CRI vs FI Privelages?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is no training required unless you have let it lapse.
Or for example a CRI could do differences training for a glass cockpit IMC which lets face it is the only thing glass is really good at.
Or for example a CRI could do differences training for a glass cockpit IMC which lets face it is the only thing glass is really good at.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The regs say training for...., not training required for...
However, since voluntary training is not checked, and in any case both instructor and trainee can legally be PIC, I would rather have g1000 ifr training from an experienced CRI who has flown behind it in real life than from an FI who has instructed for the IR, but never ever loaded a flight plan, let a lone a procedure and activated it.. (I showed TWO how to do that - should have charged them instead of paying)
However, since voluntary training is not checked, and in any case both instructor and trainee can legally be PIC, I would rather have g1000 ifr training from an experienced CRI who has flown behind it in real life than from an FI who has instructed for the IR, but never ever loaded a flight plan, let a lone a procedure and activated it.. (I showed TWO how to do that - should have charged them instead of paying)
can any of the above training for issue/revalidation/renewal be legally conducted at night by a CRI
Last edited by Whopity; 29th Jun 2012 at 07:06.
A slight absurdity is that a night+instrument qualified & current CRI could do IRI reasonably easily, but would have to do a full FI course to be able to teach for the NQ. It's just how the system is, but not very sensible or logical in that regard.
The FI rating as printed on the licence says "no aerobatics" whilst the CRI rating does not. Ditto "no applied instruments", but in that case the existence of the IRI/IMCRI qualification(s) clarify matters somewhat.
I've taught, as a CRI with the full knowledge of a school CFI and subsequent sight of CAA, the instrument component of the NPPL(SSEA), with nobody batting an eyelid; but I imagine that most FIs have too. Neither I nor an FI should be teaching for, say, the IMC/IR(R) without holding IRI or IMCRI however - I think that's pretty clear.
G
The FI rating as printed on the licence says "no aerobatics" whilst the CRI rating does not. Ditto "no applied instruments", but in that case the existence of the IRI/IMCRI qualification(s) clarify matters somewhat.
I've taught, as a CRI with the full knowledge of a school CFI and subsequent sight of CAA, the instrument component of the NPPL(SSEA), with nobody batting an eyelid; but I imagine that most FIs have too. Neither I nor an FI should be teaching for, say, the IMC/IR(R) without holding IRI or IMCRI however - I think that's pretty clear.
G
The FI rating as printed on the licence says "no aerobatics"
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having read through CAP804 etc, I can't establish what is required to be an
FI(LAPL) verses an FI(PPL) etc. Is it complete the full FI course without the CPL writtens? or something else?
Many thanks IMC
FI(LAPL) verses an FI(PPL) etc. Is it complete the full FI course without the CPL writtens? or something else?
Many thanks IMC
The pre-requisite for a FI applicant to have passed the CPL exams does not apply to a PPL(A) holder wishing to instruct at LAPL(A) level only.
All other pre-requisites, such as experience, still apply. The FI course is the same and the pass standard is the same whether you wish to instruct at LAPL or PPL level.
Incidentally, amongst other requirements, an IRI under part-FCL will need to have achieved 800 hours of 'flight under IFR'; to provide instruction for the IR, an FI will need to meet similar requirments but to have achieved a lower figure of 200 hrs of 'flight under IFR'.....
Hence AOPA has proposed an IRI (Restricted) certificate to the CAA, to be included in a part-FCL licence, which will require the same pre-requisites as the current 'removal of no applied instrument' restrictions.
Finally, don't think that, just because the 'no applied instrument' caveat will disappear from your part-FCL licence on 17 Sep, you'll be able to provide instrument instruction with no further requirements! See 'FCL.905.FI FI Privileges and Conditions' in CAP 804 Section 4 Part J, Subpart 1 Page 1.
All other pre-requisites, such as experience, still apply. The FI course is the same and the pass standard is the same whether you wish to instruct at LAPL or PPL level.
Incidentally, amongst other requirements, an IRI under part-FCL will need to have achieved 800 hours of 'flight under IFR'; to provide instruction for the IR, an FI will need to meet similar requirments but to have achieved a lower figure of 200 hrs of 'flight under IFR'.....
Hence AOPA has proposed an IRI (Restricted) certificate to the CAA, to be included in a part-FCL licence, which will require the same pre-requisites as the current 'removal of no applied instrument' restrictions.
Finally, don't think that, just because the 'no applied instrument' caveat will disappear from your part-FCL licence on 17 Sep, you'll be able to provide instrument instruction with no further requirements! See 'FCL.905.FI FI Privileges and Conditions' in CAP 804 Section 4 Part J, Subpart 1 Page 1.
Last edited by BEagle; 29th Jun 2012 at 10:05.
The FI rating as printed on the licence says "no aerobatics" whilst the CRI rating does not.
The UK system was based upon removing "limitations" whilst the JAA system is based upon adding additional qualifications. At least under EASA, the CAA will have to finally get rid of the old UK "limitations"
Think back a few years, a Unrestricted FI was one who could give instrument instruction, because the Applied IF Course (exactly the same as the IRI course) was the only way you could upgrade from AFI to FI and remove the AFI restrictions. Ah, the good old days!
Last edited by Whopity; 29th Jun 2012 at 13:26.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My licence has exactly what I can teach on it, next to my FI(A) it states,PPL, CPL Night (Unrestricted) My IRI allows me to teach IR and IMCr and next to my CRI it just states Nil restriction as I have both SE/ME privileges.
