What is a flight instructor?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Reading this stuff here got me to wondering who can be considered a flight instructor.

Can someone like me call myself a flight instructor even though my rating expired many moons ago, or do I need to go through the mind numbing process of renewing my flight instructor rating to be considered a real instructor?

There that should bring out some real interesting ideas and opinions. :E

[darn]

In my opinion, if your rating has expired then you cannot do any instructing, so you can't call yourself an instructor!

You can say you were an instructor though. Besides, its really not that hard to get your rating renewed.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I live in Canada and getting my instructors rating renewed would be a very big issue as I would have to jump through all the hoops again which I have no intention of doing.

As to my not being able to do any instructing without an instructors rating that is not true as I can do such things as type ratings without an instructors rating to name one thing.

I am licensed to do type ratings in Canada, Australia, and under JAR so what am I then if not an instructor?

Maybe a teacher? :confused:

[FlyingOfficerKite]

Chuck

With all due respect if you don't know the answer to your own question you are definately NOT a flight instructor.

Although the idea does give me reason to smile!

Maybe I could call myself 'boy' even though I haven't been one for decades - or 'young and fit' even though I'm not. I was a boy once ... and young and could run many miles.

Just because I'm older and less fit doesn't mean IN MY MIND I am!

Sure Chuck - once a flight instructor, always a flight instructor.

If you promise me you won't try flying, I'll promise not to try running!

KR

FOK

[mad_jock]

Nah Chuck I suspect you were an instructor even before someone made you jump through the hoops and made it official.
I bet your also an instructor on boats, cars and all things that you have a love for (apart from women)

Some people who have the rating arn't instructors will never be instructors and won't grasp the subtly of your question ;)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

We should be able to have fun here on this forum Jock and what better way than pointing out how absurd it is that so many people think that unless one is blessed by the regulator in a given time frame to be the holder of one of their pieces of paper you somehow had a total loss of memory the day your flight instructor rating lapsed.

So lets watch this evolve and see where it goes, with the week end coming up we may get some real interesting opinions on this simple question. :E

[darn]

Chuck, I really don't think anyone actually thinks like that. From your original question, it just sounds like your asking if you can still be considered an FI if your rating has expired, although I suspect you're just playing games to provoke a response.

At the end of the day, you can think whatever you like about yourself. :cool:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Darn it is not what I think about myself that is the issue here as I know what and who I am.

My reason for starting this is to find out how many people really believe that having a flight instructor rating really means much.

For instance suppose you do not have a sea plane rating and decided to get one who would you choose to take your training from?

A certified flying instructor who has no real experience flying sea planes outside of a bare rating and a flight instructors rating.

Or.

Someone like myself who has thousands of hours flying sea planes and teaching on same with an expired flight instructors rating?

Don't jump to the conclusion that I am fishing for students as I am not.

What I am looking for is serious answers to the question. :)


P.S. :

Reading your posts here I noted you were having problems teaching the final stages of the landing.

Did you get it sorted out or are you still having problems, if you are I am sure I can help you out via P.M. s if you are interested.

Believe it or not I taught advanced flight training for decades and am still able to recall how to teach. :ok:

[DFC]

Can someone like me call myself a flight instructor even though my rating expired many moons ago, or do I need to go through the mind numbing process of renewing my flight instructor rating to be considered a real instructor?



Passing Off.

From Canada especially for Chuck;

s. 7 of the Canadian Trade-Mark Act, often plead at the same time as a passing-off action, and which read as follows (2007):
"7. No person shall

(a) make a false or misleading statement tending to discredit the business, wares or services of a competitor;
(b) direct public attention to his wares, services or business in such a way as to cause or be likely to cause confusion in Canada, at the time he commenced so to direct attention to them, between his wares, services or business and the wares, services or business of another;
(c) pass off other wares or services as and for those ordered or requested;
(d) make use, in association with wares or services, of any description that is false in a material respect and likely to mislead the public as to
(i) the character, quality, quantity or composition,
(ii) the geographical origin, or
(iii) the mode of the manufacture, production or performance
of the wares or services; or
e) do any other act or adopt any other business practice contrary to honest industrial or commercial usage in Canada."

