ppl instructing

[hollywood285]

Sorry if this has been done before but I know the rules have changed recently.
I have an EASA PPL;
Class 2 medical ( class 1 not an option as failed in 2006 due to field of vision defect)
15 years flying with about 450 hours in singles and twins

What I want to do is become an abo intro instructor and get paid for doing it .

Questions

Can I get paid for it .?
Will I need a CPL.?
Are the jobs limited because I don't have a class 1?
Were can I do this course .

Thanks in advance
HW285.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Sorry if this has been done before but I know the rules have changed recently.
I have an EASA PPL;
Class 2 medical ( class 1 not an option as failed in 2006 due to field of vision defect)
15 years flying with about 450 hours in singles and twins

What I want to do is become an abo intro instructor and get paid for doing it .

Questions

Can I get paid for it .?
Yes

Will I need a CPL.?
Get CPL theory, without it you'll be quite limited. You don't need the CPL itself.

Are the jobs limited because I don't have a class 1?
In ab initio instruction, I doubt anybody will notice.

Were can I do this course .
Whole bunch of schools around the UK and overseas. Try On-Track at Wellesbourne, Aeros wherever they are at the moment, Booker, Tayside as four to start your search that all have good reputations. Just use a search engine, look at school websites, they'll say if they offer the course, and most show pricing.

G

[TheOddOne]

I think the problem isn't the FI course, it's finding somewhere to do just the CPL theory. When I did mine, back in the 1980s, I did 'distance learning' or correspondence course, as we used to call it, with PPSC at Bournemouth. I've heard recently that most places only do the full ATPL. This would be an excellent place for someone to refute this with an example.
I needed a Class 1 when I started instructing back in 2007 but the rules thankfully relaxed just as I got to 65 and was faced with ££££ of cost for a stress ECG, now happily on a Class 2, no problem with getting paid (not much, mind you!)

TOO

[hollywood285]

Thanks for the replies , CATS do a CPL theory course, as you say most only do full ATPL which there is no point in me doing because I can't get a class 1 medical , thanks for the advice on FI , it's ok googling this but it's word of mouth at who's the best .

[MrAverage]

Where in the UK are you hollywood285 ?

[hollywood285]

Where in the UK are you hollywood285 ?

Just outside Lincoln

[rarelyathome]

Thanks for the replies , CATS do a CPL theory course, as you say most only do full ATPL which there is no point in me doing because I can't get a class 1 medical , thanks for the advice on FI , it's ok googling this but it's word of mouth at who's the best .

There might be a point doing the full ATPL as it’s not that much more work and gives you the theory for an IR if you want to do that. It would give you another string to your instructing bow.

[rudestuff]

... Plus there's a lot more training support for ATPLs, so ironically they're probably easier!

[Kemble Pitts]

There is the option of not doing the CPL theory at all, just do the FI Course, and still be able to teach ab-initio but to LAPL only. Just another option.

[rarelyathome]

There is the option of not doing the CPL theory at all, just do the FI Course, and still be able to teach ab-initio but to LAPL only. Just another option.

As per GtE’s post. Up to LAPL would be quite limiting IMHO

[anchorhold]

Hollywood, based on your location, it might be worth utting a few feelers out at Gamston Airfiled, there used to be a guy there that did FIC training as well as flying a King Air, perhaps someone can remind me of his name I did part of my FIC course with him elsewhere, quite a sound instructor, he might be able to help adivise you on CPL exams, the other person is Chris Caine, who you may be able to contact through Halfpenny Green, he may be doing FIc course part time, last time I heard, he was also a standards man at the CAA, again quite a sound bloke.

To add, the FIC instructor at Gamston name was from memory (I think), Phil Turner.

[S-Works]

An FI without a CPL is like chocolate teapot. There is no market fro initial LAPL training for a start. Differences training wont put food on the table. Doing the CPL theory will only extend you to be able to teach the full PPL but no other career path which will get old pretty quickly.

[AllanA]

An FI without a CPL is like chocolate teapot. There is no market fro initial LAPL training for a start. Differences training wont put food on the table. Doing the CPL theory will only extend you to be able to teach the full PPL but no other career path which will get old pretty quickly.

I teach LAPL, Night Ratings, IR(R), IR and MEP and hold a couple of examiner certificates and do very nicely thank you very much without CPL TK

[Mickey Kaye]

And your not on your own. I know two people who work full time as flying instructors one of which also has examiner privileges. They also do a fair bit of microlight instruction to.

Neither have CPL TK.

[AllanA]

Yes, there are quite a few when you look around. Instead of spending 800 hrs studying CPL TK most of which I felt would not be as relevant, I spent the 800 hrs flying VFR and IFR in singles and twins UK and Europe to build up real practical experience to teach people to fly in the GA environment. Diff’rent folks, diff’rent strokes.

[S-Works]

A niche minority whatever way you look at it. As a very large flying school running over 200 students a year I can count the number of LAPL students on Homer Simpson’s hand....... An Instructor only able to teach LAPL and night is useless in a normal school. There may be a few niche schools that have accommodated them but that does not make it a viable career path i anybody’s book. It’s just hand to mouth teaching.

[AllanA]

Yeah I suppose it is better to charge £25 - £30 per hour and teach PPL than charge £40 - £60 per hour and teach IR(R)/MEP/IR and more for examinations. I am happy with my niche thanks!

[S-Works]

Yeah I suppose it is better to charge £25 - £30 per hour and teach PPL than charge £40 - £60 per hour and teach IR(R)/MEP/IR and more for examinations. I am happy with my niche thanks!

non of which you are teaching on your heavily restricted FI...... ;)

dont false advertise.....

