EASA PPL instructors

[IMC1]

Hello, Maybe I have missed it in another thread, but whats the current situation regarding becoming a FI with only an EASA PPL?
Currently I have a CRI and I find the flying very rewarding. The only issue with obtaining a JAR FI rating was the time off work required to gain a CPL first etc.

Many thanks IMC

[Genghis the Engineer]

You'll need CPL theory passes, but not to have done the CPL flying course.

And you can get paid.

G

[mrmum]

Not necessarily I believe, if you can limit yourself to instructing for the LAPL(A), rather than the PPL(A), then you won't need CPL TK anymore after 17th September.
From CAP804 Part J and presumably lifted straight out of EASA Part-FCL;FCL.915.FI FI – Prerequisites
.....(b) additionally, for the FI(A):
(1) hold at least a CPL(A); or
(2) hold at least a PPL(A) and have:
(i) met the requirements for CPL theoretical knowledge, except for an
FI(A) providing training for the LAPL(A) only...
I know there are other requirements in there, but I've just quoted the relevant bits. (my bold/underline)

[BEagle]

Yes, but organisations providing LAPL(A) training will need to be EASA-approved ATOs. Which is likely to be expensive (very!), so why would they bother? They can still provide PPL and NPPL training as RFs for a couple of years yet without having to pay rip-off CAA ATO approval fees.

Unless we manage to retain RFs for PPL-level training, the LAPL(A) may well wither on the vine....

[mrmum]

I certainly won't be bothering to become an ATO, until as late as I possibly can.
I really hope you can get something done to negate the need to change to an ATO, it'll just be a pointless increase in overheads. I guess it could end up just like the total b***s up they made with the engineering, that's already costing us thousands a year extra, for no benefit. The absolute last thing we need at the moment, is more regulatory costs.

[Big Pistons Forever]

You'll need CPL theory passes, but not to have done the CPL flying course.

And you can get paid.

G

You may not have to have done the CPL flying course but as a practical matter you will need equivalent to CPL flying skills before you start the FI course.

I personally have not met a lower time PPL yet, that would be ready to start an FI course without a significant amount of pre-course dual instruction brush up, so if you want to go this route then I would advise budgeting accordingly.

I find it sad that the CPL theory exams are required as from what I can see very little in them has much relevance to teaching PPL's :hmm:

[Genghis the Engineer]

All very valid points BPF, I don't disagree.

G

[BEagle]

You may not have to have done the CPL flying course but as a practical matter you will need equivalent to CPL flying skills before you start the FI course.

Although there may well be a significant number of experienced PPL holders with practical knowledge, relevant experience and light aircraft handling skills in excess of those possessed by inexperienced CPL holders.

At the end of the day, those good enough will pass the FI Skill Test regardless of their background. Although I agree that, in general, inexperienced PPL holders are unlikely to be able cut the mustard.

[Big Pistons Forever]

In a perfect world flying schools would have a mix of experienced PPL instructors and retired high time commercial and military instructors. Each will bring a set of skills and experience that the others will not have and such a school would be the best of all worlds for someone to learn at.

It does appear to me that there is a group of low houred PPL's that are looking forward to the PPL FI as an opportunity to get paid to go flying as opposed to their present situation of them having to pay for an airplane.

There is nothing wrong with this and a person dedicated to instructing instead of using it only as a stepping stone to a "better" flying job can't help but be healthy for flying training.

However a PPL FI doesn't mean you just show up with your PPL and start the FI course. You have to show up with a high level of personal flying skills, hence my comment that for low houred PPL's it would be prudent to plan on having to pay for some dual instruction before the course starts in order to meet pass the initial flying assessment which will be performed before the actual flight instructor training starts.

[IMC1]

Thanks for all the reply's.
While I agree with many comments outlined, certainly a freshly minted PPL without some real flying experience should not be a candidate for an EASA PPL instructor. I'm sure like myself, there are many PPL's with several hundred hours real experience with also the right attitude that could make he grade as an FI.

From what I have read I don't see how removing of the PPL instructors route years ago improved standards etc.

While I had to demonstrate CPL knowledge for my CRI, I would not be able to complete the written exams as part of my busy home/work/life schedule.

It would be great to get final clarity on EASA's plans for this....

[xrayalpha]

Of course, one could look at examples close at hand to see what could be achieved in a safe and affordable manner.