Pasing onself off as an instructor would cause the public to expect a certain qualification and current experience. Misguided as that may be (I symphatise with your comments regarding inexperieced pilots who are instructors providing poor quality instruction), it does not change the law.

There would also be the not simple task of obtaining insurance to operate as an instructor when not so qualified.

------

Finally, why come to an instructor forum and post several posts discussing how crap instructing and instructors are. Did you expect to elicit some special reaction?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Bit of a pointless question IMO. Aviation is regulated by qualification. That is each qualification comes with privilages. If the regulator says your qualifications allow you to instruct than you are an instructor. If they don't then you are not. This encompasses far more than the just holding a flight isntructor rating. TRI's for example do not have to have a flight instructor rating but are clearly instructors.

Chuck I still do not understand why you have such a hate on for pilots who have a flight instructor rating. It is the system they operate in that is the problem not the fact they hold the rating. IMO the antidote to poor flight training practices is articulating a better way, not blaming the person.

[DFC]

TRI's for example do not have a flight instructor rating but are clearly instructors.



Clearly. The I in TRI standing for Instructor!! :}

However, a TRI is not an FI i.e. they can not teach ab-initio or send people solo.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

What gives you the impression I have a hate on for pilots who have instructor ratings BPF?

Somehow you have gotten confused about my thoughts on the subject, maybe you missed all the times I have said there is no higher calling in aviation than being a flight instructor.

Somehow you have missed all the times I have said that the wages paid to flight instructors is pathetic.

My only dissatisfaction with the training sector of aviation is the low standards that are in place for the certification of flight instructors and the resulting working conditions and pay.

Having owned a flight school and tried to change things for the better and failed in my efforts I not only sold the school but have come to the conclusion that instructing at the ab-initio level is not worth the effort both financially and from a satisfaction standpoint.

What I would like to see is an industry were training is managed by high time well paid pilots, then the progress for the newly rated instructors would be better managed and instructing would be a sought after segment of aviation. The ratio of high time pilots in any given school would have to be high enough that they can and would make sure the new people are trained properly.

As it stands now it is ass backwards and we have students teaching students.

Just to set the record straight B.P.F. I am proud to be a flight instructor even though I no longer hold the rating nor have any desire to.

If I want slave level wages I would look in the lower level of the labour market, trouble is where would you find lower wages as construction ditch diggers are better paid than flight instructors.

It is the system I am unsatisfied with not the pilots as they are victims of the system.

Now are you beginning to understand me?

[Big Pistons Forever]

DFC

Sorry what was your point ?

[Dudley Henriques]

Reading this stuff here got me to wondering who can be considered a flight instructor.

Can someone like me call myself a flight instructor even though my rating expired many moons ago, or do I need to go through the mind numbing process of renewing my flight instructor rating to be considered a real instructor?

There that should bring out some real interesting ideas and opinions. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

Of course you can, and from what I've been reading from your posting you are doing just fine for an "old retired guy" :-)

I've been retired from active flying as an instructor for a long time now. Lost my medical some time ago.
I've remained active in the community as a safety advisor and consultant both in primary instruction and specifically in the aerobatic display community.
I still consider myself very much an instructor and I'd like to think that I'm considered as such by my peers as well.
So far at least, this has been the case.
By all means, stay involved. GOOD teachers and CFI's are always welcome in the safety community whether currently flying or retired.

[Oktas8]

I see a well established conversation here - may I add a thought as a new poster?

For me the answer to the "I am a ...." question is either what I get paid to do, or what people would generally describe me as, if they knew me well.

Chuck, if you earn your weekly income by teaching flying skills, then I suppose you are a flight instructor. Presumably you, like Dudley, have the specific qualification that allows you to teach those skills legally, as a consultant or advisor or any other capacity.

But if the rest of the world actually describes the work you do as "airline simulator instructor" then it would be a little misleading to say otherwise. Not wrong, just misleading. (That's just an example - obviously I don't know what work you actually do right now!)

Better just to say what you do. Sometimes that might mean avoiding a term like "flight instructor" that carries strong connotations.

Cheers,
O8

[Dudley Henriques]

I see a well established conversation here - may I add a thought as a new poster?

For me the answer to the "I am a ...." question is either what I get paid to do, or what people would generally describe me as, if they knew me well.

