Peroni & Paco
Tell me if I am wrong but aren't you both agreeing with me and recognising that the current requirements to work as an SFI are simply not good enough.
Peroni - I'm afraid that when a new type comes on the market you need SFIs right away, maybe earlier, and they will NOT have any serious time on type. It's not feasible to expect any other scenario and because that situation will pertain for a number of years you will get a situation where low-time SFIs are teaching and that can be acceptable if all the other elements in his preparation, mentoring, supervision and standardisation are in place. However such 'best practice' is not mandated by regulation and as HiHover as already pointed out nobody will spend money if they don't have to.
Shawn - It's the other way around. I am not supposed to teach from a pilot's seat. I am obliged to teach from the IOS seat with no flight controls but to qualify as an SFI I need to do a TRI course in the aircraft (or have an FI rating) but then I have to teach the same manoeuvres using only my voice and a good pre-flight briefing. That's not to say that on occasions I don't hoof the copilot out of his seat and give a quick demo when all else has failed. But it's not the way the course was designed and approved.
If the regulators are not paying attention then somebody else has to pick up the batton. IHSP? OGP? BHAB? HAI? We may be sleepwalking into what could become a serious problem when all the negatives that Peroni alludes to and Paco observes become the 'norm' as the role of the SFI expands.
G.
Last edited by Geoffersincornwall; 17th Oct 2011 at 09:59.