I have a few other oddballs thrown in for good measure but that's the gist!
I have a few other oddballs thrown in for good measure but that's the gist!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class Rating Instructor
As a new Class Rating Instructor I am trying to fully understand what I can and can't do. This seems to be a more complicated area than I envisaged and not helped by the new EASA regulations.
I was asked the other day if I could do the differences training for someone with an old UK PPL SLMG in order for them to fly SEP. As they have a licence and that licence has not lapsed I would think that this is within my remit?
I have also been asked if I can provide training someone who allowed their licence to lapse some years ago?
I was asked the other day if I could do the differences training for someone with an old UK PPL SLMG in order for them to fly SEP. As they have a licence and that licence has not lapsed I would think that this is within my remit?
I have also been asked if I can provide training someone who allowed their licence to lapse some years ago?
I've been a fairly active CRI for 2 years, by all means drop me an email (not a PM please) if you want to talk through any of the issues.
NPPL(SLMG) [or NPPL(M) ]--> NPPL(SSEA) is within your remit, but NPPL --> EASA-PPL is not, for odd historic reasons not worth exploring as it seems unlikely to change.
You do however need to do it within a training organisation, and they will need an examiner, you can't just sign those ones off as differences training.
Training of a lapsed PPL to allow them to revalidate by skill test / proficiency check is also possible, but as the requirement is that they need to do training as required by the CFI of a training organisation, you need to be working within a training organisation, you can't just freelance it.
G
NPPL(SLMG) [or NPPL(M) ]--> NPPL(SSEA) is within your remit, but NPPL --> EASA-PPL is not, for odd historic reasons not worth exploring as it seems unlikely to change.
You do however need to do it within a training organisation, and they will need an examiner, you can't just sign those ones off as differences training.
Training of a lapsed PPL to allow them to revalidate by skill test / proficiency check is also possible, but as the requirement is that they need to do training as required by the CFI of a training organisation, you need to be working within a training organisation, you can't just freelance it.
G
an old UK PPL SLMG
BFRs, differences training and syndicate / rental checkouts or currency mainly, plus aerobatics and any kind of general skill improvement for existing qualified pilots - which is actually quite a lot.
G
G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer; 28th Jun 2013 at 22:10.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several posters said that a CRI has privileges that a FI(R) has not.
FCL.910.FI FI – Restricted privileges
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:
(1) for the issue of the PPL, SPL, BPL and LAPL;
(2) in all integrated courses at PPL level, in case of aeroplanes and helicopters;
(3) for class and type ratings for single-pilot, single-engine aircraft, class and group extensions in the case of balloons and class extensions in the case of sailplanes;
(4) for the night, towing or aerobatic ratings.
My understanding is that a FI(R) may, out of an ATO/RTF, and unsupervised, train for differences (TW etc.) and the do the one hour SEP revalidation flight. Is it your understanding as well?
FCL.910.FI FI – Restricted privileges
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:
(1) for the issue of the PPL, SPL, BPL and LAPL;
(2) in all integrated courses at PPL level, in case of aeroplanes and helicopters;
(3) for class and type ratings for single-pilot, single-engine aircraft, class and group extensions in the case of balloons and class extensions in the case of sailplanes;
(4) for the night, towing or aerobatic ratings.
My understanding is that a FI(R) may, out of an ATO/RTF, and unsupervised, train for differences (TW etc.) and the do the one hour SEP revalidation flight. Is it your understanding as well?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several posters said that a CRI has privileges that a FI(R) has not.
FCL.910.FI FI – Restricted privileges
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:
(1) for the issue of the PPL, SPL, BPL and LAPL;
(2) in all integrated courses at PPL level, in case of aeroplanes and helicopters;
(3) for class and type ratings for single-pilot, single-engine aircraft, class and group extensions in the case of balloons and class extensions in the case of sailplanes;
(4) for the night, towing or aerobatic ratings.
My understanding is that a FI(R) may, out of an ATO/RTF, and unsupervised, train for differences (TW etc.) and the do the one hour SEP revalidation flight. Is it your understanding as well?
FCL.910.FI FI – Restricted privileges
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:
(1) for the issue of the PPL, SPL, BPL and LAPL;
(2) in all integrated courses at PPL level, in case of aeroplanes and helicopters;
(3) for class and type ratings for single-pilot, single-engine aircraft, class and group extensions in the case of balloons and class extensions in the case of sailplanes;
(4) for the night, towing or aerobatic ratings.
My understanding is that a FI(R) may, out of an ATO/RTF, and unsupervised, train for differences (TW etc.) and the do the one hour SEP revalidation flight. Is it your understanding as well?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: France
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. I asked this question when I was a restricted instructor and the response from the CAA was very clear. As a restricted instructor you must be supervised for any training that you do.
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:
(1) for the issue of the PPL, SPL, BPL and LAPL;
(2) in all integrated courses at PPL level, in case of aeroplanes and helicopters;
(3) for class and type ratings for single-pilot, single-engine aircraft, class and group extensions in the case of balloons and class extensions in the case of sailplanes;
(4) for the night, towing or aerobatic ratings.
It is specifically written that the restriction applies only in certain cases: I infer that there must be cases where the restriction does not apply, otherwise the wording would have been simpler, such as "any training done must be supervised".