FI(R) without CPL?

[tobster911]

Just a quicky - Is it possible to become an FI without having a CPL, then using the hours gained as an FI to get a CPL (Seems like a cheaper option to me, and more likely to secure employment if the employer doesn't have to pay me.

Thank you

T

[Duchess_Driver]

It is possible to be an FI in EASA land without a CPL. But...

You still need to have demonstrated CPL level knowledge (i.e passed the CPL ground exams!)
You need more hours/experience to be an FI without than you do with.
You can't be paid.


Don't always look at the bottom line cost wise!

The Pre-Req's and priv's for an EASA FI are detailed in Subpart J of EASA PART FCL (Google 1178/2011R)

[taybird]

I believe you can now be remunerated for FI work without a CPL.

[AirborneAgain]

I believe you can now be remunerated for FI work without a CPL.
That's correct. See part-FCL.205.A (b).

[sapperkenno]

Yes, you can be remunerated as a PPL FI, and can also teach without CPL knowledge if you want to teach only towards the LAPL and NPPL.

I know this as I only hold a EASA PPL, but have been working as a CRI for almost 2 years, and an FI(R) instructing NPPLs for 6 months or so.

[Whopity]

It has always been possible to be a FI with just a PPL however; it is not a cheaper option because a PPL holder requires 150 hours PIC in order to do the FI Course wheras a CPL holder requires only 100 hours PIC. In both cases the candidate must have passed the CPL theoretical knowledge exams except to instruct for a LAPL.

[AirborneAgain]

It has always been possible to be a FI with just a PPL however;Maybe in the UK (I wouldn't know), but certainly not in every other European country -- not even without remuneration!

[tobster911]

So, I can get a PPL, the do the FI(R), and still be paid for it without having to do a CPL?

Could somebody please talk me through the exact requirements (minimums) to become a flight instructor?

Thank you

T

[AirborneAgain]

So, I can get a PPL, the do the FI(R), and still be paid for it without having to do a CPL?You can be an FI, yes. I don't know what you refer to by FI(R). Is that a national UK rating? The EASA rules make no reference to an FI(R).

Could somebody please talk me through the exact requirements (minimums) to become a flight instructor?The absolute minimums for a PPL(A) holder to apply for an FI(A) rating are:

200 hrs flight time on aeroplanes or TMGs

of which at least 150 hours as PIC
of which at least 20 hours as PIC on VFR cross-country
of which at least 30 hours on SEP
of which at least 10 hours is instrument flight instruction (received)
of which at least 30 hours is the FI flight training itself


5 of the SEP hours must be in the 6 months before doing the "pre-entry flight test" for the instructor training.

You must also have done a VFR cross-country flight (as PIC) of at least 300 NM including full-stop landing at two different airports.

Unless you are going to instruct LAPL(A) students only, you must also have the CPL theory.

Then there are additional requirements depending on what kind of instruction you are going to give. I strongly suggest you read the source material (part-FCL Subpart J).

Disclaimer: I may have made a mistake in compiling the figures above!

[tobster911]

Excellent, thank you...

Best start earning some money then to afford all this :/

Regards

T

[sapperkenno]

To clear things up. FI(R) is "Flying Instructor (Restricted)... Until the new FI(R) holder has given 100 hours of dual instruction, and obtained 25 solo sign-offs (excluding first solo's) while being "supervised" by another FI, they will be restricted. This restriction means they can't send anyone on a first solo, or first solo Navex, and they are to be overseen by a supervising FI.
Once they are unrestricted, they can do everything in an FI's remit and don't need their hands holding by a responsible adult. Interestingly the rules are rather vague about how the supervising FI is to go about their supervision.

So on passing the training and flight test, the licence holder will become an FI(R). Once they meet the requirements to lift the restriction, they pay some money to the CAA (no big ****ing surprises there then) and get a new page for their licences (which hopefully they haven't cut up) showing they are now an EASA FI.

Then they can happily instruct for the PPL (if they have EASA CPL theoretical knowledge exam passes) or just the NPPL/LAPL if they don't...

