What to do next? PPL questions

[Kengineer-130]

Well, having just revalidated my little used PPL, I'm rapidly approaching it's tenth birthday, but with a lowly total of 91 hours :*, split between the states mainly & about 12 in the UK.

I'd like to try to fly a lot more, fortunately now I'm in a much better job, so should have more spare cash to convert into noise (& hopefully height!).. My only problem is that I cannot get a class one medical due to eyesight restrictions.

I'd like to carry on learning & developing my flying skills, so i was thinking about maybe doing a PPL FI course, but I'm not sure if a) I have enough experience to start the course, or b) if it would ever lead to being employable, as I have a full time job that can take me away for quite a lot of time in a year, do schools/clubs take on part time instructors?

I do work as a B1/2 engineer, so maybe could be useful teaching some technical ground school?

Is the IMC rating worth doing now or is it going to be defunct soon?

Any more suggestions for interesting courses or experiences would be most appreciated!

[Whopity]

The medical is not an issue if you only want to instruct. You will need the CPL ground exams. The IMC is well worth doing and as 10 hours IF training is a pre-requistite for the FI Course then its almost essential. You will need 200 hours total with 150 PIC to start a FI course. You will also need a 300 nm X-Cty
Go for it, your engineering experience will stand you in good stead.

[sapperkenno]

You won't even need the CPL exams if you are happy being restricted to teaching LAPL/NPPL only. Which you will be able to do on a PPL, with a Class 2 medical and get paid for your efforts.

[Kengineer-130]

I'd probably want to do the CPL exams for my own knowledge anyway, can never learn too much, and I would imagine it would be more beneficial for the student as well....

Getting to 150 hrs PIC/ 200 total may prove to be the barrier here, that's another 10k straight away :(

[sapperkenno]

I'd probably want to do the CPL exams for my own knowledge anyway, can never learn too much, and I would imagine it would be more beneficial for the student as well...

I don't think everyone would agree with that statement, but you'll be more employable and "might" learn some worthwhile things. You'd be better reading stick and rudder until you know it inside out and back to front, and getting some varied flying knowledge and hands-on experience with other knowledgable pilots, flying interesting types etc as you build hours.

I think you're misguided to think having passed CPL knowledge would be of any benefit to your students, or would go above and beyond what you'd learn on an FI course. A thorough understanding of the PPL theory might though.

[Pull what]

Most of the candidates I take through the FI course do not fly very well, nor do they have good technical knowledge.

Particular weak points are:

Flying an an accurate and well managed circuit
Flying and managing a PFL
Steep precision turns
Cordinated turns
VFR navigation
Dealing with abnormals and emergencies.

The amount of technical knowledge you need to be a flying instructor is more than you need to pass a professional pilots exam in the subject areas that are relevant to the PPL.

I have to spend valuable time on the course re teaching candidates to fly rather than teaching them to instruct, Candidates need more directed learning while hour building. All a 100 hours of straight and level teaches you is that light aircraft are quite stable.

[mykul10]

I agree with all of that, but would add S&L at different power settings/speeds/configurations. When a pilot can maintain S&L whilst efficiently changing these parameters they then properly understand about the use of power and attitude and how to anticipate what is required.

[TheOddOne]

When I did the IMC course it seemed to me to be like doing the PPL course again, only properly. In this regard, I'd say that this is a much better way of 'hours building' than just boring holes in the sky. It's a bit more expensive than just renting for the equivalent number of hours, but much better value for money. I'd do the night rating, too, for similar reasons (as well as being great fun, a wonderful experience, enhancing skills, etc).

I think the IMC rating is here to stay, the only problem seems to be we're losing instructors capable of teaching it.

TOO

[Pull what]

but would add S&L at different power settings/speeds/configurations

I asked a recent FIC candidate to select two stages of flap down and reduce to approach speed downwind while flying straight and level and he said as he had never done it before he was reluctant to do it without me talking him through it!