Dare I say "microlights"?

Already, we have had light aircraft training allowed from unlicensed airfields - as was case in microlights.

We have had self-declaration medicals (albeit for NPPL, and now reduced medical for LAPL) - as was the case for microlights.

We are now getting to the stage where you can get paid without having a CPL - as in microlights.

Yet, as far as I am aware, safety has not been compromised.

So, perhaps there is a case for some EASA super PPL for wannabe commercial pilots, with highly skilled, commercial sector instructors.

But for Joe Bloggs, who just wants to fly, the future looks bleak in "Group A" land.

ps. As I say to people who are thinking of learning to fly in Scotland: what do you want from your flying?

You can't fly at night, since the only places open after 5pm in central Scotland are Glasgow, Prestwick and Edinburgh - and Prestwick is the only one you can afford to fly out of, and then you cannot afford to land at Glasgow since they charge £140! So you fly in circles in the dark for an hour - big wow!

Or you want to fly IMC - so you need somewhere like GLA, PIK, or EDI to base - and then it costs a fortune, apart from the need to keep current.

So you are now looking at Day VFR - so why not look at microlights and LAA types?

So NPPL does.

Since the NPPL SSEA is now on the way out, the replacement has to work or you can say cheerio to those students.

Just my farthing-worth (there is an economic crisis on, I can't afford a ha'penny!) from the sharp end.

But there has to be a reason why we are still growing and our competitors are not.

[dont overfil]

Hi xrayalpha,

I agree with some of what you say. Microlights and LAA types are overtaking SEP for flying hours. Going down the instructor route with this type will ensure you are kept busy as there seems to be no shortage of new starts. Probably more lucrative as well. I've certainly scored off the origional plan to do the PPL instructor course for a retirement job.

I however don't agree with your comments about the usefulness of the IMC rating and NQ. If you really want to go places with an aircraft an IMC/IR is essential to get any sort of dispatch reliability. This qualification totally changes the way you fly whether the weather is good or bad. It's not about landings to minimums (usually). It is about cruising in comfort and safety. Contrary to popular belief it makes the flying easier.

As for airfields available after dark you are forgetting Dundee, Inverness, Kirkwall, Stornoway, Islay, Wick, Perth (by arrangement) and Cumbernauld sometimes. There are also active clubs with local agreements on fees which operate out of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Leuchars and Kinloss.

Most new non commercial students don't have a clear idea what they are going to do when they get their licence. The limitation of what a new PPL can actually do comes as a surprise and unless they quickly add ratings they will get bored with the burger run.

What I am seeing now at Perth is the flying club becoming more polarised. There is a large microlight/LAA contingent who own their aircraft and several owners and groups with IFR cabable aircraft.

As far as I can see even microlight owners need a pretty large capital investment to own an aircraft so lets not kid ourselves this is a cheap option. What is missing is the renters. Where have they gone?

Sorry, drifting off subject now.

D.O.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Microlights can be a cheap option, but isn't necessarily.

I recently returned after a bit of a break to flexwing flying. I paid £2k for a 1/3rd share in a reasonable aeroplane (a Mainair Blade 582 for anybody that means something to), and all-in my flying is working out in that at about £42/hr, in a pretty decent aeroplane that carries 3+hrs fuel and does everything about 50 knots.

If I preferred 3-axis (actually I think they're both great, but am electing to fly flexwings mostly for a bit) I could easily find you a good flyable single seater for £3k, and a fair choice for double that - all of which will probably have £30-£45/hr running costs and operate in the 45-70kn bracket.

On the other hand, there are certainly £60k+ microlights out there which are likely to cost £70+/hr to run when you add up hangerage, insurance, etc. They will however outperform the vast majority of certified light aeroplanes in all but payload. I've been teaching on one just lately - a CTSW, which is a simpler aeroplane to manage, but a much more impressive (and faster) aeroplane to fly, than say a C172 and is costing the new joint owner £55/month + £32/hr wet (plus my time :p).

By comparison my joint owned "group A" aeroplanes (both CofA) will cost 2-3 times as much per hour, or about the same per mile and renting a similar aeroplane, 3-4 times per hour, and 50% more per mile. The faster microlights however would beat those aeroplanes per mile as well as per hour, by a fair margin.

