FIC - A Decision!

[28Left]

Hi,

I am new to PPrune so apologies if this has been discussed before (I am sure it has). Also if I am in the wrong forum please redirect me.

Would appreciate some advice and feedback. Been flying Gliders and usual light aircraft 15 years, 400 hours, IMC, Night etc, love flying and always had an interest in instructing. Career in Training and Management Development etc. Circumstances mean more available time now and I am considering doing an FIC course with a view to instructing freelance/part time.

Assuming I can pass the course successfully I will be 53 at that point. Critical questions for me are 1) is my age going to be a barrier and 2) are there potential opportunities for people with my age/ experience profile?

I would really appreciate your views and also hearing about the experience of others who have become instructors in similar circumstances

Many thanks

[Duchess_Driver]

To answer the questions

a) No
2) Yes

Now I'll expand.

Age is no barrier, merely an obstacle on some peoples routes to the airlines. Maturity of attitude and life experience are two things that age usually gives which is missing in many younger FI's.

Now, be careful with your choice here. As a newly minted FI you will need to work under the supervision of an un-restricted instructor and obviously that may restrict the opportunities to 'freelance'. As a CRI you are not subject to those limitations - but you are subject to others. So think carefully about what kind of teaching you actually want to do before jumping onto one course or another.

[Whopity]

As a CRI you are not subject to those limitationsIf you qualify as an FI there is nothing to stop you applying for a CRI as well.

I see no mention of CPL level knowledge in the original post. Whilst you don't need it to undertake the FI Course, without it, you will only be able to teach for the LAPL which could be very limiting.

[dobbin1]

I did my CPL and FI rating at age 52 after retiring from my "proper job". I had around 450 hours at the time. Age did not seem to be an issue, and the grey hair is reassuring to nervous students who assume you are a very experienced old lag.

I think some age also makes you slightly more attractive to some schools as they know you are not going to disappear as soon as you get a sniff of an airline job.

Go for it!

[dobbin1]

Ps, the opportunities for freelancing are few and far between. They are non-existent if you want to teach ab initio, so it is a good idea to build a relationship with an RF or ATO which could lead to work after you qualify. If you decide not to do the CPL theory, you will be limited to LAPL only and almost useless to any school. If all you want to do is coach qualified pilots then just do the CRI.

[dobbin1]

If you qualify as an FI there is nothing to stop you applying for a CRI as well.

I wanted to do this, but I was told by the CAA that I would have to do the full CRI course and test!

In my opinion, the FI certificate should contain embedded CRI privileges anyway.

[28Left]

Thanks everybody for your comments - really helpful

It is my intention to do the CPL theory as I recognise the limitations of LAPL only.

I had assumed, wrongly it seems, that CRI privileges would be embedded in FI rating as Dobbin1 suggests they should be. So that gives me some further food for thought.

Anyway I appreciate and am encouraged by your comments. There are few situations where grey hair, of which I have enough, might actually be an advantage!

Thanks again

[Mickey Kaye]

I wouldn't be so hasty in saying that an FI without CPL knowledge is of no use to a flying school.

I know of one such instructor and he is logging about 80 hours a month at the moment.

[Whopity]

I wanted to do this, but I was told by the CAA that I would have to do the full CRI course and test! Apply, and if they don't issue it then go for a Regulation 6 Appeal. You have done the CRI Course 10 times over whilst completing the FI Course. They can and have issued them on application.

I know of one such instructor and he is logging about 80 hours a month at the moment. But none of those hours can be credited towards a PPL untill after LAPL training has been completed. How do you sell that to a student who may want to change streams?

[sapperkenno]

Can a "regulation 6" or any other appeal be used to show that ICAO CPL theoretical knowledge is just as good as EASA TK? Rather than the long/expensive way of signing up to an ATO for a ground school course, then paying to sit 9 (a minimum of, but more likely to do 14) written exams... Why not have a "foreign pilot" CPL written, comprising one exam with a selection of questions, for people who have already have an ICAO CPL and want to convert?

[S-Works]

Rotfl.......:p

[Level Attitude]

Can a "regulation 6" or any other appeal be used to show that ICAO CPL theoretical knowledge is just as good as EASA TK? Rather than the long/expensive way of signing up to an ATO for a ground school courseThe requirement is "have met the requirement for CPL Theoretical Knowledge" - I am sure (but could be wrong) that a few months back the CAA confirmed that a holder of a non-EASA CPL or someone who had passed a non-EASA CPL Theoretical Knowledge course would be deemed to have met "the requirement"

Rotfl.......:pIf only I knew what R O T F L stood for I could join in the joke.

[Duchess_Driver]

Rotfl.......

If only I knew what R O T F L stood for I could join in the joke.

Rolled (ing) on the floor laughing. Depending on where you are or who you speak to. Must admit, I LMFAO'd at it too.

However, why charge one fee for one exam when you can charge 9 or 14?

A very sensible solution, though.

[Level Attitude]

A new FI (with CPL Knowledge) will have Privilege b) which gives the same privileges as a CRI. However, because this privilege is part of an FI rating then the restriction (requiring supervision), of Part-FCL.910, also applies.

