If you can’t hold altitude to better than 300ft, you will not pass the IR test 
Thanks Peter, really helpful
I forgot to add to the list of advantages: flying outside the UK is vastly easier in general under IFR. France is not bad (below FL120 as mentioned) although only because their ATC just lets you through, usually. But if you look at the VFR chart in say Belgium, you rapidly get my drift.
Peter wrote:
I suggest an IR to everybody who can tick the other boxes (good VFR pilot, a brain for “techy” challenges, and money ) but not too soon after the PPL.
Well, I’m gonna contradict this, of course 
Whilst on EuroGA one gets the impression that an IR is necessary (are IR rated a majority here Peter?), I oppose the idea. An IR is, IMHO, only required by professionals, or if your flying is to meet business demands. Or maybe to shoot an ILS at a major airport in order to fill your personal logbook with that famous 4LC?
Flying SEP in hard IMC is not the safest form of flying (and yes, nor is VFR scud running). Generally speaking, a SEP is ill-equipped for hard IMC, as in no weather radar, no anti/de-ice, limited instrument back-up, no LoVis ops, poor to average performance, single pilot ops, etc.
You will, by reading voyage reports here on EuroGA, realise that most of those have been flown in VFR under IR, and could as well have been flown in pure VFR fashion. With the added benefit of route freedom, and the enjoyment of scenery. As opposed to flying in a corset of departure/arrival routes (often adding mileage to your trip), airways, all with their respective altitude and route restrictions.
Most recreational flying in SEP, IR rated or not, is done in fair weather. For point to point travel, hop on the next CrapAir flight. For pleasure flying, VFR will take you everywhere, with or without an IR. It’s called freedom
I agree with all that too, but what is the title of this thread?
One has a toolbox in flying. Different tools for different jobs. VFR is one tool. IFR is another. “Request 30 left to avoid” in CAVOK conditions, where the controller is quite obviously f***king you around, is another Diversions “due wx” are another widely used one, at all levels in GA including bizjets. Flying an IAP which requires special crew authorisation “under VFR” (usually in VMC) is another. Flying VFR in the Alps is another, to get close-up pics or avoid the FL160+ or FL180+ minimum levels, or “funny issues” with Swiss military.
Sure; IR holders are mostly diligent (not to say “obscessive”) personality types who thus contribute more, and this shows up on a quality forum like EuroGA A forum which is 99% VFR is mostly one-liners and gibberish; as a result most are run just for the advert income. Not a lot one can do about that.
My longest trip from the UK was actually Kastelorizo but short of that, I did UK-Crete VFR which is almost the same. It was quite an exercise though… especially in those days. 20kg of Bottlang guides Much easier today with satnav apps. OTOH I would argue that in today’s more regimented world, IFR is a good way to play the game. In 2004, few ATC units gave a toss where you were. Sometimes, being limited to VFR can be seriously hazardous e.g. the French FL120 ceiling.
VFR will take you everywhere
If you accept a reduced despatch rate, perhaps reduced to zero in typical winter high pressure conditions.
Dan wrote:
Well, I’m gonna contradict this, of course
Whilst on EuroGA one gets the impression that an IR is necessary (are IR rated a majority here Peter?), I oppose the idea. An IR is, IMHO, only required by professionals, or if your flying is to meet business demands. Or maybe to shoot an ILS at a major airport in order to fill your personal logbook with that famous 4LC?Flying SEP in hard IMC is not the safest form of flying (and yes, nor is VFR scud running). Generally speaking, a SEP is ill-equipped for hard IMC, as in no weather radar, no anti/de-ice, limited instrument back-up, no LoVis ops, poor to average performance, single pilot ops, etc.
You will, by reading voyage reports here on EuroGA, realise that most of those have been flown in VFR under IR, and could as well have been flown in pure VFR fashion. With the added benefit of route freedom, and the enjoyment of scenery. As opposed to flying in a corset of departure/arrival routes (often adding mileage to your trip), airways, all with their respective altitude and route restrictions.Most recreational flying in SEP, IR rated or not, is done in fair weather. For point to point travel, hop on the next CrapAir flight. For pleasure flying, VFR will take you everywhere, with or without an IR. It’s called freedom
@Dan, you are talking about a small subset of countries! :)
In the UK some form of IR is almost a must due to weather and CAS structure.
Not to fly in “hard IMC”, but to cross some clouds etc or depart in less than ideal weather and to get VMC on top.
Plus in the UK in most interesting places you have Class A TMAs. Same in Netherlands around EHAM, France around Paris, Spain around Madrid, etc.
