True cost of flying IFR in France (or EU) (annual revalidation, equipment check)

@arj1: tx, ! very helpful advice especially concerning the Jepp Charts

Worth to mention here.
There is a lot simpler way to do IR in EASA noways following BIR route.

Sign up for BIR at ATO, and find a freelance IRI.
No official flying hours needed. One can train on simulator, private aircraft, etc.
BIR theory is three subjects only!

After getting BIR, fly 50hours of IR under BIR rating, and do the exam for IR, and there you have full ICAO IR rating.

It is hardly to get it simpler than this.

Peter wrote:

No. You need at least CPL theory. Many previous threads here.

For instructing (except for LAPL), yes. For towing and paradropping, no.

I didn’t say [CPL+IR theory being the same as ATPL theory] was.

Then I honestly don’t understand how to interpret your post #13.

Wires crossed.

I don’t want to get into the old business of picking up some post and hammering it to show some peripherally related point, but please show me a study route which gets you an ATPL

Salut Max !

I used to fly at Hispano. Clubs like these are definitely the kind of place where the mention of IFR raise many eyebrows.
Here on EuroGA, you can go through the irrelevant and outdated stories.

About ATC checks, if you check on SIBA, you can see that :

• for VFR planes, it is 240€ +VAT every 5 years
• for IFR planes, it is 546€ + VAT every 2 years

Add to that the mandatory database subscriptions, it makes a IFR extra cost very reasonable.

BUT, this is only the minimum cost stricto sensu.

• IFR cost more also in terms of airplane.
  You will notice IFR capable planes are more expensive than VFR only ones. An example is DR340 vs F172M. They have about the same useful load and speed, but vary immensely in purchase price. The cessna, with its “modern” panel design, bigger tanks, unambiguous TC for IFR, carries a big upcost. Which impacts your insurance premium. Some IFR types offer intersting prices, like the dutch_flyer’s TB10.
  In terms of renting, well, you are close to the 300€/hour range. Think about it. A return trip to Dinard will cost you about 1k€.

• IFR is kind of a rabbit hole.
  Talk to any IFR pilot here and he will tell you “How glad am I to have XX” “How could I do without YY” etc… Every step you make up in the GA staircase asks for the next : Golze, Jepp charts, turbo, etc….. And all these steps add up to the cost whule improving safety and dispatch rate.

As a VFR pilot, I struggle to get a feeling of how much IFR stricto sensu gets you from A to B more than VFR. I think it is mainly a question of safety in marginal VFR days. Days where I cancel the flight and others would try.

I think it is mainly a question of safety in marginal VFR days

I disagree. Here in France at least, days when you can be sure of completing a journey in VMC are not that common. For example, for the last several days there has been a fairly thin cloud layer over Nice/Cannes. We’d planned to go to Avignon at the weekend, where it was perfect VMC, but couldn’t get out of LFMD nor be sure of getting back.

IFR it would be easy. Unfortunately I don’t yet have my EASA IR, nor am I FAA current. So VFR only for the moment, and we didn’t go.

In winter you still have to worry about the freezing level, but it still gives you a lot more scope. And for 8 months of the year, down here anyway, that’s a non problem.

Jujupilote wrote:

As a VFR pilot, I struggle to get a feeling of how much IFR stricto sensu gets you from A to B more than VFR. I think it is mainly a question of safety in marginal VFR days. Days where I cancel the flight and others would try.

IMO it is about two things:

1. Ease of flying, ease of flight preparation, far less preparation to make in terms of looking at each NOTAM in detail and each controlled air space and its associated frequency, …
2. Dispatch rate, that is one cancels far less often. Not only on “marginal VFR days” but also, right at the beginning of the IFR equipment range, when the weather is clearly strongly non-VMC:
   • BKN004 with visibility 2500, and that cloud layer is thin and not icing temperature and it is “tempête de ciel bleu” above? Under these conditions, I’d do it with “any IFR machine”, even a Robin.
   • With thicker layers, icing, convective activity, etc it starts to depend heavily on the plane and its equipment.
   • Golze is useful in another step up in dispatch rate? Yes, because you can depart with some uncertainty in weather and get real-time updates.
   • Jepp charts? The French AIP charts are quite good; if they all were like that, I would not take Jeppesen at their current price. Nonetheless some/many IFR pilots fly with AIP charts “only”; Jeppesen charts bring uniformity and thus ease of flying, but they don’t improve one’s dispatch rate per se.
   • Turbo and oxygen together improves dispatch rate even further? Yes, it allows to outclimb more stuff.

But in my opinion, each step is valuable in itself and you can “stop” there. The ease of flying is worth in itself, even if one didn’t improve one’s dispatch rate (flying, say in Spain or Cyprus); that’s essentially what the defunct Enroute IR was in large part giving access to. The capacity not to be grounded by thin layers close to the ground nor morning mist is IMO also worth in itself, and doesn’t require more than the right instruments for the SID and/or the approach.

Thanks guys.

FWIW I would install the Golze ADL even if I was VFR-only.

Tht’s unless all flight is very low e.g. below 3000ft.