CRI on microlights

[betterfromabove]

Hi,

(Tried to do a search on this topic, but can't see how to do so with a 3-letter acronym....sorry)

Under the new EASA regime, assuming you have the 'difference' on your EASA PPL, am I right in thinking a CRI rating could be used on 3-axis microlights?

And if so, would you need the 50 hours on this class of aircraft, as you do for the AFI pre-entry?

If so, am I right in thinking this would create the slightly absurd (what's new ....:bored:) situation of most AFI's working from the basis of an NPPL and any CRI's working from the basis of an EASA PPL??

I'm also assuming here that we are talking about the UK, although would be interested to hear how this might work elsewhere in Europe.

Confused, as frequently the case with all this licencing basket-threading.....:ugh:

All the best,
BFA

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can teach as a CRI on microlights: 3-axis or flexwing, subject to being checked out and current yourself.

I can't lay my eyes on a specific number for experience, but have a vague recollection of 15 hours from somewhere?

Just like anything else you do as a CRI - you can't teach ab-initio, but you can for example teach 3-axis to flexwing or vice-versa, biennials, microlight differences training for "group A" pilots, syndicate checkouts, tailwheel (not mandatory for microlight pilots, but a very sensible thing to do), and so-on.

I teach on microlights occasionally, as a CPL & CRI with about 600 hours on microlights. It's just as satisfying as any other instructing - although the profiles of the pilots somewhat different. Microlight pilots tend to be much better stick and rudder pilots who also know their aeroplanes better, but much worse at flying procedurally or doing anything involving sums than their group-A colleagues.

G

[betterfromabove]

GtE,

I've read a lot of your posts and thanks so much once again for your useful insight....

Yes, exercising CRI privileges on ML's does seem a little niche that I'm not sure how many people know about or making use of, especially with the virtual identical nature of some of these types to their SEP equivalents....

I know when you do your CRI, despite the fact that it's for the Class, it's often structured around a particular type, so I guess you could do it on a ML? You would need to find an FIC with 3-axis sign-off though of course, which might be a rare breed.

A couple of years ago, I did ask a 3-axis AFI if the "CRI(ML)" niche would be of much use and he thought not for his club. As non-SEP, he wasn't aware the CRI even existed though, so this could be slightly misleading. I suppose it would depend on trade from 3-axis-ers who need renewals/checkouts etc. Presumably, this must be a growing market though....??

BFA

[Genghis the Engineer]

It would have to be a UK rating on a UK licence presumably.

Right now, the number of people who hold a JAR/EASA licence and thus can add CRI to it, yet also have enough microlight time to instruct usefully on one, must be pretty small?

But if it can be added to an EASA PPL, then I can't see why in theory at least an NPPL(M) holder couldn't pass it, if that were made legal. I could imagine this being popular in a fair number of the smaller microlight clubs - the real clubs as opposed to those around schools.

G

[betterfromabove]

Your 2nd line was partly my line of thinking....:hmm:

Obviously, the CRI was never designed for this, so no wonder there does seem to be a bit of a grey zone here. Although, I can't help but think it's - potentially - a useful outcome of its existence, with the right safeguards.

My understanding is that the route from vanilla PPL-SEP to a microlight instructor could go two ways:

AFI route:
1. Get ML differences
2. Get enough hours (50) on ML for pre-entry to AFI course
3. Take ML GFT to be able to apply for NPPL(M)
4. Take AFI course
5. Obtain AFI post

CRI route:
1. Sufficient hours (200) for CRI pre-entry
2. Do ML differences training
3. Take CRI course (on SEP or ML, as appropriate)
4. Obtain sufficient hours on ML's to be at level to instruct on them

For the CRI route, items 2-4 could be interchanged of course, but still does leave several questions open, depending on your overall experience, e.g. quite how many hours you would need on ML (let's say it's 3-axis in this case) before you're ready to exercise those CRI privileges on ML?

I also seem to remember having heard or read about a regulatory minimum, once differences signed off. Obviously, the judgment of the training organisation would need to come into play also.

BFA

[Whopity]

am I right in thinking a CRI rating could be used on 3-axis microlights?To do what exactly?

The privileges of a CRI are to instruct for:
(1) the issue, revalidation or renewal of a class or type rating for non-complex non-high performance single-pilot aeroplanes, when the privileges sought by the applicant are to fly in single-pilot operations;
There is no such thing as a Microlight Class or Type rating under EASA.

[Genghis the Engineer]

As CRI (as presently available) is an EASA rating, and Microlights are Annex II, and the majority of their pilots flying on some variation on the NPPL, whatever a CRI does on microlights is, so far as I can see, a gift of UK CAA and nothing to do with EASA.

However, I think my first post on this thread did correctly state the form of CAA's gift?

G

[Whopity]

Essentially you could do difference training. Nothing would count towards the revalidation of the CRI whilst obtaining the qualification and any subsequent revalidations would be based upon SEP flying. If you want to be a Microlight Instructor, do the Microlight AFI Course, nothing in the CRI course is relevant or orientated to Microlights..

