IMC Test in PA34 Seneca

The United Kingdom’s Instrument Meteorological Conditions (I.M.C.) Rating has been a useful add-on to the Private Pilot’s Licence for many years. I first obtained this rating in the 1980’s and, after letting it expire, renewed my privileges around five years ago.

With an IMC rating a PPL holder can fly in much reduced visibility and may carry out instrument approaches to suitably equipped airfields. The requirement to remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface is removed from the basic licence and hence flying in the clouds is possible. Whether this is a good idea or not depends on the type of cloud and the air temperature, as airframe and propeller icing is a possible consequence of prolonged exposure to those conditions.

The main benefit of the IMC rating in my case, is that it enables me to fly up through any clouds and cruise, in hopefully good visual conditions, to the destination. This strategy keeps the aircraft clear of obstructions, i.e. hills and masts, and avoids trying to navigate at lower altitudes and in poorer visibility. If the cloud beneath the airplane is solid at destination, then an instrument approach can be flown to enable a landing.

There are a few “gotchas” however! As the IMC rating is not a full Instrument Rating, flight in airways (Class A airspace) is not allowed. This sometimes is, and sometimes isn’t, a problem. If there is no Class A above the route, then a climb through the clouds continues until the airplane breaks into the clear. If there is Class A above, then the climb would have to be stopped before entering that airspace, and this may require prolonged flight in potential icing conditions. It’s not enjoyable for pilot or passengers to fly in the clouds for extended periods.

Recently I converted my licence to the new EASA regulatory body and the name of the IMC Rating has changed. It’s now called an IRR(A), or Instrument Rating Restricted (Aeroplane). The privileges are the same, only the name has changed. It’s a bit confusing to some, as it sounds like a full Instrument Rating, but it’s not.

The IRR(A) requires a flight test every 25 months, and mine was due recently. I’d had some practice in our Piper Arrow but I was doing my renewal in a Piper Seneca, a twin engine aeroplane. The flight test can be done in a single but I want to use the rating in multi engine planes as well. To avoid two flight tests, I chose to renew in the Seneca, which is just a big Arrow really.

I met my examiner at Blackpool and was briefed on what the test would consist of and who was responsible for various tasks. I checked the aircraft over and we both strapped in. I pressed the starter button for the right engine and nothing happened! The propeller did not move at all. The battery was virtually flat. To cut a long story short, after the engineers had tried two or three other batteries we ended up with a motor car in front of us revving up his engine, with jump leads connected to our plane. This was a comical sight but one that enabled the engines to fire. We were in business at last. This protracted saga meant we were ninety minutes behind schedule and I was feeling rather stressed! I calmed myself and concentrated on the tasks required.

I won’t go through a full description of the flight but the following were some of the elements:

Full panel, 360 degrees level turns left and right.

Levelling off in a climb and descent at specified altitudes whilst continuing to turn onto headings.

A recovery from an unusual attitude (spiral descent) on full panel.

Limited panel manoeuvres, including timed turns.

A simulated engine failure in the cruise and in take off configuration.

Turns, climbs and descents on single engine.

Simulated single engine go-around.

SRA approach with a minimum descent altitude of 600 ft.

All performed "under the hood".

After landing,I felt all had gone reasonably well and I was rewarded with a pass. My IRR(A) is now valid for another couple of years and I’ve just got to do my multi engine renewal test in a few weeks, to be good to go for the coming year.

The Seneca really is a lovely aeroplane to fly. It’s old 1970’s technology but it’s very rugged and fast. The biggest downside though, is it’s appetite for Avgas!

Biennial Instructor Hour

It's been a while since my last entry but now I have a few things to write about, there will be further posts in the next couple of weeks. Firstly, here's a brief description of my first flight of 2013.

Further posts will include:

1- IMC Renewal Test in PA34 Seneca
2- SR20 Currency flight
3- PA34 Seneca Solo Flight


Every two years I have to renew my Single Engine Piston (SEP) rating by flying at least twelve hours, completing twelve take offs and landings and undergoing a flight of at least one hour with an instructor. These requirements have to be completed in the last year of validity of the SEP rating.

As I also have a multi-engine rating (MEP), I fly with an instructor more often than the single engine pilot may necessarily do. This is because a flight test is required every year for the multi rating. No flight test is required to renew an SEP rating. In addition, the flying club I use requires a six-monthly currency check as well. All this adds up to me flying fairly regularly with an instructor.

Two years ago I completed my biennial instructor hour in a Cirrus SR20, but this renewal was to be in my grouped Piper Arrow. As my Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) rating was also due to expire soon, I wanted to combine the instructor hour with some instrument flying and an ILS at Blackpool.

The weather for this flight was not good. The report for Blackpool gave 4000 metres visibility with broken clouds at 400 feet. Those would be challenging conditions for a pilot in current practice, which I wasn’t! However, my instructor held an Instrument Rating (IR) which allowed him to fly down to only 200 feet above the surface still in the clouds, and that meant we were going to fly.

Almost immediately after take-off, I began flying on instruments only, so I couldn’t tell you when we entered the clouds. I looked up on a couple of occasions and all I saw was a milky whiteness. I checked the weather via the VHF radio and found it to be as expected, with a low cloud base of 400 feet. I contacted Blackpool approach and, shortly after selecting a transponder code, the controller came back to tell me we were identified and the approach would be radar vectors to the ILS, runway 28.

My first vector was heading 355 to maintain 2000 feet, before further turns to the left were given and I was asked to report established on the localizer. I turned us onto the final approach track and waited for the glide slope needle to move down the course deviation indicator (CDI). Maintaining 2000 feet, it wasn’t long before the indicator centred. I lowered the undercarriage and commenced descent towards my decision altitude of 550 feet. As the clouds were reported at 400 feet I was expecting to either see nothing at decision altitude and commence a missed approach, or be told by my instructor to continue down to his decision altitude of 200 feet.

I was calling off the altitude every hundred feet and at 600 feet I looked up to see the runway in a position suitable for me to land. This was the first time I’d completed a real (not practice) approach to minimums and it was a great feeling to know that I could do it. The cloud base was actually a little higher than reported, but it was still serious IFR weather.

I lowered the flaps to full and did a touch and go on the runway, transferring to instruments again shortly after take-off. We climbed up through the clouds and headed back to Barton. When I started to fly visually again, I found we were over scattered/broken cloud tops. A descent and visual landing back at City Airport rounded off the sortie.

I was very pleased with this flight as not only had I completed my biennial instructor hour, but had also refreshed my instrument flying currency and had an approach signed off by my instructor. This was doubly useful as it meant that my IMC renewal test the following week would only need to consist of one approach and not two. Therefore there should be less stress for my test, particularly as I was doing it in the Seneca, a twin engine aircraft.

The next post will detail how I got on with the IMC renewal test.