Chuck, if you earn your weekly income by teaching flying skills, then I suppose you are a flight instructor. Presumably you, like Dudley, have the specific qualification that allows you to teach those skills legally, as a consultant or advisor or any other capacity.

But if the rest of the world actually describes the work you do as "airline simulator instructor" then it would be a little misleading to say otherwise. Not wrong, just misleading. (That's just an example - obviously I don't know what work you actually do right now!)

Better just to say what you do. Sometimes that might mean avoiding a term like "flight instructor" that carries strong connotations.

Cheers,
O8The way this is handled in our community is quite simple really. Unless an instructor's certificate has been revoked for cause, it remains an earned certificate.
The accepted protocol in aviation for instructors who wish to continue contributing to the general good of the program after retirement is for these instructors to simply present themselves as a CFI retired.
There is nothing "misleading" about the term "instructor" used in this accepted manner.

Dudley Henriques
CFI (Retired)

[mad_jock]

Instructing and teaching is part of your personality.

Some people can't help but instruct by their very nature about the things they enjoy.

It doesn't matter if they have an official tick in the box or not people will learn off them by default because they have the knack of instructing.

Once Chuck get's to the smelling of wee stage sitting at the local FBO with his dog getting some peace from the wife. A student pilot is sitting there struggling with the whizz wheel. Guaranteed within 10 mins the two of them will be hunched over a chart the student enthralled not noticing the smell of wee and will come out of it know everything you need to know about flight planning. CFI will be standing by thinking how dare that old bugger instruct my student he isn't even qualified. Then after a couple more lessons thinks hells bells this kid understands flight planning and NAV.

Real instructors never have to tell people they are instructors they already know. And the main problem with the training industry/ aviation career ladder is that many many none instructors have the tick in the box and the title "instructor". The fact that students eventually reach the required standard is more a case of the students ability to learn than the instructors ability to instruct.

I actually quite like the FAA gold seal CFI system. Only ever flew with 2 of them one doing twin training and the other a BFR. It was like chalk and cheese in comparison to the other FAA instructors I had sat next to. Top system and I wish we had it in the UK.

[Bla Bla Bla]

If many years ago I won the lottery and ended up sleeping with many supermodels I would be call myself Lucky.


Many years later when I had lost all the money in the process of divorcing one of the said supermodels and was fat and ugly and had no chance of pulling anything but myself I believe it would be incorrect to still refer to myself as lucky!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Dudley, I am sorry to hear you lost your medical as I have always wondered when I would lose mine.

Now the status of my medical is being able to get up every morning and not feel any older or physically worse than I ever did, I still pass my regular six month medical for my ATPL only because I want to know the way my health is tracking not because I need to to earn a living flying.

Every time I see a picture of a Pitts or some other aerobatic airplane I wonder how long it would take to get my system back in shape to wring one out and then I realize I am getting old because I " KNOW " it would hurt to much to get back in shape. :}

I now have the best of all worlds for me......my Cub project takes up all of my 20X30 foot garage that has been turned into a hangar heated with every tool and aid I need to work on building the Cub.

As to flying and being an instructor that is not an issue for me anymore until I get the Cub finished and on big wheels, then it will be back to work instructing pilots who want to learn off airport flying. :ok:

Age is difficult to measure as we all are different we just have to do the best with what we have.

By the way I am a firm believer that good instructors are born not made.

[carholme]

Chuck;

Is that the Cub you have up for sale on AvCanada?

[S-Works]

A flight Instructor is someone who has a passion and dedication for the subject. A person who gives their all in the goal of enriching others with the joy of flight. Someone who considers the education of others before benefit of themselves.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Yes, Carholme... thanks for reminding me the add is there as I will delete it.

I was going to sell it and found out that it will be far better to put the money and time into building it rather than selling it as a project for next to nothing.

Also I really miss working on airplanes as that was what I liked most about the life I had in aviation.

Now I once again lie in bed figuring out what I need to do next and looking forward to morning so I can go back to working on it.

I had planned on using the Husky to do some training with but there are two problems with that idea....It is not my airplane and I just can not justify using a quarter of a million dollar airplane as a teaching tool when I can build one that will do the same job and only cost me at the most $50,000.

How is life going for you these days, I notice you no longer post on the Canadian site and have wondered how you are doing.