[Whopity]

but certainly not in every other European country In all JAA countries since July 1999.
The EASA rules make no reference to an FI(R).FCL.910.FI FI — Restricted privileges
(a) An FI shall have his/her privileges limited to conducting flight instruction under the supervision of an FI for the same category of aircraft nominated by the ATO for this purpose, in the following cases:

[AirborneAgain]

In all JAA countries since July 1999.A long time, but it was even longer that that when I last checked (until the EASA rules...) :}

FCL.910.FI FI — Restricted privilegesCertainly, but to my understanding this is not a separate rating. You have an FI, you just can't do all kinds of instructing until you have the necessary experience.

Please correct me if I am wrong (and kindly refer me to the relevant part.FCL section).

[Whopity]

Certainly, but to my understanding this is not a separate rating.You are quite correct. The UK issued FI(R) as a seperate rating under JAR simply because it was a replacement for the former AFI rating however; it was never intended to be a seperate rating. It was probably the easiest way to adapt the licence issuing software!

[Mickey Kaye]

Whopity

Any chance you could expand on this a little.

Are you saying that the UK are the only state in Europe where an FI(R) once they meet 100 hours 25 solos sign offs. Have to send there licence to their NAA, pay a fee, before they become unrestricted?

Do you know how other European states do it?

[RTN11]

Is it possible to become an FI without having a CPL, then using the hours gained as an FI to get a CPL (Seems like a cheaper option to me

In what way is it cheaper?

You still need 150 hours PIC to become a flying instructor, so no money saved there.

You need to do CPL(A) theory. The more common route is to do ATPL theory, do the CPL(A) (with or without IR(A)) and then do the FI(A).

With ATPL groundschool you have to get BOTH the CPL and the IR within three years of the last exam, or the exams expire, so unless you are very sure of your timeline on getting CPL and IR, you could end up repeating groundschool, which will cost you even more.

[tobster911]

My reckoning for it being cheaper is that I didn't think you had to have as many hours, and if I'm instructing during the time it takes, I don't have to pay for my flights?

I am probably wrong here, but that's the way I looked at it.

[RTN11]

Are you saying that the UK are the only state in Europe where an FI(R) once they meet 100 hours 25 solos sign offs. Have to send there licence to their NAA, pay a fee, before they become unrestricted?

This is all historic stuff. The UK used to issue an AFI rating (assistant flying instructor), which limited your privileges, then once you met the requirements you took a test and applied for a full FI(A) rating. This is still the way that it works for microlight instructors on an NPPL(A).

This was then replaced by issuing an FI(R) rating, which would have the restrictions removed in a similar way.

Now you get a FI(A) rating on your licence from the onset, but with restricted privileges printed in the ratings section. When you have your 100 hours and 25 sign offs, you apply and have the restriction removed, but it does not change the actual rating you have like it did before. I think this is how it is done throughout Europe.

Under JAA you couldn't earn money from instructing on PPL, but with EASA you can, although you've always required more hours to add the FI(A) to a PPL compared to a CPL.

[Gally2]

Why under JAA can you not earn money?

[Whopity]

The JAA no longer exists!

When it did the privileges of a PPL were:(a) Privileges. Subject to any other
conditions specified in JARs, the privileges of
the holder of a PPL(A) are to act, but not for
remuneration, as pilot-in-command or co-pilot of
any aeroplane engaged in non-revenue flights.

[Gally2]

So once you have a CPL you can earn money by teaching the PPL?

Also i see in the States that they do a single engine CPLand a multi engine CPL? If you were to do a SINGLE ENGINE CPL would that still qualify you for the flight instructors course?

[AirborneAgain]

It used to be like that in Europe, but now you can earn money instructing without being a CPL.

[Gally2]

Can you actually make a living from being a flight instructor ? Is it good yearly salary . I presume not

[RTN11]

Can you actually make a living from being a flight instructor ?

No. Unfortunately the market is in a state where there are plenty of instructors willing to work for very little money, so flying schools have all the power.

