Shortage of FI's in Scotland
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe the real reason for a shortage in FI's could be that the progression (eg.to a IRI) has been hampered by EASA. Not my view, but one offered by a mates who instruct.
I also initially thought that you could instruct under easa with a ppl and completed cpl theory. Now it seems, judging by an advertisement in the back of a popular GA Magazine, that you don't even need the cpl theory either.
Surely this must cause a few problems in that a cpl/ir holder, possibly with some debt, would rather head off to Africa to break into the job market than compete with a ppl/Fi with no debt for the same instructor job. A matter of flexibility/ability to do the job for peanuts is where I am going with this.
Coupled with the time, cost and effort to train and study for a cpl it may feel to some budding future instructors that the route to the FI rating seems watered down. Not the FI rating itself, don't get me wrong.
I also initially thought that you could instruct under easa with a ppl and completed cpl theory. Now it seems, judging by an advertisement in the back of a popular GA Magazine, that you don't even need the cpl theory either.
Surely this must cause a few problems in that a cpl/ir holder, possibly with some debt, would rather head off to Africa to break into the job market than compete with a ppl/Fi with no debt for the same instructor job. A matter of flexibility/ability to do the job for peanuts is where I am going with this.
Coupled with the time, cost and effort to train and study for a cpl it may feel to some budding future instructors that the route to the FI rating seems watered down. Not the FI rating itself, don't get me wrong.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortage of FI's in Scotland
"You don't need the CPL theory either..."
Why should you, to train a PPL? If the subject matter was relevant, I might agree that all instructors should have such knowledge. As it stands it's just a load of BS, and with exams at £80 a pop and compulsory groundschool, it costs way too much for a lot of people. I also disagree that extra credit should be given to someone having an fATPL who has failed to get an airline job and then ends up clutching at straws trying to become an FI instead. If somebody was stupid enough to rack up loads of debt without promise or any real opportunity of getting a job, then that's their own fault. Whereas, if another person played their cards right, and attained the hours and experience as a PPL holder, and then passed an FI course, they should be just as employable as an fATPL holder (with little or no real world experience) FI. It's these silly sods who have already paid through the nose for a CPL/MEIR and are happy to prostitute themselves and pay to fly that are knacking the entire industry anyway.
Compared to the FAA system, with a single written exam containing appropriate questions, and in depth oral examinations for each checkride, the EASA system leaves a lot to be desired IMHO.
Just my view as a FAA Commercial/Multi/Instrument CFI/CFII and EASA PPL FI... Who isn't deemed suitable to instruct a EASA PPL (even though he trains NPPL students to the same standards, and can instruct FAA commercial/instrument students) unless he sits 14 written exams.
Why should you, to train a PPL? If the subject matter was relevant, I might agree that all instructors should have such knowledge. As it stands it's just a load of BS, and with exams at £80 a pop and compulsory groundschool, it costs way too much for a lot of people. I also disagree that extra credit should be given to someone having an fATPL who has failed to get an airline job and then ends up clutching at straws trying to become an FI instead. If somebody was stupid enough to rack up loads of debt without promise or any real opportunity of getting a job, then that's their own fault. Whereas, if another person played their cards right, and attained the hours and experience as a PPL holder, and then passed an FI course, they should be just as employable as an fATPL holder (with little or no real world experience) FI. It's these silly sods who have already paid through the nose for a CPL/MEIR and are happy to prostitute themselves and pay to fly that are knacking the entire industry anyway.
Compared to the FAA system, with a single written exam containing appropriate questions, and in depth oral examinations for each checkride, the EASA system leaves a lot to be desired IMHO.
Just my view as a FAA Commercial/Multi/Instrument CFI/CFII and EASA PPL FI... Who isn't deemed suitable to instruct a EASA PPL (even though he trains NPPL students to the same standards, and can instruct FAA commercial/instrument students) unless he sits 14 written exams.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little bit of a rant there. Relax. Don't have a go at me. I agree with you regarding the whole easa fiasco. I never had any dept whilst I trained via the modular route nor any desire to instruct. I'm just conveying the feelings that some pals of mine that I fly with in GA have. That's all.
Gawd why does every discussion turn into a ptf debate?
Gawd why does every discussion turn into a ptf debate?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortage of FI's in Scotland
Not a rant, and not having a pop. Just my honest opinion of things. IF, and it's a big if, schools up north have a habit of hiring competent instructors and pay well, then it can only be good for everyone.