Chuck.

[Dudley Henriques]

Dudley, I am sorry to hear you lost your medical as I have always wondered when I would lose mine.

Thanks. Believe it or not I don't miss it much. I managed to do much of what I wanted to do in aviation and now I'm simply hanging in giving back a bit of what aviation gave to me.
I'm still active. I'll be addressing the European Air show Convention in Belgium this coming January on display flight safety as well as many other things I'm still deeply involved in within the flight instruction and aerobatic community.
Add to this I was fortunate to have married one of the finest women on the planet 45 years ago and I'm doing fairly well for an old grumpy bald guy :-)
Dudley

[mary meagher]

Please, Sir, can somebody tell me about the FAA gold seal system?

I am still permitted to instruct in K13 gliders, with JAR medical. And yesterday just got put through the WRINGER by an extremely capable PA owner and qualified instructor, for the biennial check ride, survived, but discovered significant room for improvement.

Our only disagreement was if my engine declines to rotate the fan, I dedicate my time to chosing the field and making the approach, forgot all about trying to start it again in midair, and as for calling a mayday, IMHO landing a PA l8 in a field should be a nonevent.......Of course if the terrain is seriously unfriendly I think I might mention it to somebody....

[Captain Stravaigin]

I think the original question was asking a question about being. Clearly one can call yourself anything you want (as long as there is no intention to defraud). But surely the question means is it legitimate for me to describe myself (to myself and/or others) as an Instructor ?

Quoting the Law, FARS or any other legal prose is completely missing the point. In Malaysia they have just brought out a new requirement in the State of Selangor that requires you to have a licence to teach Islam but that is just a control mechanism.

On a fundamental level an Instructor is a Teacher or Guru. Once s/he has reached that level (like 1st Dan in Karate) s/he will always be a Teacher. S/he may lose their licence to practice but s/he is still a teacher.

And to former students s/he will always be their Guru. :ok:

[snchater]

Were we smoking one of those funny cigarettes when we posted Captain Stravaigin?:)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Whatever the Captain was was smoking his/her description of what a teacher is is correct.

[Oktas8]

In one context, yes.

In another:
"Hi. What do you do?"
"Hi. I'm a teacher."
"Oh, where do you teach?"
"Nowhere. I retired thirty years ago. But I still retain my innate teaching ability."
" :confused: "

Oktas8
Flight Instructor (not yet retired)

[polyfiber]

At least 25% of flight instruction is done by people without an instructors rating. You don't need an instructors rating to teach IFR. No instructors rating is required to teach someone to fly a taildragger or to use skis or to check out someone on a new plane for insurance purposes.

I think Chucks definition would sum up what an instructor is.:ok:

[polyfiber]

Also, if you have an ACE card you automaticaly hold the privelages of a Class 1 aerobatics instructor without an instructors rating.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Thanks for the comment polyfiber, for some strange reason there are a lot of people in aviation who think that holding an instructors rating is somehow an indication that the holder of said certificate is guaranteed to be a good teacher.

Having been in the flying instruction business since 1957 I have met many licensed flight instructors who have difficulty tying their shoes but somehow passed the flight instructors course. So much for using the possession of a flight instructors rating as a benchmark of high quality of teaching skills.

For the past few decades I have owned and operated an advanced flight training business and have done very well financially and customer wise without having held a valid flight instructors rating.....in fact I let mine lapse in 1965 and never saw any need to renew it.

[polyfiber]

Hello Chuck,

My son started his pilot's licence a while ago and I must say his instructor was very good. He made sure they touched down on the centerline and always tried for the numbers on the runway. The other instructors feel the first third of the runway is "good enough" for a TD point. When they did spins it was three turns and recovery on a chosen heading rather than a mere insipient spin. I was pleased to see his instructor wants to instill more than just the minimum to pass.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Your son is fortunate to have such an instructor and hopefully remains with him/her until he finishes his license.

I have owned a flight school both fixed and rotary wing and the reason I finally sold it was the ongoing problems with sub par flight instructors and their know it all attitudes because they passed the low bar to be a flight instructor.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Chuck you said

"For some strange reason there are a lot of people in aviation who think that holding an instructors rating is somehow an indication that the holder of said certificate is guaranteed to be a good teacher."

