chflyer wrote:
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.
100% this. I don’t get the negativity around BIR. @snoopy convinced me to go for it while I was studying for CBIR theory so I changed to BIR and have not regretted it for a second. Sure there are conditions where I won’t be able to fly. I wouldn’t be able to fly those with my CBIR either for the simple fact I would not have it – the absolute best case scenario would be that I would still be training for it, and the more realistic scenario would be that I would still be struggling to fit it in my schedule somewhere
For all the arguments I hear around here about IR being artificially kept “hard”, I’d expect more enthousiasm for BIR. Yes some ATOs still will keep it hard and yes it would be even better if DTOs could offer BIR. But one of the nice things about EASA and the EU is you can look around. If you don’t mind a DIY approach with self study and remote training, there are lots of schools with open minds and great enthousiasm. And in contrast to the CBIR, the time you need to spend with that ATO for BIR is low enough (provided you come prepared – see the DIY bit) to make a single dedicated trip over there for a week or so a realistic prospect. I got mine in CZ with Aviaticky Klub and they are awesome. I’m sure there are nice places in France as well where I wouldn’t mind spending some time.
BIR is not meant for aspiring airline pilots I believe so recruitment problems don’t seem to apply. As chflyer wrote I see it as a stepping stone and a realistically achievable one especially for non-owners.
APOLOGIES I just paid a visit to the Limoges aeroclub website and I don’t think it is of any use to you now.
With the BIR you can fly an ILS to 200’ but in planning and for the approach you need ceiling greater than 600ft and visibility of 1500m IIUC.
That leaves a lot of scope for leisure pilots to have an extra to VFR on Top in Europe.
Here is an translation of how the course is carried out at a French aeroclub.
As discussed the theory for the BIR is a lighter version of the CBIR and needs to be done in a certified organisation such as Institut Mermoz.
A pass is valid for life as opposed to CBIR and IR theory exams.
At the aéroclub of Toulouse Midi Pyrénées flight training is done in an Cirrus SR20 following a course consisting of 3 independent modules.
After each module an in flight evaluation is carried out by the club’s partner ATO (don’t know who that is) . All this before the final test by the examiner.
Module 1:Vol sans visibilité (Flight without visibility)
Module 2: approach procedures 2D and 3D
( validation of modules 1 & 2 are carried out at Pau)
Module 3: IFR en route (final evaluation and test at Pau)
Before commencing the in flight training the candidate needs to demonstrate competence in the following:-
On the ground analysis of meteorology, NOTAMS and zones.
In flight ability to handle.the aircraft in different configurations (take off, cruise, approach, landing and go around)
Some ability of flying without visibility, radionavigation (VOR and GPS) and radio communications . (ie all the stuff you do for the PPL these days).
As far as I can see the evaluations and tests takes about 5hours flying time in total.
Please note this is a quick translation from their internet site. I have not spoken to them. They also do CBIR according to the site.
My thought in posting this is it gives an idea of what is involved and IMO also shows that you do not need (other than the theory) to do the majority of the training in an ATO but you do need to be evaluated by an ATO and to take the test within an ATO (although I am not totally convinced about the need for the final exam to be taken in an ATO as many French IR examiners are freelance)
Like the CBIR, the BIR needs to be revalidated every year
This can be done by a (sorry can’t think of the English: control of competence with an examiner
Or
Effect 6 hours of flying during the period of validity whilst PIC in IFR including 3 procedures and a flight of at least 1 hour in the presence of an instructor.
However
One in 2 years must be a control of competence with an examiner.
Going on to CBIR from BIR AIUI has already been discussed and hinges on the number of hours you have done, an ATO evaluation of your abilities, an oral theory covering the differences between BIR and CBIR plus PBN theory and a flight test / control of competence with an examiner to include the differences between the BIR and CBIR.
gallois wrote:
With the BIR you can fly an ILS to 200’ but in planning and for the approach you need ceiling greater than 600ft and visibility of 1500m IIUC.
