An argument which proposes that PPL FIs would be as competent as CPL FIs, must be applied to all walks of life if it is to be consistent. Would it hold water if it was applied to Doctors, Solicitors or members of any other professional body?
Would you rather have a surgeon who had learned by observation only, rather than one who had received a formal academic training? They may both have excellent "hands", but the educated one is more likely to have a more complete comprehension of his task, I suspect.
What a daft analogy
A doctor would have had formal acedemic training to become a doctor in the first place ... ever heard of one who's learned by observation only? They become surgeons by choosing that speciality and honing that particular skill in a hands on way under supervision. Where's the relevance to flight training here?
It would be nice to have some input from a current PPL instructor, and I don't mean one who was, but who later went on to get a CPL. That sort, if expunging the virtues of PPL instructors are akin to politicians happy to see students saddled with huge debts having received a free education themselves
You're quite correct though, a "perfect instructor" is likely to be one who has vast experience in many spheres of aviation, is professionally qualified, totally committed to teaching and patient ... even if the student is not of the "right stuff" but wants to learn anyway
. Yes a CPL FI will have proved him/herself at a professional level and that's great, but they may not actually have much "experience" ... So what's best? An experienced amateur or an inexperienced professional? I suppose that may depend on where the student is planning to take their new found skill, I don't know? Ok I admit that is taking it to the extreme and adding a certain amount of assumption, but I'm simply trying to show that all is not black and white. In fact, it could be argued that a professional teaching qualification would be far more appropriate than a CPL when it comes to teaching people to fly ... how many instructors possess one of those?
Let's get something straight here; I'm not coming from the angle of a PPL wishing to easily become an instructor. I'm a long time PPL who was taught by (mostly) PPL instructors before the rules were changed. I expect some, if not all of those instructors probably do now have CPL's (if they are still teaching). The point is that I don't agree that they were likely to have trained me to a lower standard than CPL instructors teach the students of today. Yes one day I might possibly like to teach, but it won't be for a few years as family and other commitments swallow up any spare cash (spare cash ... what's that~?). When I do, it will probably be at NPPL level as I'm sure the rules will have changed to something more akin to what I've alluded to by then anyway. It's fine gaining a CPL if you have ambitions to go on to fly for airlines or even if you wish to make instructing a career, but I fail (even after these less than eloquent explanations) to see why a basic instructor of PPL's has to spend out so much to prove what a couple of stand alone exams could quite easily show ... that is, an appropriate knowledge to teach basic PPL flying.
SS