UdoR wrote:
In my ATO this translates into at least 15 hours of flight training. But maybe even more.You know, to get cleared for a practical exam they require that not less than three instructors agree that you’re good enough for it.
Wow. Your ATO must be really exceptional.
When I renewed my IR after having it lapsed for 18 years (and not having flown for 17 of these 18 years). I did a total of 8 hours in the aircraft and 2 hours in a simulator (well, ok, an approved “flight training device”) before the checkride. All with a single instructor. (Except for one final ride with the Head of Training, IIRC.)
I did do a lot of procedure training on my own using a PC with X-plane.
UdoR wrote:
You know, to get cleared for a practical exam they require that not less than three instructors agree that you’re good enough for it
Ouch. Three that actually need to fly with you? That sounds like a horrible money grab, sorry. I would look for another ATO in that case – not easy I know.
To elaborate on and partly correct (missing “9” in previous post) this topic:
EASA FCL Appendix 6
9. Applicants for the competency-based modular IR who hold a BIR in accordance with point FCL.835 and who have received at least 10 hours of instrument flight time under instruction at an ATO may be credited towards the training course referred to in paragraph 4, 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
VS.
10. 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.
For 9, it makes sense to arrange training so that 10 hours in ATO are complied with. This isn’t really a problem.
For 10, it is basically a day at the ATO and a skill test for the ICAO IR, whereas the interpretation of 9 is subject to the local authority (some insist the CBIR theory exams are still required, which would be pointless).
Exactly, Snoopy.
On the “9” route, this part: “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” is a required comparison in theory content between the BIR and CB-IR course. In EASA speak a topic is a term strictly used for theoretical knowledge. Now the ATO which taught the BIR theory has to look through all CB-IR topics and look at which topics are not covered by the BIR. This takes some time, because the “AMC1 FCL.310; FCL.515(b); FCL.615(b); FCL.835(d)” is, literally and I am not joking, a 599 pages long table with learning objectives. Now this isn’t impossible to do if you know what you’re doing as an ATO, but most will just give up at first sight.
If I were to upgrade my hypothetical BIR I would certainly just go for the 50 hours IFR experience with the BIR and then do the IR skill test, instead of arguing with an ATO and authority about the BIR vs. CB-IR theory content. After all, the BIR is a very good rating IMO, because at least in my SEP flying I don’t shoot 200ft minimum approaches and full flights in IMC anyways: The reality is that we fly for fun and my wife dislikes being in the clouds for longer than say 20 minutes. That’s why for me, the 50 hours IFR experience → skill test is a way better route than number 9 above. It’s basically what I did with my EIR, I flew until I had >50 hours IFR and did the IR skill test, in my case as an ICAO conversion. It was was a very painless transition and will be the same for pilots upgrading their BIR. Just use an upcoming proficiency check for it and it’s done.
Travelling with just a phone.
It is a big mistake to think IR equals flying in crap wx at altitude.
Loads of times I have been doing a nice day trip and doing an ILS to minima.
The layer then lifts…
Check the IFR Flying writeups and cloud tops writeups on my website.
The BIR is a half cooked product which will die. The number of private pilots doing any IR in Europe is tiny. You need to own a decent plane or be in a very good syndicate. The BIR is another European political compromise.
Peter wrote:
Loads of times I have been doing a nice day trip and doing an ILS to minima.The layer then lifts…
Check the IFR Flying writeups and cloud tops writeups on my website.
The BIR is a half cooked product which will die. The number of private pilots doing any IR in Europe is tiny. You need to own a decent plane or be in a very good syndicate. The BIR is another European political compromise.
I don’t agree, because you’re taking the approach of the BIR being a long-term rating for the all-weather type of flying you do. That’s not what is being suggested by @Snoopy.
The idea is that the BIR is competency-based with no minimum hours, more quickly achieved. Then go fly in benign conditions to build the IFR hours before converting to a CBIR.
For a PPL pilot expanding his horizons to IFR flying, that seems to me to be a very practical and cost-effective way to quickly get into the system and gain experience before taking the CBIR skill test.
