Class Rating Instructor with just a PPL

[Jay_solo]

The CRI sounds like a very powerful instructor rating considering what you spend and how much you can do with it.

But how much opportunity can a CRI with just a PPL (no CPL) get to instruct per year?

I am thinking, as you can't get paid on a PPL, how would it work if you were a member of a flying club that charges for aircraft rental or air/ground instruction.

And apparently (from what I have read elsewhere) you don't have to be part of a flying organisation to use it. So if you are using it as a part time way to instruct and stay active in GA, how can you advertise your services without being seen to be paid?


:confused:

[MrAverage]

I understood that a CRI with a just a PPL (no CPL knowledge) could be paid, because there is no ab initio training involved.

Someone will be along shortly with chapter and verse.

As to how much flying you'd do, it depends on where you intend to fly and what the policies are at the clubs/schools in that area.

[Jay_solo]

So, CRI's can be paid with just a PPL?

[rudestuff]

I thought the same so I just checked cap804.

Section 2 part a page 2 says: PPL - An ICAO licence which is for non- commercial use, no remuneration permitted, (however an instructor may receive remuneration for training others) *This would seem to agree that PPL+any instructor can be paid.

2a4 says: part fcl PPL - The privileges of this licence allow you to fly privately (not for remuneration or for any commercial operation), except that a PPL holder who holds a valid flight instructor (FI) or Flight Examiner (FE) rating may be paid to give instruction in flying or conduct skill tests, as applicable. **This is a bit more specific in that it names The type of instructor rating - it says an FI *can* - but it also doesn’t say that a CRI *cannot*

[Sleepybhudda]

Apologies, I. don't have quite the answer your looking for, just some advice.

I completed a CRI as my first instructor certificate and it did open doors. But the training is in my opinion dangerously short. I understand the intention was to basically create a TRI equivalent for DHC-6, C208 and SEP MEP Class without becoming a full FI(A). But just as in the case of a TRI you do not get taught how to teach people to fly only how to convert to class / type. If you try to correct fundamental flying techniques without knowing the approved theory it can go badly wrong.

The FI(A) course is long for a reason and it annoys me when I come across Airline training departments that look down on FI(A)s. Sorry rant over.

I agree you should be able to be paid as a CRI with just a PPL.

Best reference I can find is in the UK ANO

Remuneration condition
4.—(1) In this Part, a reference to the “remuneration condition” in the privileges for aeroplane,
helicopter, gyroplane and balloon and airship private pilot’s licences is to the condition set out in
this paragraph.
(2) The condition is that—
(a) in the case of—
(i) instruction, the holder’s licence includes an appropriate instructor certificate;[/I]

[BillieBob]

A CRI Certificate may be applied to any EASA aeroplane licence except the LAPL(A). The privileges of the CRI are found in FCL.905.CRI:

FCL.905.CRI CRI — Privileges and conditions
(a) The privileges of a CRI are to instruct for:
(1) the issue, revalidation or renewal of a class or type rating for single-pilot aeroplanes, except for single-pilot high performance complex aeroplanes, when the privileges sought by
the applicant are to fly in single-pilot operations;
(2) a towing or aerobatic rating for the aeroplane category, provided the CRI holds the relevant rating and has demonstrated the ability to instruct for that rating to an FI qualified in accordance with FCL.905.FI(i);
(3) extension of LAPL(A) privileges to another class or variant of aeroplane.

The matter of remuneration is covered by FCL.205.A as follows

FCL.205.A PPL(A) — Privileges
(a) The privileges of the holder of a PPL(A) are to act without remuneration as PIC or co-pilot on aeroplanes or TMGs engaged in non-commercial operations.
(b) Notwithstanding the paragraph above, the holder of a PPL(A) with instructor or examiner privileges may receive remuneration for:
(1) the provision of flight instruction for the LAPL(A) or PPL(A);
(2) the conduct of skill tests and proficiency checks for these licences;
(3) the training, testing and checking for the ratings or certificates attached to this licence.

Combining the two requirements, the only remunerated instruction you will be able to give is that leading to the issue, revalidation or renewal of a class rating attached to a PPL(A), a towing rating or aerobatic rating attached to an LAPL(A) or PPL(A) and the extension of LAPL(A) privileges to another class of aeroplane.

Not a great deal of money to be made there, I fear.

[Whopity]

And apparently (from what I have read elsewhere) you don't have to be part of a flying organisation to use it.Apart from the dual flight with a qualified pilot, for revalidation of a SEP or TMG Class rating and differences training; all training for the issue or renewal of a Class rating must be conducted at an ATO or soon to be DTO.

[TheOddOne]

I did the CRI course for SEP back in 2006, principally so I could check out fellow club pilots and conduct 2nd year revalidation flights, so that the FI could concentrate on ab initio instruction. I wouldn't say that the course was dangerously short, but then I had 500+ hours at that stage. It consisted of 25 hours 'teaching and learning' ground school plus receiving and 'giving back' long and pre-flight briefs. There's also 3 hours flying, as I recall.The flight test took half a day and consisted of delivering a long brief, then a pre-flight brief, then about an hour's flight covering bits of the syllabus, especially stall recovery, slow flight etc. I think a new PPL would struggle with the test after only 3 hours instruction, but probably the ATO wouldn't let you take the test if they didn't think you'd pass.
In the ensuing 12 months, I suppose I did about 20 hours actual 'instructional' flying so hardly setting the world alight and I certainly didn't charge for any of it, even though I had a CPL.
What was good, though, was when I subsequently did the full FI course, I did feel some confidence that I was somewhat suited for the role, though I found the course itself pretty tough.
Latterly, LAA 'coaches' are I believe now checked out as CRI, very helpful when they might be the only person experienced on a particular make of aircraft. It is also a way for very experienced aerobatic pilots to pass on their knowledge to new people entering the sport, without having to do the full FI course.

TOO