EASA BIR Basic Instrument Rating

Last Updated in September, 2024 by Patrick | Published: 2022

A lighter, simpler and cheaper way for European Pilots to obtain an Instrument Rating.

TL;DR Get your EASA Instrument Rating flexibly, efficiently and in rapid time – thanks to the EASA BIR!

Theory can be done 100% online.
Practical part is entirely competency based, has no minimum flight hour requirements & can even be done via a combination of training using home simulator (X-Plane) remote IFR sessions, on VFR approved aircraft for basic IR exercises and on IFR approved aircraft for IFR procedure training.

EASA BIR Intro

This is (sort of) an add-on post to the article on the EASA CB IR course, as the BIR is actually closely connected. In other words, even though this is a quick intro to the EASA BIR, pursuing it you might just end up with a full ICAO compliant IR. Read on to find out how it works!

Obviously the idea here is to inform European pilots of a fantastic regulatory development allowing them to obtain an EASA (B)IR in a lighter, simpler and cheaper way.

A little history first. According to unverified sources, approximately 50% of pilots in the USA (FAA licenses) have an instrument rating. Admittedly, not all of those maintain actual IFR currency, however, they have all undergone the required training and are familiar with flying on instruments. On the other side (of the atlantic), the ratio of pilots with an instrument rating is a low single digit percentage. An astonishing difference indeed, and a lost opportunity for flight safety.

An instrument rating can make pilots safer. Yes, while there are pilots flying around happily and just as safely under VFR with no intention to change that, we’re talking statistics here (VFR in IMC!). The GA private flying safety record isn’t exactly stellar, and it isn’t improving either. Logically, it’s therefore in the regulator’s (EASA stands for European Aviation SAFETY Administration, after all) interest to enable as many pilots as possible to obtain additional qualifications such as an IR in an easier way.

So a few years back, a first shy try of an “IR light” was implemented, and, you guessed it, it failed tragically. The “E IR” (enroute instrument rating) didn’t appeal to a significant number of pilots at all. The CB IR course came along, and while offering quite some flexibility (e.g. training 30 hours in your plane with an independent instructor outside an ATO), it too didn’t substantially increase the number of IR rated pilots. Don’t get me wrong, the CB IR was (again, relatively speaking) a revolution by EASA standards for obtaining a full ICAO compliant instrument rating. So you’re probably asking yourself “Why then are there still only so few IR rated pilots in Europe?”, to which the short answer is: The theory course and exams (involving pointless multiple choice question memorizing) are frustrating, as are interest conflicts paired with bureaucratic dependancies that are still very much prevalent. So, how could the number of IR qualified pilots be increased significantly? Simple. Eradicate any counterproductive hurdles. No need to be creative, a short field trip to FAA land could yield plenty of ideas. Such as:

1. Scrap any theory course requirement and leave it up to the candidate to pass the exams. Seems to work well in the USA.
   
   Instead, we see “approved” web based learning courses offered in a copy paste fashion by ATOs competing for the worst, counterintuitive and boring way to frustrate motivated IR aspirants. Wouldn’t it make so much more sense to use excellent materials provided by passionate and knowledgeable IR instructors who happen to be owner pilots themselves. Take a look at Erlend Vage’s IR book series and show him your support. His books are not only well suited for those new to the IR but also a practical, to the point “refresher resource” for those who who already have the instrument rating. I am not affiliated with and do not receive any compensation for mentioning Erlend’s books.
   
2. Any IR instructor can give IFR training in a suitable airplane and assess a candidate’s readiness for the practical exam.
   
   Instead, while the CB IR allows this in part, the mandatory part at an ATO acts as a complicator and inhibitor.
   
3. The examiner can convince himself of the candidate’s knowledge and skills during a combined oral and practical skill test. This is already in place, however, currently it must be preceded by 1. and 2, so it’s fruitless and provides no benefit.

Believe it or not, the above exists, and works well, with no detrimental effects on flight safety. Quite the contrary, actually. Perhaps large bodies of water change air molecules or whatever, so we can’t have nice things on our side of the pond. Anyway, for now, keep on dreaming, the above improvements aren’t happening anytime soon in EASA land. Speaking of necessary improvements, please join AOPA and european GA networks to participate actively in lobbying. Everyone counts!

Enough realism. Let’s move on to the positive news. In spite of the above, there is a recent and substantial improvement. Hooray! The EIR died a silent death and is long forgotten, please welcome the new star emerging on the vast stage of FCL regulations:

The EASA Basic Instrument Rating (BIR)

The short summary of the BIR is that for the theory exams, you’ll be memorizing only around 1400 questions instead of over 4000 (CB IR). A major improvement. For the practical part, there are no minimum flight hour requirements. This isn’t to say someone will now magically attain instrument proficiency with significantly less than the previously mandated 40 hours, but it means you can grab an instructor (even remotely via screen sharing), fire up X-Plane on your computer, and spend very little money for grasping basic and procedural IFR concepts as well as complex avionics, well before spending your hard earned money in an airplane. Obviously, one could do the same to complement CB IR training just as well, but there you’d have to spend 30 hours in either a certified FNPT or an airplane, in order to count towards the required hours. With the BIR, what counts is your actual competence foremost, how you achieve it is more liberal.

BIR Theory

First you’ll do a theory course at an ATO. Some ATOs didn’t bother creating and obtaining approval for a dedicated BIR theory course, so you’ll end up clicking yourself through a CBIR theory course. A bit of a nuisance. Many ATO courses include 8-10 hours of mandatory in-classroom theory. Or you can do it 100% online through distance learning. Reach out to me to learn more. The important part is that instead of 7 exams (as for CBIR) you’ll do only 3. And as stated above, the question bank is significantly smaller. That means a greatly reduced amount of evenings wasted “clicking”, and one day of 3 exams vs. three days of 3-2-2 exams.

BIR Practical Flight Training

Again, there are no minimum prescribed hours. It is entirely competency based. Instead, the BIR flight training is divided into three modules (single engine) or four modules (for multi engine) respectively. To prove that you have attained the competency (by whatever means: training with an independent instructor outside ATO, yourself on a home simulator etc.), you need to “finish the modules” by doing a flight (or flights, if required) for each module in an ATO, either on an ATO aircraft or by adding your aircraft to the ATO.

Again to make it clear, you may fly and train, for example, with an independent instructor outside an ATO, until competence is attained, and then complete each of the modules with a flight (or flights, if so required) at an ATO (module iii, “enroute” can also be completed outside an ATO with a qualified instructor).