All of our basic PPL students are capable of doing this along with ovals or squares at 500 feet, 800 feet or 1000 feet with power reductions for the approach from anywhere past abeam the numbers. Too many schools still turn out pilots who can only fly a bomber square circuit by numbers which in my opinion doesnt encourage situation awareness and good judgement

[Whopity]

two stages of flap down and reduce to approach speed downwind while flying straight and level and he said as he had never done it beforeLook at the average log book, Ex 6 S&L now appears as one exercise. Look at the EASA syllabus:
(viii) Exercise 6: Straight and level:
(A) at normal cruising power, attaining and maintaining straight and level flight;No mention of flying S&L at different power and flap settings i.e Ex 6(ii) has disappeared. Yet another load of unquantified, unqualified junk that some call a syllabus.

If we slavishly follow ill-conceived legislation the outcome is hardly surprising!

[dobbin1]

Has the EASA syllabus changed then? My copy says:-

(viii) Exercise 6: Straight and level:
(A) at normal cruising power, attaining and maintaining straight and level flight;
(B) flight at critically high air speeds;
(C) Demonstration of inherent stability;
(D) Control in pitch, including use of trim;
(E) Lateral level, direction and balance and trim;
(F) at selected air speeds (use of power);
(G) during speed and configuration changes;
(H) use of instruments for precision.


Is this out of date? We still teach slow safe cruise

[Whopity]

No it has not changed; my point is that it is so badly written with no quanifiication of what is required, except perhaps in A where it says: attaining and maintaining straight and level flight. No mention of that in B-H

More importantly, its listed as a single exercise rather that two seperate exercises, the first where the method is learned and the second where the method is used to acheive different results.

[Pull what]

There is no mandatory requirement to follow Mr Pratts syllabus as Bungle has pointed out

[mykul10]

I'm a bit out of touch these days, but do FIC students still have to fly an assessment before the course to prove that they can fly to CPL standards, regardless of whether or not they hold a CPL?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Thoughts:-

- As a fellow engineer (albeit of a rather different flavour) I use my CPL TK most days in some capacity, probably more than I use it flying. That may just agree with those who say it's irrelevant to flying and written by engineers and ex-navigators mind you.

- The IMCR, apart from now being called the IR(R) remains relevant, very useful, with a life going well into the future yet.

- Teaching, remunerated, on microlights is also open to you, either with an FI Microlight ticket, or FI plus significant microlight time.

- Personally I'm a CRI rather than an FI, and I've no aspiration to be a full time instructor. But I get a lot of satisfaction from doing 30ish hours per year of instructing slottedd around the day job. If you want to dip your toe in the water, the CRI course is much cheaper and quicker than the FI course, although there's only minimal credit over to the FI course if you do that later.

G

[BEagle]

Ignoring Pull what's childish insults (yet) again :rolleyes:, the UK CAA AltMoC states the following for Straight and Level:

Exercise 6 Straight & Level Flight

L00kout technique
Attaining and maintaining straight and level flight
Demonstration of stability
Straight and level flight at an increased airspeed
Straight and level flight at a decreased airspeed
Maintaining straight and level flight during configuration changes

(Although it doesn't actually include the regulation CFS 00..;) )

[Capn Bug Smasher]

Go for it, your engineering experience will stand you in good stead.

Yes one of the best instructors I ever had was a B1/2 and he did all his maintenance himself. Knew that plane inside out. I can't understate how much I learned from him.

:ok:

[Whopity]

I'm a bit out of touch these days, but do FIC students still have to fly an assessment before the course to prove that they can fly to CPL standards, regardless of whether or not they hold a CPL? Yes, there is a pre-entry flight test for the FI Course but not for the CRI Course. The content of the test is taken from the Class Rating proficiency check and its purpose is to allow the FIC instructor to assess the task ahead, not to test CPL standards.

[Kengineer-130]

What's a CRI course I've never heard of that?

[Whopity]

Class Rating Instructor for Sigle Pilot Aeroplanes. Before you can commence the course you need 300 hours as pilot of aeroplanes. Its purpose is to train experienced pilots to teach other qualified pilots to fly different class or types; towing ratings; aerobatic ratings; differences training and the one hour training flight for SEP and TMG revalidation.