IMC Renewal instruction by non IR instructor

[hooligan88b]

As an authorised IR(R) instructor I do quite a lot of instructing for initial issue as well as renewal / revalidation practise. I often have too much work on for the latter.
Is it permissable for an instructor who doesn't have the instrument upgrade to 'teach' PPLS with lapsed (or about to lapse) IMC/IR(R) - I'm inclined to think OK as the formal 'dual' training is only for initial issue.
The instructor would have to have a current IR I think as a minimum.
I would be interested in views

[Whopity]

A FI teaching the 10 hours of IF on a CPL does not need to be an Instrument Instructor however; to do the same 10 hours as part of a Basic Instrument Module does. The old reference to "No applied IF" which was a limitation in a UK licence has now gone.

If the student is flying an instrument approach under IFR they can only do so under instruction if they do not have a vald rating and that would require the instructor be qualified to give such instruction!

[TheOddOne]

Here's my take on it (prepared to be shot down in flames)

I'm an unrestricted instructor with a current IR(R). As such I teach basic instrument flight for PPL but not applied for the IR(R). There's a bit of soul-baring here. I did the IMC instructor course a few years ago, all fine on teaching the basics and holds, partial panel etc but was advised I needed more practice flying ILS before I was assured of passing the test. I'd run out of money so I gave up.

Case 1. I'm asked to fly with a current IR(R) holder to act as lookout and to proffer any advice that might help. Essentially I'm an experienced passenger for any approaches we make, but can be an instructor for en-route IMC practice.

Case 2. I'm asked by a current PPL with an expired IR(R) to help him get back in shape for a test. I can instruct for IMC en-route practice but any approaches we make are strictly with me as PIC and the other pilot is a 'passenger'. There may be some value in this. There is some muddy water here about a non-rated pilot making Instrument approaches in VMC. In my view, if you're looking in flying by sole reference to instruments, then you're not properly VFR even in VMC.

Case 3. A PPL who has never had an IR(R) asks for some pre-course instruction. Whereas there is some useful instruction to be done here in basic IMC flying, in my view, there is little to be gained by the other pilot watching me flying an ILS. I certainly won't be trying to 'instruct' them in this case, as they've never been taught how to do it properly. ANY instructional hours towards the grant of the IR(R) MUST be conducted by a qualified IR(R) instructor.

As with ALL flying, it is vital to sort out who is PIC, Pu/t or a passenger for any given flight, prior to getting in the aeroplane. This would form a part of the necessary pre-flight brief.

Perhaps I should save up and have another go...

TOO

[Whopity]

ANY instructional hours towards the grant of the IR(R) MUST be conducted by a qualified IR(R) instructor. If we go back a few years to when it was just IMC then any of the basic IF could be taught by a FI who is qualified to give basic instrument instruction (Ex 19). Only the approaches required an "Applied Instrument Instructor". Despite all the muddling and fudging there has been no fundamental change to the format of the IMC training.
then you're not properly VFR even in VMCA flight shall be conducted in accordance with the VFR or the IFR, there is no halfway house and IFR has no correlation with the weather. If you are flying an Instrument Approach it is IFR.

Basic Licence Privileges since JAR-FCL 1999
FCL.600 IR — General
Operations under IFR on an aeroplane, helicopter, airship or powered-lift aircraft shall only be conducted by holders of a PPL, CPL, MPL and ATPL with an IR appropriate to the category of aircraft or when undergoing skill testing or dual instruction. Which means the pilot flying the approach can only be under instruction by someone who is legally qualified to give such instruction.

[BillieBob]

If we go back a few years to when it was just IMC ...It still is. The term 'IR(R)' is simply a bureaucratic fudge to allow the IMC Rating to be included in an EASA licence.

[hooligan88b]

Thanks for the replies, it seems best to keep IF instruction to those qualified to do so. A shame that relatively few seem to be so qualified.

[sapperkenno]

A shame that relatively few seem to be so qualified.
With the experience requirements an instructor must meet to become an IRI it's no wonder!