is implemented) but it sounds like an N-reg King Air owner will get fleeced of an extra k or two by a Part M firm. Usually the same firm which did the work and either supplied the IA or is a FAA145 company.
Any guess as to how many CAA/JAR SEP/IR’s there are on the British or EASA register?
Not many. As WN suggests, a lot more in the “more compliant” Germany than in the UK where most in recent years went N-reg (are there really 2k in Germany who reval every year and fly GA with it?) and almost none in the rest of Europe (tends to follow GA activity but more sharply because an IR is mostly for touring and most of “less English speaking” Europe doesn’t do much touring, presumably due to the language issue). Historically, less than 10 a year have been doing the JAA IR in the UK and some of them would have been in the ATPL pipeline anyway. I would say 100 in the UK who actually revalidate theirs and fly “GA” with it. I think quatrelle is spot on.
There was a group of about 30 UK pilots who got together a few years ago, got a discount from CATS on the theory, and something like half of them eventually finished. They used to have a mutual support forum which I had access to and my feeling is that most of them no longer use it – no suitable plane, mostly, I think.
A friend of mine has just done the ICAO IR “conversion test” and passed. Waiting for the issuance of the new license by the LBA now. He took zero training or similar before the test.
This was in Germany.
Boscomantico:
It would be very helpful to many of us to know:
How detailed was the ‘oral’ part of the test?
What procedures he was made to fly?
What fee he had to pay?
And confirmation that he was able to wear ‘foggles’?
Many thanks.
Don’t know yet.
Even if I had, they would not be very useful for you people outside Germany, since these are exactly the details that vary from country to country (read: authority to authority).
What transpires is that this thing is “no big fuss” here. Actually, in hindsight, things couldn’t have turned out much better for ICAO IR holders.
We don’t have these funny screens here in Germany, so yes, foggles or probably a “hood”.
We don’t have these funny screens here in Germany, so yes, foggles or probably a “hood”.
From my experience (25 years IFR, over 20 of which commercial, several type and classratings, so over 50 IFR checkrides) I would think: Nothing at all. I have never seen or worn either foggles or a hood, never used it with students, never saw it worn by anybody else. But our weather is such, that on average every second IFR checkride is in actual IMC and obviously that is sufficient.