For the sheer fun of flying, and doing a lot cheaply, microlights has been the best VFR option for 20 years. The snob value of certified GA, and the fiction of flying IMC & night (well, how often does anybody actually do so?) has made microlights apparently the poorer cousin for years - but it's mostly been a mis-perception.

That you can now rent microlights is a big bonus, although to be fair there aren't many options to do so still, because the microlight community tend to be more built around a culture of ownership.


So microlights are the way ahead if you want to do lots of affordable flying, and the day-VFR restriction isn't too onerous. Many LAA aeroplanes will give similar advantages - although there are pros and cons there relative to microlights: they don't have the option of a Type Approved Permit that allows commercial training, but do deliver hours that count towards an ATPL.


I'm not about to give up the day-job to set up a flying school, but if I did, I could have a Type-Approved 2-seater for £6-£8k that is a perfectly capable training aeroplane, and a full microlight AFI course would cost me about £4k. So, £10-£12k to be able to teach commercially in my own aeroplane [okay yes, under the wing of a suitably qualified FI, but that's do-able] from being a PPL/CPL with enough hours (100PiC of which 60 in microlights), is a pretty cheap way into earning your living airborne. There's a healthy culture of one-man-band microlight schools, or of microlight instructors with their own aircraft latching onto existing FTOs to everybody's satisfaction.

G

(roughly equal hours in microlights and "group A", and currently "CRIing" on both group A and 3-axis microlights so no particular axe to grind.)

[md 600 driver]

what medical cert is required for ppl instructor

[BillieBob]

A PPL requires a Class 2 medical; the instructor certificate does not affect that.

[Aware]

Looking at the new CAP804 it now seems CPL TK iis now 13 exams, that seems rather excessive to me.

[IMC1]

Reading CAP804 it does look like a PPL can instruct for an LAPL(A) but only if we complete the full FI course. Not sure how many CRI's will 'upgrade' to a full FI if they can only instruct for an LAPL(A)

[xrayalpha]

Hi,

Actually, regards medical cert, depends which PPL you want!

If it is an NPPL (Microlight), then it is just the NPPL self-cert countersigned by one's GP that is needs as an instructor.

Not sure about NPPL SSEA.

To answr another question:

Where have all the renters gone?

Answer: they have bought aircraft.

Microlights are expensive?

Well, if you have the cash to buy a 50k microlight, you are not the sort of person that wants to pay -in Scotland - in excess of £100 an hour for a cosmetically clapped out old product of the US aviation industry.

If you are the sort of person to spend £2,000 on a third share of a £6k second-hand two-stroke microlight, then you don't have the cash to spend in excess of £100 an hour to rent a cloapped out ...

Of course, there are middle routes, but the arithmetic is all the same. You can afford to look after a microlight/LAA aircraft and polish it without the risk of incurring the wrath of EASA. You can usually sell a few years later for what you have paid.

So low running costs and little depreciation. Low fuel burn. Able to operate out of cheaper facilities than many traditional GA types.

Perhaps the reason the US is cheaper for traditional light aircraft is that every airfield has an A&P mechanic rebuilding a Cessna at the back of a hangar. Their paperwork to get the qualifications and run that sort of operation must be much simpler.

[Genghis the Engineer]

If you are the sort of person to spend £2,000 on a third share of a £6k second-hand two-stroke microlight, then you don't have the cash to spend in excess of £100 an hour to rent a cloapped out ...

Not so much can't, as won't.

Given that a flexwing microlight (at-least on a sunny day) is far more fun than a clapped out spamcan - why the heck should I trade a full day of maybe 6 hours flying in my microlight for the short burger run in a 40 year old rental C152 that I'd get for the same money?

Not to say I never rent, but only when I'm abroad, want to fly something particular, or I'm desperate to go flying and all three of my shares are either booked or unserviceable.


Incidentally I think I've lost money on the three microlights I've owned then sold. Offhand, a depreciation of about £200/year on the cheaper aeroplanes I've tended to buy. Realistically, a figure lost in the noise of running costs - as is any loss or gain on the various "group A" shares I've owned.

I'm also sure that I'm not the only person here to have both microlight and "group A" shares/aeroplanes. Each have their merits - but renting is the idiots option for anybody flying more than, say, 25 hours per year (and anybody flying less than that is probably safest renting from a school where the grown-ups can keep an eye on their permanently rusty flying standards.)


Not sure why I'm saying all this, as I'm basically agreeing with you. :ok:

G