[Genghis the Engineer]

The CRI course is all about delivering skills you already have to an already qualified pilot who lacks those skills in some way.

I can't see any particular "moral" difference between somebody (like me) who did a CRI course in a C152 delivering tailwheel (when they have good tailwheel experience) or microlight (when they have good microlight experience) differences, or various biennial / currency / pre-revalidation-by-test training in either. But the CRI course didn't, at-least in my case, explicitly cover either.

Any more than there are reasons why an FI who also did his course and skill test in a C152 shouldn't do the same.


That said, I agree - if somebody wants to do all their instructing on microlights, the microlight AFI course would be a much more sensible route.

G

[Whopity]

The Microlight syllabus is quite different to the PPL/SEP syllabus, the aircraft characteristics are quite different and the techniques taught differ. It has always been legal for a FI to teach on Microlights however; it has always been highly recomended that any instructor learn the Microlight way of doing things before treaching on them. None of this would be conducted on a CRI course or any subsequent revalidation. Whilst legal it really has no relevance.

[Genghis the Engineer]

however; it has always been highly recomended that any instructor learn the Microlight way of doing things before treaching on them.*

And quite right too, for exactly the reasons you say.

Presumably it's not covered on the standard FI course either however?

G

[Whopity]

Presumably it's not covered on the standard FI course either however?
No, the FI Course is all SEP based and the syllabus can be traced back to the RAF circa 1950s. The Micriolight syllabus was home grown by the BMAA, is based around Flexwing aircraft and largely evolved form the Hang Gliding World.

The gaping hole is that the Microlight syllabus does not look at more modern 3 Axis low drag aircraft which are more appropriate to the traditional FI. So we have Microlight Instructors teaching on devices they have probably never been taugh to teach on. Fortunately, there have not been any major safety issues, but one or two fixed wing FIs have commented about the lack of knowledge of pilots of these devices when upgrading to SEP.

[ifitaintboeing]

My understanding is that the route from vanilla PPL-SEP to a microlight instructor could go two ways:

AFI route:
1. Get ML differences
2. Get enough hours (50) on ML for pre-entry to AFI course
3. Take ML GFT to be able to apply for NPPL(M)
4. Take AFI course
5. Obtain AFI post

CRI route:
1. Sufficient hours (200) for CRI pre-entry
2. Do ML differences training
3. Take CRI course (on SEP or ML, as appropriate)
4. Obtain sufficient hours on ML's to be at level to instruct on them

Microlight AFI Course
AFI (2) The requirement is 100 hours as PIC of which 40 hours are on Microlights including at least 5 hours PIC on the control type to be used on the course.

For the Microlight AFI course, there is also a pre-entry written test and pre-entry flight test.

CRI Course
CRI (1) The pre-entry requirement for the CRI course is 300 hours not 200. A microlight aircraft is not likely to be acceptable for use on a CRI course.

ifitaint...

[Genghis the Engineer]

However, I *think* that the original poster was basically asking if there was scope or value in having a suitably tailored CRI(M) rating available, which could be added to an NPPL(M) ?

G

[Whopity]

That is simply answered in Schedule 7. There is no CRI(M) rating and the only instructor ratings that can be added to a NPPL(M) are the AFI(M) and FI (M)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Well yes, there currently isn't, and can't be, a CRI on an NPPL(M).

But it seems a reasonable question to me - would there be value in one? Rules can be changed where there's good enough reason.

G

[BEagle]

Rules can be changed where there's good enough reason.


What reason would that be? Is there currently a shortage of Microlight flying instructors?

[Genghis the Engineer]

What reason would that be? Is there currently a shortage of Microlight flying instructors?

betterfromabove asked the question, I'm just defending it as a good question.

But maybe, there are quite a lot of true clubs in the microlight world who don't need the availability of ab-initio training, but also need an instructor occasionally and often don't have anybody conveniently to hand.

G

[Whopity]

would there be value in one?I very much doubt it. How many qualified pilots want conversion training to a Microlight? Most will already have a licence that covers microlights with no further training so I doubt anyone would ever cover the cost of a CRI Course.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Not sure I follow your argument there Whopity.

Surely a microlight pilot has the same reasons to use the services of a CRI as a "group A" pilot, and there are a significant number of CRI(SPA)s and people who use them.

G

[BEagle]

How many qualified pilots want conversion training to a Microlight? Most will already have a licence that covers microlights with no further training...

Further training is required for holders of SEP Class Ratings who wish to exercise their privileges on Microlights:

The holder of a UK issued licence or any Part-FCL licence with an SEP rating, may, subject to differences training on the appropriate class with a suitably qualified instructor, exercise the privileges of their licence on microlight aircraft. However, any experience gained in microlight aircraft cannot be counted towards the flying experience necessary to maintain the full SEP or TMG privileges.

However, surely there are enough 'suitably qualified' instructors around to meet this rather marginal need?

[Whopity]

Further training is required for holders of SEP Class Ratings who wish to exercise their privileges on Microlights:
Not if you have an old National Pre JAA PPL where the privileges were included. The due process of law to change those privileges has never been completed. Changes were only made to subsequent licences and are not retrospective.