ME/IR Instructing

[blagger]

How do FIs build the multi engine PIC time to move onto MEIR instructing? Is everybody doing it ex-airlines or air taxi/biz jet? Even if people work up through an organisation from SE CPL say they must get the 30hrs MEP somehow?

[Cows getting bigger]

They 'blag' the hours. :)

[nick14]

If you joined the airlines as a cadet then the hours don't count, 30 hours on the class of aircraft.

I'm guessing you would have to rent them and build up the hours over time.

[Whopity]

This has been an issue for some time and is likely to get worse; even the ex military guys don't have 30 hours MEP. Add to that, the 200 hours IFR needed before you can qualify to teach instruments and we have a potential shortage of commercial instructors. The problem has been staring us in the face for ages but nobody in the regulatory world seems to have noticed! Probably because they are not pilots or instructors!

[smithgd]

Don't forget that 15 hrs PIC have to be done in the 12 months preceding the application! That's the hard bit if your self funding the hours or blagging the odd flight :{

[high wing harry]

smithgd - I cannot find any reference to needing 15 hours in the previous 12 months on multis - can you enlighten me?

[mad_jock]

It used to be part of the pre course requirements for MEP CRI.

I don't have a clue if its the same under EASA.

And when I looked into it, it had to be MEP time the fact you had flown 900 hours in the previous 12 months in a manual turbo prop didn't matter. So even if your highly experenced twin prop driver you still have the issue with

A) getting solo
B) finding someone willing to rent you a twin
C) having enough hours to be insured solo/as PIC (it was 50 hours mep when I looked)
D) having a valid rating because it appears now you have to do the course again if its been more than 7 years.

[high wing harry]

Nope - still confused!

LASORS states (for the addition of MEP to an existing FI(A)):

1) Hold a valid MEP rating
2) Have 500 hours total time
3) Have had the supervisory restrction removed from FI(A)
4) 30 hours PIC on MEP (Not including SPIC)
5) COmplete an approved course
6) Pass a skill test

The only change if for a CRI is that if they want to extend to a different class they need 10 hours on type in the preceding 12 months.

So I read it that an FI(A) who has 30 hours on twins PIC can do the course. I know there used to be a recency requirement about 10 years ago but I don't think it exists now.

I dont think anything changes for this under EASA an its ever-changing implementation date...

[BillieBob]

Don't forget that 15 hrs PIC have to be done in the 12 months preceding the application!There is no such requirement under either JAR-FCL 1 or Part-FCL

[mad_jock]

its still though 30 hours PIC in a MEP which most of us don't have.

Got thousands of hours in twins. Those mixture levers must be harder to operate than I remember.

[nick14]

Regarding the 30 hour requirement for MEP class, can we count PICUS time? I know that it stipulates SPIC is not allowable, but nothing is mentioned about PICUS.

[S-Works]

One could argue that the requirements are there for a reason. Why should the student pay for you to gain experience?

Personally I had around 700hrs ME time before I started teaching CPL/ME....

[mad_jock]

I would very much doudt it. I was told I needed 30 hours MEP PIC with 1500 PIC hours turbine twin time.

[Whopity]

One could argue that the requirements are there for a reason.It is interesting that SPIC is allowed as part of the experience required to gain a CPL and to become an FI, but it is not acceptable to add the CRI(ME) to an FI rating. This was an illogical UK ruling made by an administrator, there was no safety case to justify it. Essentially, it only applies to graduates of integrated courses, but as its not included in Part FCL, it will be interesting to see if it survives.

[smithgd]

Don't forget that 15 hrs PIC have to be done in the 12 months preceding the application!

There is no such requirement under either JAR-FCL 1 or Part-FCL


The more I read Part-FCL the more I get confused, but anyway.....

FI to upgrade to MEP = "FCL 905.FI h) (1)"

Which says they must meet the training course prerequisits in "FCL 915.CRI a)" which is 500hrs TT and 30hrs MEP PIC, and of course do the CRI training course listed in "FCL 930.CRI".

However the privileges and conditions of the CRI are listed in "FCL 905.CRI" and paragraph "b)" mentions the 15hrs in 12 months to be able to extend privileges onto other classes/types.

Clear as mud isn't it :ugh:

[Whopity]

Those are the privileges of the CRI (stand alone). Whilst the FI has to meet the requirement of completing the CRI Course to add the ME privileges to the FI rating, he is not restricted by the privileges in "FCL 905.CRI" but enjoys the privileges stated in FCL.905.FI FI — Privileges and conditions(3) in addition:
(i) for multi-engine aeroplanes, met the requirements for the issue of a CRI certificate;

Don't mix the Mud from different pots!