I would balance your statement by saying that a lot of people in aviation think that simply have many thousands of hours automatically makes you a good teacher. This IMO experience is often not the case particularly when teaching new pilots. The higher hours are simply an indication that you are probably a highly skilled pilot, but for instructing at the end of the course the only thing that matters is how well the student can fly.

Obviously in a perfect world the instructor should have both lots of experience and demonstrated high instructional skills. Students IMO should make a big effort to search for and train with those kind of instructors, particularly for advanced training (ie post PPL).

Effective teaching is a skill like any other. A pilot engaged in instructing, regardless of their experience will IMO be a better instructor if they undertake a course of formal training in the art of instructing.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Big Pistons Forever do you think that I am not aware of the significance of proper training for any new task including becoming a flight instructor?

[Dudley Henriques]

Obviously in a perfect world the instructor should have both lots of experience and demonstrated high instructional skills. Students IMO should make a big effort to search for and train with those kind of instructors, particularly for advanced training (ie post PPL).

Good instructors, as well as good teachers usually grow into the job through experience, but this result isn't necessarily a direct result of experience. people entering these professions bring along a specific set of "baggage" as they enter the arena. Those bringing positives with them will grow and become better as they continue along the learning curve. Notice I said CONTINUE. A new CFI is at the beginning of what should be a career long learning curve that includes among other aspects, a dual role of both teaching students and learning from those students how to be an even better teacher and flight instructor.
Those bringing negatives with them into the teaching arena can improve along the curve but usually fail due to various reasons mostly related to poor attitude.
I agree that as instruction becomes more advanced, experience plays a much larger role in the instructor/student equation, but if this higher level of experience has been obtained by the instructor without corresponding proper teaching skills and/or at least an improvement in teaching skills on the part of the instructor, any advantage of higher experience can be easily nullified and actually be detrimental to the student.
Good teaching is both an art and a science. Above that, to become an excellent teacher, one has to carry with them a genuine desire to teach. You find these qualities in a CFI, and you have found the RIGHT instructor, be it in a J3 Cub, or a 747 :-)
Dudley Henriques

[Oktas8]

do I ask the FI how many hours he has, and do I ask for proof?! Is this the done thing, etiquette,do you guys get asked for any provenance at all

If you're signing up to a big flying school, you'll have little choice who you get (although you can request an instructor change, again you won't be able to specify who the new instructor should be).

If you approach a small school, yes, you could ask how much experience the instructor has, but don't ask for proof because that's rude. However, you probably won't be able to afford the most experienced instructors, or they will be already be overbooked months in advance.

By all means look around though - you don't have to settle for anything you're unhappy with!

there are a lot of people in aviation who think that holding an instructors rating is somehow an indication that the holder of said certificate is guaranteed to be a good teacher

Never met anyone with more than a thousand hours or so who suffered from that attitude. And, Chuck, just because I disagree with your definition of what you "are" (in a vocational descriptive sense rather than an existential sense) doesn't mean I think all instructors are great, or that I am great, or that pilots without an instructor's rating are un-great. I didn't know that one can do all this instructing in Canada without a formal rating - if someone instructs IFR as a vocation, yes, I think they certainly are an instructor in a vocational sense.

Cheers,
O8

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Oktas8 in Canada we can instruct licensed pilots without having to hold a flight instructors rating for the following.

Seaplane ratings.

Multi engine ratings.

Instrument ratings.

Type ratings.

Check outs on any airplane you are qualified on such as tail wheel airplanes.

I have been giving training on all of the above since I let my Canadian Instructors Rating lapse in 1965.

You have to hold a minimum of a commercial license with the required times on each type of training you are teaching toward.

For whatever it is worth I do hold licenses to do type ratings issued by C.A.S.A.( Australia ) South African C.A.A. and under JAR in Europe.

I consider my self a flight instructor based on the above. :ok:

[Mach E Avelli]

In the past I have held approvals from various authorities to train and issue type ratings on equipment from DC3 thru B737. Currently I am 'instructing' Chinese national cadet pilots on light jet aircraft. Seeing as they have zero hours on jets when they start, I can't see how it could be anything other than instruction.
But I have never held an instructor rating. I would not know how to get someone up to solo standard. Nevertheless, an instructor I am, and the Australian Civil Air Regulations say so. CAR 5.19, 5.20, 5.21 etc. Additionally an organisation with its own CAR 217 check and training approval can appoint instructors for line training. Most countries have similar provisions.
Now, I await some anally-retentive type out there to tell me the difference between 'training' and 'instruction'.