There shouldn't be a problem applying for a stand alone CRI (if wished) on the basis of a successful FI course and test - thereby allowing immediate independent Class Instruction to Licensed pilots.

A new FI without CPL Knowledge will also be Restricted as per FCL.910, but they will also be limited, due FCL.915, to only teaching for the LAPL (which does not contain Class Ratings) - Therefore an, additional, stand alone CRI Rating would seem necessary, to me, to make this a viable Instructor Rating.

I wouldn't be so hasty in saying that an FI without CPL knowledge is of no use to a flying school.

I know of one such instructor and he is logging about 80 hours a month at the moment.Mickey Kaye,
Interested to know what instructing this person does?

Also, as I've never seen one, how does his "LAPL Only Restriction" appear on his Licence?

[sapperkenno]

Level Attitude. Do you have any further information about this possible acceptance of ICAO theoretical knowledge instead of EASA knowledge? I would only be interested in it as far as ticking the box for a PPL FI holder without EASA TK, but with ICAO TK, to teach EASA PPLs... Not as a work around for getting a CPL.
This "non EASA CPL TK" FI of who Mickey Kaye speaks has a half dozen NPPL students (as they can teach that) and does rental/currency checkouts etc. There is NOTHING written on their licence mentioning the lack of CPL TK, and having compared this licence with a "normal" one, is no different. The bar on teaching EASA PPLs is found in CAP804.
This person also happens to be an FAA instructor (who has and can teach the FAA CPL and Instrument Rating) so it's not like they're a total noob with no knowledge beyond PPL.
Sorry for 7500-ing the thread.

[Captain Stravaigin]

I think several people have knocked over the age objection - I was about age 58 when I did my CPL and FI. I now combine a wee bit of flight instruction with my new career as a University Lecturer.

My advice would be to do the CRI course first.

Firstly it is the shortest and least expensive of all the licences/ratings that you need. (You do not require the CPL theoretical knowledge exam passes)

Secondly it will give you a very good insight if this is actually something that appeals to you or not.

Thirdly, done this way you can claim some credit towards your FI rating from the CAA.

And at the end of it if you decide you have better things to do with your life you still have a (very useful) rating in your flight bag.

Good Luck!

[ifitaintboeing]

There shouldn't be a problem applying for a stand alone CRI (if wished) on the basis of a successful FI course and test - thereby allowing immediate independent Class Instruction to Licensed pilots.

I have assisted several FI applicants to do exactly this upon application for their FI(R).

There is NOTHING written on their licence mentioning the lack of CPL TK, and having compared this licence with a "normal" one, is no different.

It should have been annotated "(a) LAPL only", and without (b) privileges.

Do you have any further information about this possible acceptance of ICAO theoretical knowledge instead of EASA knowledge?

The CAA won't accept your ICAO theoretical knowledge (yet), but they will currently accept your previous experience to issue you a FI certificate without restriction. CAP 804, Section 4, Part q, Subpart 2, page 4.

ifitaint...

[sapperkenno]

Yet..? Meaning what exactly, as I've heard that there may potentially be an oral exam as part of the skills test for CPL in the near future where ICAO CPL holders "converting" to EASA can demonstrate knowledge instead of 14 exam passes?
How about in other EASA member states? Or is it just the UK CAA's interpretation and rule that it must be EASA knowledge?! So maybe a bit of EASA shopping around might simplify the workload and allow a more pragmatic approach?

[Level Attitude]

It should have been annotated "(a) LAPL only", and without (b) privileges.That is what I would have expected.
it's not like they're a total noob with no knowledge beyond PPLAn aircraft doesn't fly any differently depending on the qualifications of an Instructor so I don't think competency is an issue - but they (or their students) could come unstuck in a legalistic/bureaucratic sense if they do Instruct outside their privileges.

Personal Opinion:
Currency Checks (even on a PPL+SEP holder) where nothing gets taught that is outside the LAPL syllabus would be OK as an 'appropriate' Instructor Rating is held.

No Instruction of a (PPL+) SEP holder can be counted, by the SEP holder, towards the hours required for "Revalidation by Experience" of their SEP Rating as Privilege b), which expressly allows this Instruction, is not held.

[sapperkenno]

If the CPL requirement for an instructor comes from ICAO, then why isn't ICAO knowledge accepted?

My understanding is that ALL FIs have the exact same privileges, with the exception that one without CPL TK cannot teach an EASA PPL, and can only teach LAPL/NPPL only.

There is nothing in CAP804 to state otherwise, and the course content/testing for all FI candidates doesn't discriminate between whether they hold CPL TK or not. Everyone does the course, passes the FI skills test etc, then goes on to instruct. There isn't one FI course for CPL TK passes people, and one for everyone else, likewise with the skills-test.

[Level Attitude]

My understanding is that ALL FIs have the exact same privileges......one without CPL TK.....can only teach LAPL/NPPL only.sapperkenno,
You seem to have contradicted yourself.