IFR gives you that piece of mind that if you’ve got your clearance at the departure you are mostly to be able to get somewhere and not stopped by some £$%£$%£$% with a radar screen that cannot give you some CAS crossing due to “controller workload” and “I don’t like your tone!”.
PPL/IR has generated some sort of world stats re: weather and it was fairly obvious that if you fly true VFR in the UK, then your dispatch rate is going to like 50%. If you fly with even IR(R), then it is more like 75%. That is on average! In Spain it is a different picture, I get it…
And please, stop saying that you cannot fly in hard IMC only in small GA planes – some big jets also cannot fly in certain “hard IMC”! :)
Just ask @Peter how many times he has seen bizjets deferring their departures.
I may sound like an Old Record but I still maintain that, even given the current climate, getting the FAA IR, flying 50 hours, and then, if they want to, doing the ‘Conversion’ to a U.K. IR may still be of advantage (and more convenient) for some.
For someone, though, flying ‘N’, mainly in Europe, the equation is more convincing.
I think both routes – FAA IR & European IR – are far from easy and both test pilots in slightly different ways.
As accident statistics show – both produce good, safe, IR pilots (which at the end of the day is surely what the qualification should be about).
The Oral for an FAA IR is no ‘ walk in the park ’: Mine I recall, although many years ago, was over 1 hour.
But there are some people (who go on to prove afterwards to be excellent IR pilots) for whom the CAA TK is a steep mountain to climb.
For them, the FAA route (with or without ‘Conversion’) might still be a practical option.
[Although the FAA Written has now to be done in the USA – and I always encourage people to get the TK done before they do the flying – it is perfectly possible with On-Line Courses to get up to speed in the U.K. so one is guaranteed to pass the moment one arrives in the USA.]
In the end it must be ‘ horses for courses ’ – although I fully admit that in the new scenario, there will be fewer runners.
The IR is useful for filing IFR in controlled airspace as it saves one reading hundreds of pages of en-route NOTAMS, begging for airspace crossings and reduce the amount of planning to 5min, most EuroGA trip reports are to sunny destination as no one is interested in cloud interiors
VMC is usually found above clouds in controlled airspace where you can fly IFR but you can’t fly VFR (VMC under clouds require one to be equipped for flying into terrain)
Dan wrote:
Generally speaking, a SEP is ill-equipped for hard IMC, as in no weather radar, no anti/de-ice, limited instrument back-up, no LoVis ops, poor to average performance, single pilot ops, etc.
I hear that all the time from a friend who is 5 starts or strips captains and fly our syndicate Currie Wot on weekends, we still try to convince him to do the English Channel crossing to LeTouquet or Abbeville I also met a B737 Captain, she specialize in NAT SEP ferry business and flies anything with wings in any country & conditions, she even has an IFR PA18 in US on Experimental that she flies for “business travel” !
SEP IMC is a matter of taste, just like bimbling in Alps, landing in tight grass or flying on two-stroke engines, those who fly for living tend to deal with harsh weather as they can’t pick their battles, someone who flies privately with flexible schedule may enjoy fog & rain & clouds, worst case you cancel or divert?
IMC in SEP is not much of an issue as long as one can avoid terrain, put it anywhere he likes and be flexible about his trips & timings (+/-3h if it’s a cold front or +/-1day if it’s a warm front, the rest of weather is very easy to deal with)
I can lunch into a cold front thunderstorms forecast: 1/ land half way and watch it pass for 2h before flying again or 2/ punch through if it turn out there is enough gaps 3/ fly 300nm around it…unlike CAT, I have zero incentive to get vectored inside by ATC, so the lack of capability & equipment is irrelevant: it’s a different “weather flying style” with more headroom and zero obligation
For sure, some who flies pistons like airlines: on tight schedule in busy airspace with harsh weather& terrain, will hit the jackpot sooner or latter: as they say “if you have spare time go in your own aeroplane”
Dan wrote:
Flying SEP in hard IMC is not the safest form of flying (and yes, nor is VFR scud running). Generally speaking, a SEP is ill-equipped for hard IMC, as in no weather radar, no anti/de-ice, limited instrument back-up, no LoVis ops, poor to average performance, single pilot ops, etc.
Sure, but not all IFR is in “hard IMC.” Most IFR is in clear air above cloud or between layers. I have only once had to go down to 200 ft on an ILS approach and that was because of unforecast fog.
You will, by reading voyage reports here on EuroGA, realise that most of those have been flown in VFR under IR, and could as well have been flown in pure VFR fashion.
I agree that most flights I have done IFR could also have been done VFR. But