[Oktas8]

This thread seems to have moved from "I no longer instruct, can I call myself an instructor" (I know that's not quite what the OP said, but it is what I and others inferred from the post), to "I am instructing in some capacity that doesn't need a FI rating, can I call myself an instructor".

The first is arguable. The second, isn't. In fact I see no-one disagreeing at all.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Just to stir the pot a little deeper here in Canada a pilot with a flight instructor rating can start training other pilots for a sea plane rating as soon as said instructor finishes a seven hour sea plane rating.

A commercial pilot can give flight instruction for a sea plane rating once they get fifty hours of sea plane flight time.

Anyone see anything strange in that?

[Mach E Avelli]

Well Chuck I have never flown seaplanes but I have many thousands of NM under sail, solo, in the open sea. I can't imagine ANY one could adequately instruct on seaplanes after just 7 hours total. They would still be coming to terms with the whole new deal themselves. Even 50 hours sounds a bit light on - maybe OK for lakes and other pussy ponds?
But I take your point - too much value seems to be placed on a Flight Instructor rating being the font of all knowledge.
Here in Oz, CASA just set up a specialist department to periodically examine all the ATOs (Approved Testing Officers) in the industry. Which means everyone from your local club CFI through to the Head of Flight Operations in a large airline. The one mandatory qualification that CASA required for the job was a Grade One Flight Instructor Rating. Not previous airline check and training experience for the airline supervision, tho' obviously that would help. Had to have the Grade One, no matter what.
Had I any real interest in such a job, I would be real p!ssed off at being excluded.
Setting the base standard on a qualification which can be gained entirely in light single engine aeroplanes and which has not evolved much in 50 years does not augur well for a rational approach to modern demands for the MPL etc.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Instructor or not you still need 50 hrs before you can instruct on floats. But the whole float rating process in Canada is a joke. There is no flight test so there is no independant verification that the student has learned anything and the knowledge and skill requirements are far too low, for both the instructor and the student. In a perfect world the instructor would have to have significant real world experience (IMO at least 500hrs of line flying in a commercial operations) and have to receive training on instructional technique and have developed an effective curriculum.

Never the less, there are some very highly experienced and very able seaplane instructors working in Canada so I am always amazed at the fact students willingly take instruction from somebody with no practical experience when there are better options available if only they had done some homework. But then in general it seems many students put more effort into picking their mobile phone plan than picking a flying school :rolleyes:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Mach E Avelli in a perverse way I am comforted to know that Australia is not missing out on the advantages of having deep thinking government people who are making sure your pilots are not being taught by inept ignorant instructors.

I am afraid to go to bed with the knowledge that for all those years we have been flying with airline crews who have been taught by instructors who were not certified flight instructors.

No wonder there have been airplane accidents in the airlines, what else would one expect knowing the pilots were receiving training from inept, uneducated instructors.

Now that CASA has shown they are beyond the leading edge in deep thinking why not send a few of the brighter ones to the world conference on global warming so they can save the whole planet?

Sometimes I fear for my own sanity when I think of the depths of ignorance I have been subjected to.

Do you think it is to late for me to go back to school and renew my instructors rating?

I look at the Cub I am working on in my work shop and wonder what I will do with it when I finish building it, my original intention was to give tail wheel instruction with it, but now I am deeply troubled wondering if I will have the strength to go back to school and get a license to allow me to teach on the thing........it is troubling to say the least. :\

[Chuck Ellsworth]

As to the sea plane rating requirements in Canada it is interesting that T.C. requires five solo take offs and landings but no flight test.

If nothing else removing the five solo T & L requirement and replacing it with a flight test with an independent examiner would lower the insurance costs for sea plane training.

Then again it can't be all that difficult a task to learn to fly one because a lot of us only had five hours training with no solo requirement to get our sea plane ratings.