The privileges of an FI, and how to obtain them, are enshrined in EU Law and listed in Part-FCL. CAP804 is based on (cannot contradict) and quotes from Part-FCL.

Part-FCL Licences (certainly UK issued ones) list the privileges held on them. If a privilege is not listed then a Pilot/Instructor does not have it.

Everyone does the course, passes the FI skills test etc, then goes on to instruct. There isn't one FI course for CPL TK passes people, and one for everyone else, likewise with the skills-test.How many different courses do you want?

What this means is an FI currently restricted to only teaching for the LAPL does not have to do the whole FI course, and take the test, again once they gain CPL level knowledge - but they would need to apply to the CAA to have the additional FI privileges (PPL, SEP) added to their Licence before exercising those instructional privileges.

[sapperkenno]

It would seem I had contradicted myself if I had said it how you quoted, but I didn't, by adding "with the exception..." that you replaced with your set of dots and then misquoted me.

What I am getting at, is not about introducing different courses/tests, but simply that a "LAPL-only" FI is for all intents and purposes the same as any other FI, does the same course and passes the same test, bar being able to teach an EASA PPL. I don't know how to describe that any simpler. All this blabbing on about SEP/SSEA ratings and making up restrictions which aren't in the legislation seems rather pointless, especially as a CRI can do some of these things, and (although I've seen nothing official) the general consensus is an FI ticket includes embedded CRI privileges?!

So (playing devils advocate) if blogs has gotten himself an FI ticket, and it doesn't contain any restrictions therein, then is it a drafting error on behalf of the CAA when they issued their ticket (surely they have a way of checking who's passed the exams) and does it mean this person isn't restricted to LAPL-only as it doesn't say so on their licence?

[Level Attitude]

It would seem I had contradicted myself if I had said it how you quoted, but I didn't, by adding "with the exception..." that you replaced with your set of dots and then misquoted meYou did state ALL (in big letters) which means there shouldn't be any exceptions. You pointed out one but there are, in fact many.

What I am getting at, is not about introducing different courses/tests, but simply that a "LAPL-only" FI is for all intents and purposes the same as any other FIBut they are not.

I don't know how to describe that any simpler. All this blabbing on about SEP/SSEA ratings and making up restrictions which aren't in the legislation seems rather pointlessBut THEY ARE in the legislation.

Ignoring stand alone CRIs, IRI,s TRIs, etc for a moment - Think of an FI Rating as the minimum basic foundation required to do any instruction at all.
What an FI is actually allowed to instruct for depends on what additional qualifications they hold. The exact Instructional Privileges an FI holds will be listed on an EASA Licence on Page 4 in the Remarks and Restrictions column next to where it says an FI is held.

Since the legislation says an FI holder without CPL level knowledge will be restricted to only teaching for an LAPL then that will (or should) be annotated in the Remarks and Restrictions column.

If such an Instructor wishes to instruct for the SEP Rating then either they will have to gain the CPL level knowledge to remove the 'LAPL only' restriction from their FI Rating (actually remove it from Privilege a) and add Privilege b)) or apply for a separate, stand alone, SEP CRI rating.

[sapperkenno]

My brain hurts...

[mad_jock]

that was exactly my POV when I did my last instructor renewal.

SLMG, TMG and all the other "things"

thankfully I only did a couple of NPL's and the rest were all normal JAR PPL's.

its no wonder your normal private pilot is somewhat confused with all the different license and rating types. I don't have a clue either just know I have an ATPL with a SEP and IMC (although that going to be something different.) and a couple of multicrew IR's types.

Seems to be the further away you are from ATPL the more confusing it gets.

Good job there isn't an exam in the FIC and instructor renewal about all the different flavours available. Their would be an instructor shortage pretty quick.

[Level Attitude]

A valid Pilot's Licence (including valid Medical) entitles the holder to act as a Pilot.
Does this mean they can legally fly any aeroplane they want?
No. They also need to be qualified to fly a particular aircraft by holding a valid relevant Class or Type Rating, and also possibly requiring Differences Training to be have been signed off.

A valid FI entitles the holder to Instruct.
Does this mean they can legally instruct for anything they want?
No. They also need to be qualified to give a type of instruction by holding the relevant Instructional Privilege.

What's the difference?

Good job there isn't an exam in the FIC and instructor renewal about all the different flavours available. Their would be an instructor shortage pretty quick.During an FIC the candidate certainly should be taught, and quized on, the Instructional Privileges they are attempting to have granted. For every Renewal an FI will need to attend either a Seminar or a Test with an FIE (possibly both). Instructor requirements and Privileges should be reviewed at these (even if not tested).

[28Left]

Hi all,

A couple of months ago i posted about doing a FIC - usual questions about age, experience, opportunities etc.

Got some excellent replies, all helpful, some sobering but none unsupportive. Following that and a highly tolerant family I am now ploughing my way through CPL Ground School with GTS and despite having to squeeze it all in with my 'normal' job I am enjoying every minute of it.

A long way to go but determined to get there.

Just wanted to say a big thanks to all who responded