[smithgd]

Those are the privileges of the CRI (stand alone). Whilst the FI has to meet the requirement of completing the CRI Course to add the ME privileges to the FI rating, he is not restricted by the privileges in "FCL 905.CRI" but enjoys the privileges stated in FCL.905.FI FI — Privileges and conditions

(3) in addition:
(i) for multi-engine aeroplanes, met the requirements for the issue of a CRI certificate;
Don't mix the Mud from different pots!


Yep i'm aware of the different pots....but I was under the impression that when an FI upgraded to be able to teach MEPs they actually were getting a CRI rating and thus are bound by its privileges and conditions? Maybe a friendly ME FI can look on their licence and let us know?

[FI-A]

Hi Smithgd, I am friendly (most of the time) and just had a look at my licence. It says CRI ME and it is separate from the FI.

FI's can train people towards a license, while CRI's train people who already have a license towards an endorsement on their license. Thus, there is no such thing as an ME FI (I'm nitpicking a little bit, I know ;) )

I know of several people who are not FI's but CRI ME (or IRI), so it is two different things really. Of course, the most normal thing is to progress from being an FI to IRI to CRI ME and so forth..

As for those valuable 30 hrs of MEP, it can be a struggle. I did quite a few years of single engine instructing before doing some aerial work in a twin for a summer and ended up with about 100 h MEP PIC.

Blue skies!

[Whopity]

I was under the impression that when an FI upgraded to be able to teach MEPs they actually were getting a CRI ratingThat has not been the case in the UK. Teaching ME is one of the privileges of the FI(A) rating, subject to completing the ME CRI course and test.

My UK licence says: FI(A) SP SE and ME and my JAA licence says the same. I did have the qualification pre JAR and CRI ratings.

There is no clarity in any of the documents, so it is easy to see how the confusion arises.

[S-Works]

When I did mine a few years ago they just gave me a CRI ME. My FI just says PPL, CPL and Night in the comments column. I was also given a seperate IRI.

I did have the qualification pre JAR and CRI ratings.

As did I, some really weird translations into JAR I think!

[Whopity]

The best comment I have seen after an FI rating is "Not valid for Flight Instruction"

[smithgd]

Thus, there is no such thing as an ME FI (I'm nitpicking a little bit, I know)
I know I was just being lazy with my typing!

So the general conclusion is that the CAA have decided NOT to follow any standard licence format when it comes to an individuals licence/privileges.:ugh:

[BillieBob]

So the general conclusion is that the CAA have decided NOT to follow any standard licence format when it comes to an individuals licence/privileges.So just what do you consider is the 'standard' format for the licence of a Flight Instructor who meets the requirements of JAR-FCL 1.330(d) and (e), and where is this supposed 'standard' laid down?

As a Flight Instructor qualified to instruct for both the IR and MEP, I do not wish to be constrained by the limitations of either the IRI or CRI rating.

[Whopity]

The licence format is largely determined by the codes that have been programmed into the computer, they have a limited selection and they have changed from time to time. Most CRI ratings state "Only in accordance with JAR-FCL 1.330" but; JAR-FCL 1.330 has nothing to do with the CRI rating!

As BillieBob says the privileges of the FI to teach ME are clearly laid down in JAR-FCL 1.330 and Part FCL, so there is no need whatsoever to refer to the CRI rating.

[Trim Stab]

Personally I think the hours requirement for MEP and IRI instruction are too low, and the requirement to pay for additional qualifications to teach IFR and MEP is wrong. It results in too many hours-building IRI and MEP instructors at FTOs, and excludes instructors who have genuine experience to pass on but who don't see any economic benefit in paying for additional qualifications in return for a very low salary.

I have about 1000hours MEP, just about all of it single-pilot IFR. I have FI but salaries for IRI and MEP instructors are just not enough to make it worth paying for the IRI and CRI qualifications.

[Whopity]

So if your 1000 hours ME were on turbines, you'd be quite happy to pay for 30 hours on a MEP to be able to teach on it? But; you have already said its not worth qualifying because there is no money in it! So on what safety grounds would you justify extra hours? It seems you just want to improve the odds in your favour.

[Trim Stab]

I don't understand your question. Where did I mention having any MET hours? I actually have none at all -only MEP and MEJ.

My point is that there are indeed plenty of us with lots of MEP and IRMESP hours but the MEP/CRI instructor employment market is still devalued towards inexperienced pilots who think that it is economically advantageous to invest in obtaining CRI/IRI qualifications to build hours for long-term employment prospects, without having any real MEP IRSP experience to pass on to students.

[notlikethat]

With nearly 9000 hours worldwide experience 3000+ instructional hours including Integrated and IR instruction, several jet types and one turbine I have been told by one very well respected FTO that I do not have the required experience to teach MEP/IR. Mind boggles. And the CAA insist I build MEP hours even though more levers in King air than DA 42.!!!!!!!!!!!