It would be great if you could, but you can’t. You can fly an ILS to 400’
FCL.835(a)(5): The exercise of BIR privileges shall be subject to all of the following conditions: (i) the decision height (DH) or minimum descent height (MDH) used in aerodrome operating minima shall be at least 200 ft greater than what would otherwise be calculated according to point ‘NCO.OP.110 Aerodrome operating minima – aeroplanes and helicopters’ and point ‘NCO.OP.111 Aerodrome operating minima – NPA, APV, CAT I operations’ to Annex VII of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012;
Peter wrote:
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.
This is all very country-specific. I’m sure you’re right about the UK, and it maybe applies to other countries too. But I don’t agree with it as a generalization across all of Europe. Some airlines have either bought into FTO’s or bought them outright to train their own pilots, usually because they want them to be trained in their own system. Those same FTO’s only train for the airlines are aren’t interested in “private” customers. There are quite a lot of flying clubs who offer training, often even acting as ATO’s, and their interest is getting as many pilots as possible flying, not being a commercial operation of the type you describe.
Peter wrote:
And anyway the FTO doing the conversion is free to disallow any logbook entries it doesn’t like for the 50hrs IRC PIC
No, it isn’t. An ICAO IR holder with 50 PIC IFR hours, including 15 h on multi-engine aeroplanes if IR privileges on an ME class are sought, is entitled to proceed directly to a skill test without a course completion certificate issued by an ATO.
I think what is “lost in translation” here in the forum is the difference between theory and how the respective ATO translates into practice.
Yes, BIR could be so much easier than CBIR. But where I live that is not reality. The difference is negligible in terms of time and cost involved.
An advantage of BIR over CBIR in my view remains in the skill test only every other year.
I agree there is very little if any advantages of the BIR over the CBIR. But the training for it should be simplified and less expensive, more adapted to the leisure PPL. If ATOs are posing difficulties then NAAs need to consider more regulation of them. After all the BIR like the IR(r) in the UK can be seen as a safety enhancer in the same way as VSV (vol sans visibilité) was added to the PPL course.
Slight nitpick it is not a skill test but a competence check with an examiner.
This was a similar argumenton the PPL when the hour with an instructor every 24 months was brought in. Many instructors insisted on treating that as a skills test.
The difference is negligible in terms of time and cost involved.
Yes, and any IR instructor will tell you that too.
Same with PPL versus NPPL versus LAPL. Everybody takes more or less the same # of hours, plus or minus some factor which is derived directly from age using some scarily accurate formula 
There is a deeper issue here however. With a PPL the sausage machine can pretend that it can be domestic only, and some people just do aerobatics, etc. But any “IR” obviously must be immediately usable for flying abroad. That is not being delivered now, and it will be “delivered even less” if you are reducing the content.
I know there are 2 countries in Europe where one can, and people do, use an IR wholly internally (France and Sweden, for different reasons) but for most that will be a severe short-changing. It should get all new BIR holders to join EuroGA because they will want to know how to work out a route from EGKA to LFAT .
Qalupalik wrote:
No, it isn’t. An ICAO IR holder with 50 PIC IFR hours, including 15 h on multi-engine aeroplanes if IR privileges on an ME class are sought, is entitled to proceed directly to a skill test without a course completion certificate issued by an ATO.
The problem is that (a) most people have never recorded the flight rules against the entries in their logbook, and (b) IFR OCAS in the UK is nothing but a state of mind. I’m flying along and suddenly I decide I’m IFR, and I am. 20 minutes later I decide to be VFR, and I am.
I could easily retrospectively annotate my logbook to ‘find’ 50 PIC IFR hours among the hours in there. All it requires is that my IR(R) was valid on the date of the flight and that the aircraft was approved for IFR (the TB10 which makes up at least half my logbook is approved), then I can declare any flight I like to have been IFR since there are no default flight rules, no rule that a logged flight is VFR unless noted otherwise at the time.
In reality if I’m showing this evidence to an ATO then they are going to raise their eyebrows at ‘IFR’ flights lasting 30-60 minutes, possibly between two small fields without instrument approaches on a summer weekend…