Added to that, if they are also keen on teaching proper light aircraft, single pilot operating techniques, as opposed to airline-esque procedures of no value to flying an SEP, and instructors are getting 1000 hours/year (just picking up little tidbits from this thread that I liked the sound of), then it seems like an ideal place to work. I may even look into going there myself.
Has this thread stirred up any interest with the schools up there? Any increase in CVs, phone calls, walk-ins etc received since this thread started?
Added to that, if they are also keen on teaching proper light aircraft, single pilot operating techniques, as opposed to airline-esque procedures of no value to flying an SEP, and instructors are getting 1000 hours/year (just picking up little tidbits from this thread that I liked the sound of), then it seems like an ideal place to work. I may even look into going there myself.
Has this thread stirred up any interest with the schools up there? Any increase in CVs, phone calls, walk-ins etc received since this thread started?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't have a clue to be honest, I am not really connected that way with the schools.
The one I could find out about isn't looking for instructors. I don't think.
I don't think you will get 1000hours. Shall we say the school I worked at was unique with the local monopoly, the amount of money in the area and a micro climate. I suspect these days in the new school they would be getting 500-600 hours because they have more than one full time instructor. In my day there was meant to be 2 full time including the boss but he was 3 sheets to the wind by lunch most days so I got all his flying.
The CFS rated guys in Dundee also used to get high hours but I don't have a clue how many students go through that these days. And you can't just rock up to do that sort of instructing they used to only allow home grown FI's on that one because of the strict standards and methods required by the RAF CFS. But this may have changed.
go for it sapperkenno the punters are great, the flying is great, there are obviously some knobs but you get that anywhere.
The one I could find out about isn't looking for instructors. I don't think.
I don't think you will get 1000hours. Shall we say the school I worked at was unique with the local monopoly, the amount of money in the area and a micro climate. I suspect these days in the new school they would be getting 500-600 hours because they have more than one full time instructor. In my day there was meant to be 2 full time including the boss but he was 3 sheets to the wind by lunch most days so I got all his flying.
The CFS rated guys in Dundee also used to get high hours but I don't have a clue how many students go through that these days. And you can't just rock up to do that sort of instructing they used to only allow home grown FI's on that one because of the strict standards and methods required by the RAF CFS. But this may have changed.
go for it sapperkenno the punters are great, the flying is great, there are obviously some knobs but you get that anywhere.
Last edited by mad_jock; 28th Mar 2014 at 08:58.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you don't have CPL exam passes, you can only teach LAPL. I don't know of any schools in my area that are able to teach LAPL at the moment, because we are all still RFs. Even when we become an ATO later this year (I hope), I don't think that there will be very much demand for it, other than for a few people with medical issues. Anyone hoping for work as an FI without CPL knowledge is likely to disappointed. Why would a school take on an FI that could not teach PPL?
There may be more opportunities for microlight instructors though.
There may be more opportunities for microlight instructors though.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If you don't have CPL exam passes, you can only teach LAPL. I don't know of any schools in my area that are able to teach "
Not quite true thay can also teach for the NPPL. And SEP/MEP/IMC/IR/differences training if appropriately quaulified.
"Why would a school take on an FI that could not teach PPL?"
Because there are one to two ICAO CPL holders about with 5000 hours of instruction at PPL/CPL and IR level who only hold EASA PPL and no EASA CPL TK. They might not be 'qualified' in the eyes of EASA but certainly add something that a 200 hour restricted FI can't.
I'm also know of a fair few high hour PPL holders who would also make excellent instructors and I am sure a few schools would be more than happy to work around the no ab initio PPL restriction as they also bring something to the table.
Not quite true thay can also teach for the NPPL. And SEP/MEP/IMC/IR/differences training if appropriately quaulified.
"Why would a school take on an FI that could not teach PPL?"
Because there are one to two ICAO CPL holders about with 5000 hours of instruction at PPL/CPL and IR level who only hold EASA PPL and no EASA CPL TK. They might not be 'qualified' in the eyes of EASA but certainly add something that a 200 hour restricted FI can't.
I'm also know of a fair few high hour PPL holders who would also make excellent instructors and I am sure a few schools would be more than happy to work around the no ab initio PPL restriction as they also bring something to the table.