Bring back B rating.

[Trim Stab]

notlikethat - agreed.

Also, FI(A)s should not have to do CRI and IRI courses if they have substantial experience flying IFR on type. I used to be a factory pilot for a light twin manufacturer, but in order to instruct on it I have to pay for a course and exam, which I find irksome. I've looked into the costs of doing this, but it just does not make economic sense because salaries and job security are so poor at most FTOs.

There still seems to be too many young instructors about who are prepared to take out huge loans to pay for 30 hours of MEP, CRI and IRI courses in order to hours-build until they can get an airline job to pay off the loans.

The instructor qualification requirements should be re-structured to make instructing a more attractive career for pilots with genuine experience to pass on, rather than being a job for hours-builders with deep pockets.

[BillieBob]

In both JAAspeak and EASAspeak Multi Engine Turbine covers both turbojet and turboprop. In neither standard is MEJ referred to. Does that help you to understand Whopity's perfectly reasonable question?

[Trim Stab]

I still don't understand his hypothetical question! MET, MEJ are irrelevant here.

As I said, I have about 1000 hours MEP mostly as a factory pilot, but I still have to pay for a course instructed by somebody with considerably less time on and knowledge of the aircraft in order to instruct on it.

[BEagle]

Trim Stab, do you not understand that, to instruct, you need to have passed an instructor course?

IRIs will soon be hard to source; however, the demand for MEP instruction will progressively reduce as more and more airlines move to the MPL.

[Whopity]

the demand for MEP instruction will progressively reduce as more and more airlines move to the MPL.However one of the requirements for the MPL Instructor is (j) an MPL, provided that the FI:
(2) for the basic phase of the training:
(i) holds a multi-engine aeroplane IR and the privilege to instruct for an IR;which in turn requires a CRI(ME) qualification.

[Thoroughly Nice Bloke...]

I have a CPL with IR FI and CRI Ratings, I did plan on doing the IRI Course a couple of years ago but couldn’t due to family issues. I’m sure I read somewhere that the IRI Course will soon no longer exist, is that correct or did I imagine it…? And if it is being discontinued when will it happen…?

Many thanks in advance…


TNB

[nick14]

Have a look in EASA part FCL, it's still there so as long as you have the required IFR time then your all good.

[madlandrover]

which in turn requires a CRI(ME) qualification.

Not necessarily - SE IR instruction privileges are also allowable.

And if it is being discontinued when will it happen…?

Sept 17th. The current Applied IF Restriction removal will not be allowed after Part-FCL, the only applicable course will then be the full IRI course. I have this in writing from the CAA, as I have a couple of Applied IF upgrade courses to teach before September!

[Whopity]

the only applicable course will then be the full IRI course.Which of course is exactly the same for an FI. FCL.930.IRI IRI — Training course
(3) (i) for the IRI(A), at least 10 hours of flight instruction on an aeroplane, FFS, FTD 2/3 or FPNT II. In the case of applicants holding an FI(A) certificate, these hours are reduced to 5;

[Trim Stab]

Trim Stab, do you not understand that, to instruct, you need to have passed an instructor course?


I have passed an instructor course.

[nick14]

Part FCL suggests that an FI can teach for the IR if he or she holds an IR, has 200 hrs of IFR time and has completed an IRI course.

Did the CAA still state that from November 2012 there will be only tr IRI prerequisits allowed?

[BillieBob]

Did the CAA still state that from November 2012 there will be only tr IRI prerequisits allowed?Not quite sure what you mean by that. However, the CAA cannot impose any pre-requisites over and above those detailed in Part-FCL. There are a few diehards at the Belgrano who have not yet grasped this fact.

[nick14]

Sorry, long day.

Madlandrover said that the CAA have confirmed in writing that there will be no removal of the applied IF restriction on an FI cert with PART FCL.

There is a section in part FCL that still includes a reduced experience requirement for an FI as opposed to a direct applicant for an IRI.

I may have mis-understood

[Whopity]

The Applied IF Restriction is a hangover from the National FI rating which actually ceased to exist in 1999, The only reason that the "No applied IF" remained, was simply because the CAA software was not updated in time and they could not cope with the JAA changes. That was back in 1999 and it has taken them 13 years to catch up.

The requirement for an FI to add Applied IF privileges by completing the IRI course, with credits for being an FI are no different now to those introduced in 1999!

There will be no removal of the " No Applied IF restriction, because there has never been a "No Applied IF" restriction under either JAR-FCL or EASA Part FCL. The training requirements to teach IF have remained unchanged throughout. The pre-entry requirements to undertake the training have changed.