But surely getting a formal civil FI cat would be no more than a formality for the average AEF ex QFI?
Surely even re-qualifying and re-categorising such blokes as current QFIs would represent a cost saving compared to employing serving officers or paid (retired) QFIs?
With legions of ex-RAF blokes who would give their eye teeth to 'put something back' and to augment their civvy flying with a bit of light aircraft instruction, I've always been astonished that the RAF hasn't made more use of retired blokes on the UASs. There might even be a suitable resource in the shape of highly experienced PPL-holding, (perhaps instructor qualified) light aircraft pilots who have some service link (serving NCOs, Air Traffickers or engineers, for example) but who may have never worn a brevet. There was an Air Commodore Eng who kept his own light aircraft at Benson, I remember. These are just the sort of blokes who used to form the bulk of the instructors and tug pilots on the RAFGSA, and who might form a useful manpower pool for a cheap, slimmed down UAS system.
Don't get me wrong. I'm firmly of the opinion that UAS instructors should be serving, service QFIs, preferably fresh from an operational tour, who are able to give UAS studes a decent glimpse of the real air force, as well as some flying instruction. I also believe that the best operating location for a UAS is at a busy flying station, with a hectic circuit and a vibrant officers mess.
And UAS flying should be an extra, without streaming decisions at the end point, with sufficient 'flex' to be used instead of EFTS for students who get enough flying and who can get to BFTS without too long a gap. (And of course, in this 'gold standard' FTS system, all studes would do full BFTS on the Tucano before being streamed FJ, RW or ME.....)
But better a cheap, limited UAS scheme than no scheme at all, surely?