[Mach E Avelli]

Yeh, the dreaded Instructor rating....A couple of years ago I got involved in the relatively new Recreational Aviation system (probably Sport Pilot in Canada?). Wanted to convert the ATPL so did the 5 hours in a stripped-out 85 h.p. L4J Cub (on which I already had more than 5 hours, but as that time was really on a 150 h.p. Super Cub it was not within the Recreational Aircraft weight limit). Despite another 300 hours in hang gliders, I had no argument with the 5 hour concept, as low inertia aeroplanes can bite old transport pilots. Anyways, got the RAA certificate. Bought my own little 80 h.p. taildragger Sonex. Have since racked up over 100 hours on it in my spare time, flying around a fair chunk of Australia. So, now, I would like to do a bit of RA instruction, strictly as a spare time thing and to help out some of the guys at my local field with BFRs etc. BUT, I am told that I have to do the whole 30 hour flying course plus all the theory, plus, plus. The system does not allow ANY concessions for prior instructional experience. Yet, another RA pilot can do the same thing in the same time after only 75 hours of flying in RA aircraft and with NO other aviation experience - period.
What makes it even more of a pain in the butt is that many of the schools that will gleefully take your money to teach the rating can't examine for the issue of it. So once you do the training it's up to you to call in one of the few approved examiners who may or may not be 'standardized' to that school's way, and who just as likely will have their own pet theories. Also some of these examiners can be a bit territorial, so one does not need to be doing the test too close to where one may be about to practise the art, for obvious reasons. So, one needs to think about doing it elswhere, with attendant accommodation or commuting costs. Bottom line....I won't be doing an RA Instructor rating, after all. Given that it would only generate about 50 bucks an hour income (or the equivalent in beer) and I'd be lucky to do 250 hours a year as a freelancer, I am just arrogant enough to figure it is the system's loss, not mine.
Will stick to my properly-paid 'instructional' work that does not require an Instructor rating.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

SoCal App the truth is as long as the person who I am flying with is properly licensed for the airplane being flown I can fly with them and give advice as a " Consultant " even if my license is invalid because I don't have a current medical.

I have been through that argument with the Director General Transport Canada in person during a legal inquiry and the decision was that there would be nothing he or T.C. could do to me. We are getting closer and closer to a society that will be micro managed by government bureaucrats from cradle to grave and forced to live like mindless robots.

They want us to be exactly like them.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

We are fortunate here in Canada in that we can instruct on such things as multi engine ratings, IFR ratings, sea plane ratings and type ratings without having to hold a flight instructor rating.

We are also fortunate in that bureaucratic inertia guarantees nothing will change in the forseable future.

To my way of thinking it makes perfect sense to allow a pilot to instruct for these ratings without having to go through the flight instructors rating process, as long as said pilot meets the experience requirements set out in the rules.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Good question SoCal as far as I know the instructor would have to be PIC in some cases such as the sea plane rating for the simple reason the student is not qualified to fly the airplane because they do not have the rating.

Myself I make it clear that I am PIC so there is no misunderstanding about who is responsible for the safe operation of the airplane.

I do know that when instructing on airplanes registered in Australia and Europe I had to hold an authorization from both C.A.S.A. and the J.A.A. to fly their airplanes and teach on same. I spent the last ten or so years of my career doing exactly that and as well I was issued an Airdisplay Authorization with no restrictions based on my Canadian license. Mind you I had to jump through all the same hoops as the rest of the air show pilots including an annual flight test.

The FAA would not give me the authorization to teach on U.S. registered airplanes without a FAA CFI, but did allow me to do type rating training and once the student was competent on type a FAA licensed pilot did a ride with them and the type rating was approved...weird huh?

Yeh come to think about it I did several type ratings in South Africa on a U.S. registered airplane and the S.A. C.A.A. issued the type ratings..go figure. :confused:

[Oktas8]

How can you be PIC without a current medical?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

You can't.

I was only pointing out that you can fly with a licensed pilot as a consultant ( teacher ) even if you do not hold a current medical.

Incidentally my medical is current.

Going back to my starting this thread it was to point out that not holding a current instructors rating does not mean one has suddenly become incompetent as a teacher.

Holding a current instructors rating does allow you to teach at the ab-initio level where the pay is sub standard to a common labourer.

To me it makes no sense to hold a rating that will only result in working for peanuts.