The proposal to require a test at every second FI renewal is, in my opinion, a retrograde step. Having held an instructor rating for over ten years I have operated under both the ‘old’ system and the current system a feel that the current system is superior. Apart from the few instructors who fail to meet the experience requirements each of us can chose either to undertake a test or attend a seminar.
At my last renewal I opted to attend a seminar and whilst it occupied two days I believe that it was much more useful than renewal by means of a test. The presentations and workshops at the seminar were more stimulating and thought provoking than a test with an FIE and the opportunity in the evening to talk with instructors from other flying schools added to the value of the seminar.
If the system is going to be changed then why? Has the current system led to a lower standard of instruction? Are the PPLs that are being produced less safe? I have neither heard nor seen any evidence to support either of these views.
If someone is going to be consulted about the proposed change surely the best people to consult are FE(PPL)s and the Chief Flight Examiner. As an FE(PPL) I see the results of training by the same group of instructors on a frequent basis and I, and my fellow FE(PPL)s, are in a much better position to spot any underlying deficiencies and suggest remedial action than an FIE, who under the proposed system may only see any individual instructor once every six years. The CFE has the advantage of having available every Skill Test report and should be in a position to spot any diminution in standards on a national basis. Is there any such evidence?
