Hour Building - Instructor or Chtrt?

[Garth]

I have an Australian CPL (and living dununder), and am at the crossroads of where to direct my meagre funds so as to get the max return. "Max Return" meaning quickest hrs, quality of hrs and lifestyle. Do I invest in an Instrument rating and go the Chtr route....or do I invest in the instructor rating?

I am inclined to go with the IF rating, mainly because i see it as inevitable. Chtr "appears" to offer more diversity.

The instructor rating concerns me in that GA here is a bit flat and hour building could take a few lifetimes? Any advice would be greatly appreciated:)

[mattpilot]

uhmm.. usually you dont get a job if you dont have an IR

[Garth]

thanks for the info mattpilot. Downunder you can get an instructor rating w/out an IR and hence lots of instructors without the rating.

I would be more interested to know if the "instructor path" is better than the "charter path" to building good quality hours and as timeously as possible.

Hope that gives more clarity to my question.;)

[mattpilot]

Here's my opinion:


This is usually how it works in the US:

After a pilot has obtained a CFI, he has roughly 300 hours. This will get him no where since the minimum required hours for part 135 VFR only operations is 500hrs. The only job one can get with that qualification is flying traffic reporters and doing pipeline work - or similar stuff. Not many jobs like that. Next minimum is 1200hrs part 135 IFR. Now, this number is pretty much unreachable - unless your bill gates of course. So, how does one get to that number? He instructs. Instructors here average around 100 hours a month, making them ready for a job in one year.

Well, i dont really know what the rules are for your country, but untill you qualify for a good job, and if your not a bill gates kind of guy, then i'd stick with instructing until you qualify.

Of course, here in the US you can be a co-pilot with any number of hours, but most carriers dont hire you if you dont qualify as a PIC. Dont know the reason, thats what my old instructor told me.

[foghorn]

It's quite common for UK instructors not to have a full Instrument Rating also as we have the UK-only IMC rating which is basically a cheaper cut-down IR with no airway priveledges and higher approach minima, which many private pilots and instructors opt for.

cheers!
foggy.

[flyby_kiwi]

'I would be more interested to know if the "instructor path" is better than the "charter path" to building good quality hours and as timeously as possible'.

Please dont instruct - although recoginised as a stepping stone - dont take the path if this is your motive. :rolleyes:

[Garth]

thanks again for your views. Mattpilot, great, that was what i was after.

Foggy, thanx dude.

Flyby_Kiwi, thank you for your response. i guess I will have to look into myself a bit too. I see too many PPL's with lacklustre performances who have fallen victim to those "hour building" instructors. I too was almost a casualty. I had the balls to **** the guy off early on in the piece, and substituted him for an instructor whose passion was/still is teaching the marvel of flight. Don't wanna carry on, could be a topic on its own this issue. In short, get ya drift, and thanx heaps for the candid response.

[flyby_kiwi]

Glad to see ya didnt take it the wrong way and can relate to what I mean.

All the best with your aviation career.