bose-x said:
"Standardisation is the hot potato of EASA and whether we agree with it or not it's the way it is now. If you can't follow the rules to get the qualifications then how would I know you would follow the rules for training?"
If standardisation is such a hot potato, how standardised are these 'FI's' teaching EASA CPL courses outside of member states? I think that regardless of sappakenno's intention, he raises an interesting point, namely that EASA must recognise an FAA Commercial Pilot Certificate as equivalent to an EASA CPL, as FCL.900 states as at least an equivalent licence, rating, or certificate to the one for which they are authorised to instruct and in any case at least an ICAO CPL is a prerequisite to instructing outside the member states. How much emphasis is placed on the non-member state candidates ability to demonstrate to the competent authority an adequate level of knowledge of European aviation safety rules to be able to exercise instructional privileges in accordance with this Part though?
Of course the CPL and IR Skill Tests are conducted by EASA approved FE's (not necessarily independent of the ATO for an integrated course candidate), but I find it interesting that professional pilots who are ultimately licenced to fly members of the public in the EU are instructed outside of the EU by non-EU licenced personnel. And this is not intended as any criticism of non-member state instructors, only that although indeed the physics of flying don't change depending on which side of the ocean you are, the style and structure of training can be quite different, irrespective of whether you are following an EASA approved syllabus.