Almost every PPL school in the country (certainly all the ones I have dealt with) keep their instructors on a self employed basis, effectively as contractors, so they only get paid when they fly. A typical hourly rate is about £20 per flying hour, and overall in the UK you'd be luck to average 40-50 hours a month, maybe 60 as a high average.

So you'll be earning around £1000-£1200 a month, if you're lucky, but that could be £300 one month and £2000 another, there's no consistency, and certainly no salary.

[AirborneAgain]

A typical hourly rate [in the UK]is about £20 per flying hourHow much do the students pay?

[Gally2]

Really??? That is a shame!! It would be a nice job but i suppose just not financially worthwhile. Is there any job you can get from getting a PPL, ATPL and CPL (maybe IR added in to that)? I know you would not have the amount of ratings the airlines require to hire people but is there anything else?

[cyclic flare]

I have been instructing on a ppl licence since 1999 and been paid all the hours, the old system allowed ppl's to become instructors. From memory I think you needed 400 hours to get on the instructor course and the CPL course at the time was only 150 hours

From my understanding it reverting back to this under EASA I maybe wrong though

[Big Pistons Forever]

Tobster911

Whether or not you can teach with a PPL is a legal question. Since I am not very familiar with the way things get done across the pond I can't answer that question.

What I can comment on as a long time instructor including completing many instructor ratings, is that the average fresh from the flight test CPL does, in general, not have a high enough level of flying skill to properly demonstrate any manoever and the first part of the course is invariably used to raise the students flying skills to an acceptable level.

I have never flown with a low hour PPL that was any near the skill level required to instruct. If you do intend to progress towards a flight instructor rating I would suggest it would be prudent to budget for a significant amount of addition dual to raise your skills to the necessary level.

[Whopity]

the average fresh from the flight test CPL does, in general, not have a high enough level of flying skill to properly demonstrate any manoever I would agree with this observation. Usually, a PPL holder with 300 hours is far more suited to a FI Course than a freshly minted CPL holder. Hour building (wasting) is no substitute for real experience gained by a PPL who is not set on meeting an hours target.

How many car drivers, lorry drivers or motorcycle riders pass their test and rush off to become instructors?

[IMC1]

Just a slight variance on the thread. My understanding is, If I complete a FI course without sitting the CPL written's I can only instruct for the LAPL. After a period of time, if I then subsequently pass the CPL written's can I then start instructing for the full PPL without any further training. Many thanks.

[AirborneAgain]

After a period of time, if I then subsequently pass the CPL written's can I then start instructing for the full PPL without any further trainingFrom the way FCL.915.FI is worded, it does appear so, but it is not crystal clear. It says that when you apply for an FI(A) as a PPL(A), you should meet "the requirements for CPL theoretical knowledge, except for an FI(A) providing training for the LAPL(A) only".

This suggests that if you subsequently pass the CPL written, you don't need additional training, but you do need to re-apply for the FI(A) certificate.

Check with your national authority!

[Whopity]

From the way FCL.915.FI is worded, it does appear so, but it is not crystal clear. It says that when you apply for an FI(A) as a PPL(A), you should meet "the requirements for CPL theoretical knowledge, except for an FI(A) providing training for the LAPL(A) only".
When the FI(A) rating is added to the licence there should in theory be an entry in the remarks column stating that the rating is restricted to giving instruction for the LAPL. Whether or not that is there in practice is another matter. There is no reason why a FI(A) with no CPL theory should not teach for class or type ratings as they have met all the requirements for the issue of a CRI rating! Perhaps you should obtain that at the same time!

[GgW]

How will the CAA, make sure that PPL holder without cpl knowledge and a FI Rating only instruct towards/for the LAPL. Where is the cutoff point going to be in the syllabus. Because you can do all the traing with a DVLA medical and then just before the test change over to a class 2 or LAPL medical.

[Whopity]

How will the CAA, make sure that PPL holder without cpl knowledge and a FI Rating only instruct towards/for the LAPLThat is the ATOs responsibility. The CAA only need to look at the licence application and any instruction given by an unqualified FI would be rejected. Quite simple really. The knock on effect is that ATOs would become reluctant to use LAPL FIs.