Doing approaches is only a small part of IFR flying. The largest part is process: radio skills, clearances, tool setup (instruments, a/p, nav, tablet), weather analysis, etc. All that can be practiced in the real IFR environment and at the same time get the ability to take off VMC, climb through clouds, cruise, descend through clouds, and land in near VMC conditions with the IR advantages of easier route planning. IOW making a lot a trips that would be more work VFR. A good stepping stone IMHO.
chflyer wrote:
I don’t agree, because you’re taking the approach of the BIR being a long-term rating for the all-weather type of flying you do. That’s not what is being suggested by @Snoopy.
I’m afraid that Peter is right, but not because of the rating itself but because it can’t be taught at a DTO. That, I think, was a major mistake. EASA was certainly aware of this issue but decided to gain some experience with the rating first before – possibly – letting DTOs train for it.
ATOs are much more administratively complex than DTOs. E.g. In Sweden we have 49 DTOs giving flight training for the PPL(A) – all but 2 associated with a flying club – but only 10 ATOs and of those 10 only three are associated with a club.
EASA was certainly aware of this issue but decided to gain some experience with the rating first before – possibly – letting DTOs train for it.
That is a super charitable way of putting it 
What actually happened IMHO is what has always happened: those with the most clout win in the committee.
Europe cannot make the IR too accessible. It would demolish the elite status of the IR, by providing a much more accessible route for airline pilots. These guys currently deposit ~100k at FTOs/ATOs (and occassionally lose it when the said outfit hits the rocks). That’s why, as another example, you need 50hrs IFR PIC for the ICAO IR to CBIR conversion. This 50hrs is no big deal for a committed private pilot but is beyond the ability of the average airline pilot cadet who has no ability to fly anywhere using GA and in most cases no interest in doing so. And anyway the FTO doing the conversion is free to disallow any logbook entries it doesn’t like for the 50hrs IRC PIC
The FTO “100k ripoff” business model must be protected at all costs, and so far this has been successful: the number of private IR holders in Europe is miniscule and would be barely enough to fill out one Greek wedding venue (guess where I am right now).
Actually I think the fear is unfounded (the vast majority of airline pilot cadets would not follow another route even if it halved their cost; given their usual age, the cash is coming from parents and such, and a half price CPL/IR is already possible today if you are smart) but the FTOs always win the day.
Look on the internet at Limoges aeroclub or it could be named aéroclub de Limousin. I assume they are a DTO which used to do most of the hours needed for CBIR training in their Cessna at pretty near club prices. They then had an arrangement with an ATO for the final 10 hours.
The reason I suggest this is that they had/have a well known English instructor and their internet site was in both languages.
I am not suggesting you go there but the website might give some idea of how the BIR can be done in a club environment.
Full disclosure I have nothing to do with this aeroclub and I haven’t looked at their website since the EIR and BIR were created.
Sure, this was always possible, but the you hit the brick wall of airline recruitment where the major airlines are in bed with the FTO industry. From what I hear, the only way to enter Easyjet right now (and this changes periodically according to pilot recruitment requirements) is to go in under the female pilot quota system (about 10%) and they will still take Modular.
We can’t do anything about this but we can moan about and discuss the obstacles for private pilots 
The FTOs have always owned the “IR universe” and will continue to do so. Nobody has the power to change this.
The persistent problem is that when the FTO gets hold of you they can assess you as needing x more hours of training. I saw this when doing my FAA IR to JAA IR conversion. There were certain things I could not publish there, and still can’t because the said individual(s) are still alive. But some of the revenue generation was beyond a joke.
Getting back to the BIR minima, as I wrote there is often a beautiful day but with a thin layer (say 500ft to 3000ft) of cloud, hazy underneath. Even with an icing risk (e.g. SFC temp being +2C) you are very unlikely to pick up any relevant ice in such a layer. For this the BIR could be illegal.
Also looking at this from a “business” POV, most customers are looking for a product which does more or less all of what they want. They are already super-invested, up to their neck, by owning a plane, and they won’t go for another EIR-like dead end. The main effect of the EIR was the generation of about 100GB of forum traffic debating how one is going to fly SIDs and STARs having cancelled IFR beforehand
