View Full Version : National PPL intructors
17th Jul 2001, 18:44
Is it true that to become an instructor for the new national ppl you only need 150hrs period !!!???
Was told this by someone currently doing in instructors course but it sounds too good to be true.
17th Jul 2001, 21:22
Too good to be true!!??
Too frightening to be true if you ask me!
At any rate you have to have a CPL to fly for commercial gain so that's the 150hr thing out of the window....unless they are going to let well meaning amateurs teach for nothing.
Blind leading the blind springs to mind :eek:
Tell me it's not true!!!
[ 17 July 2001: Message edited by: clear prop!!! ]
17th Jul 2001, 22:37
NPPL instructors. AOPA has proposed entry requirements and a training
syllabus for instructors who hold only a NPPL. This has been provisionally
agreed in outline. The question of remuneration for these instructors has not
been agreed, but AOPA are pressing for this to be permitted strictly within a
carefully defined club environment.
So you may not need a CPL to fly for gain....As for blind leading the blind, bit of a generalisation if you ask me, there's plenty of decent "amateur" pilots out there with more experience than many of the instructors I've met !
[ 17 July 2001: Message edited by: englishal ]
17th Jul 2001, 23:49
Not with 150 hrs and no formal commercial training there's not!!!
You cannot be serious!!!
[ 17 July 2001: Message edited by: clear prop!!! ]
18th Jul 2001, 00:07
I never said that, I'm talking about "experienced amateur" pilots...(they do exist you know)
18th Jul 2001, 01:00
So sorry englishal, neither you did!
However the thread IS about 150hr pilots becoming instructors and that IS the blind leading the blind…, which is what I said!
Yes there are experienced amateurs out there, many who see themselves with skills beyond their experience and training, but that’s for another thread!
I also accept that there are some good amateurs also BTW, but not with 150hrs and able to teach!
18th Jul 2001, 11:45
The NPPLSC has yet to agree what requirements should be in place for NPPL-holding instructors. However, the figure of 150 hours is certainly incorrect, there will still be a requirment for commercial level knowledge (the exact level to be agreed), a pre-entry flight and theoretical knowledge check before a formal FI(R) course and FI(R) Skill Test.
The only remunerated instructing which might be proposed would be strictly within a Club environment; the aim is to make things simpler for those who genuinely wish to instruct, not to facilitate a method for airline-wannabe hours builders.
NPPL-holding FIs are still a long way off - the licence itself will not appear before 'early 2002' and the demand for it will greatly influence the NPPLSC in deciding whether there should be further progress towards NPPL-holding FIs remunerated or otherwise.
18th Jul 2001, 15:23
You are a narrow-minded stupid little gimp!
What the hell do you know about how competant a ppl would be to instruct? This used to be the norm for many years. As discussed in previous threads this argument is tired and outdated.
Move with the times F*CKWIT!
18th Jul 2001, 16:18
FYI I had little more than 150 hrs myself when I took and passed the JAA FI(R) course.
To be exact I seem to remember it was just over 200 hrs of which 150 had to be PIC.
I think you're living with the mistaken idea that people are just handed a FI rating once they achieve the required hours, not so.
First there's the exams, then there's the course and subsequent skills test (oral and practical) and even then you are only granted a restricted rating.
Just because someone has a thousand hours in their logbook doesn't instantly make them an enlightened aviator or good instructor material. Similarly someone with only 150 hrs might make an excellent tutor and this is where the vetting procedure of the course and skills test come in.
I agree that the average punter would be a bit wary if he knew his instructor had less than 200 hrs to his name but everyone's got to start somewhere.
Recently I have passed my JAA CPL and I tell you what, having done the instructors course first was a Godsend. :p
18th Jul 2001, 19:56
Your typical reply is not taken personally as we've all seen your 'chip on the shoulder' childish contributions before!
This forum is for those who fly for a living, or wish to. For whatever reason, you do not... or cannot so stick to the private flying forum or better still Jet- Balst but take that chip on your shoulder elsewhere!
If you had read the thread, and not twisted it, you would hav seen that I at no time stated that properly trained and experienced PPL's could not make good instructors. The thread is about 150hr total time Instructors who, as anyone who knows anything about Instructing will agree could not have the relevant experience.
I know only too well how Instructors ratings are oabtained and for how much!!. My concern is that the NPPL makes it too easy to obtain a lesser rating. As BEagle points out the peramaters have not yet been agread, so hopefully common sense will prevail. Lets hope that the delay does not slow down the number of new PPL students who may be holding back waiting for a new scheme, which may never happen!
Interesting to hear that you did your FIR before your CPL, and well done on passing the CPL Skills test, now there's a cheap test, certainly makes a first time pass essential!!
19th Jul 2001, 02:22
I know where you're coming from and on this subject I have some VERY ambivalent feelings.
On the one hand I agree that it would be great to have extra-terrestrial standards for entry instructors and PPLs. Life in this world would be safe and full of competent and aware pilots. No one in aviation would argue against that.
However, however, however. I had it hammered home what a poor state GA in this country is in after my CPL course in the States. I can only imagine that how it is out there is how it used to be here in the Sixties and Seventies (loads of GA aircraft and airfields for them to go to and fly from).
The American approach to aviation is a whole lot more pragmatic than ours, they just don't see it as such an Olympian pursuit. To be sure their Government is a lot more lenient toward flying as an activity (just compare fees) and being such a big country flying is a must for a lot of people.
Anyway, my point is that our perception of what is an acceptable standard for someone to be an instructor (imho) is based more on snobbery and proffessional jingoism than practicalities.
Apart from flying I'm an instructor in two other disciplines as well (see profile) and its no different there either, people endlessly whinging about the low standard of entry tutors or intructors ("...but he just doesn't have any experience!). As I said, everyone has to start somewhere.