[AllanA]

Don’t descend to accusations please, no false advertising here, you stick to your world and I am happy in mine thanks very much. It works for me and I am sure yours works for you.

There are many types of flight that can be taught without CPL TK, there is standalone MEP CRI and standalone IRI which are quite achievable without CPL TK, an FI(A) without CPL TK can teach LAPL and night ratings but cannot teach PPL. The CAA do authorise the teaching of IR(R) with IR TK, they even changed the IN to reflect this. Also an FI(A) can examine LAPL and NPPL but not PPL. I don’t teach PPL that’s true and that is a limitation but it bothers me not a jot because there is plenty of other work in my MEP/IR(R)/IR/PBN and glass cockpit niche to keep me happy.

So let’s politely agree to disagree on this one.

[S-Works]

An FI without CPL TK can teach only for LAPL and NIght.

Everything else you do is done under different ratings. You are false advertising what FI without CPL TK can do and muddying the waters with the additional stuff you do. I am glad you have a niche that works for you but misleading people into thinking that a FI with CPL TK is a viable way to make a living is wrong.

I am speaking as the Head of Training of a large school and someone who holds all the qualifications you do and many more. We NEVER teach ab initio LAPL courses. We NEVER teach ab initio NPPL courses. Both are routes historically for people converting licences and are rare. The core of our business is PPL, CPL, ME, IR and Class and Type Ratings. So the only thing an FI without CPL TK could do for me is teach a night Rating. Which means they have no chance of getting a job with us. There may be a few nich operators out there that could use such a limited rating but encouraging people to undertake an expensive course with little chance of work at the end is wrong.

All of your extra teaching qualifications also come at significant cost in terms of gaining the experience to teach them and the additional courses needed. None of that comes with a LAPL restricted FI.

So no no we can’t agree to disagree because I believe you are being dishonest with your answers in relation to the original question.

[AllanA]

I enjoy my niche thanks, the fact that you don't think so or how big your school is matters not a jot. It is possible and I have proven it so.

For the avoidance of doubt I am not advertising anything, I have no wish or need to advertise on an internet forum board. I do not teach CPL or PPL and never would unless I opted to take the CPL TK exams and gain a CPL; this is unlikely. So if the original question was as a career instructor in a large school then that my path is not the correct one. My point was that there are many other facets that are possible should one have a different strategy so I don't agree that it is a chocolate teapot, readers can take whichever path they choose.

I have nothing further to add to this conversation that will benefit the thread or its readers

[Whopity]

The priviledge to conduct training for a Night Rating is contained in FCL.910.FI FI so is the province of a FI, the privilege is also conferred upon a FI with restricted priviledges, but is not included in the IRI or CRI priviledges. The FI who has qualifired under FCL 915.FI FI (i) met the requirements for CPL theoretical knowledge, except for an FI(A) providing
training for the LAPL(A) only is limited to giving instruction for the LAPL (only) and whilst a LAPL holder may add a Night Rating, the FI(LAPL) is not granted any priviledge to instruct for a Night Rating!
So please let us know how a FI without CPL knowledge can teach the Night Rating as I can't find anything in the legislation that permits this, (except for the grandfathered National FIs)?

[S-Works]

Good point whoppity. Reinforces my point further....

[Mickey Kaye]

I'm not quite sure that the whole picture is being presented here.

http://nationalprivatepilotslicence.co.uk/PDFs/NPPL%20training%20by%20FI%20without%20CPL%20TK.pdf

So they can teach for the NPPL including all its associated ratings and lets remember there are a significant number of microlight instructors who make a their living out of just that. A suitable qualified FI without CPL TK can do that.

Also upon completion of the FI course if the candidate is suitability qualified (300 hours TT) they can apply for a CRI rating. This allows them to teach for numerous ratings. Do the hour with an instructor flight and the numerous types of differences training that are available. Also there is nothing stopping them adding addition privileges such as aerobatics

I know 5 FIs without CPL TK. Two work full time and both used to work for the largest ATO in my part of the country. The other three work part time and seem to be fully booked.

Also there is nothing stopping any of these guys from doing the CPL TK at a later date and one of them did just that and he now works for a fair sized UK airline.

[BEagle]

Whopity wrote: the FI(LAPL) is not granted any priviledge to instruct for a Night Rating!

Not so.

At the 2015 LAPL Review Board meeting, in response to a query posed by DGAC (France), it was confirmed by EASA that a 'LAPL-only' FI may provide flight instruction for a LAPL holder to include additional ratings in the licence - e.g. Night, Aerobatic or Mountain ratings. The 'LAPL-only' FI has to meet the same requirements as other FIs to be qualified provide such training, but does not have to meet CPL knowledge requirements. He/she may also conduct differences training for LAPL holders.

There is an action item on this requiring RMT.0596 to clarify the existing sections of SubPart J to make this clear.

[Whopity]

it was confirmed by EASA that a 'LAPL-only' FI [u]may provide flight instruction for a LAPL holder to include additional ratings in the licence Thanks Beag, so we can now see that to teach the Night Rating for anyone other than a LAPL holder you need to hold a FI Rating without the LAPL only limitation.

[BEagle]

No, just as a PPL/FI may instruct an ATPL holder for the Aerobatic Rating (assuming he/she holds the relevant qualifications, a LAPL-level FI may provide flight instruction for a Night Rating to be included in a pilot licence, again assuming that the relevant instructional qualifications have been met, irrespective of the licence level.

It is only the instruction for a licence, not a rating, which requires the FI to hold the same (or higher level) licence. Thus a PPL/FI may not instruct for the CPL itself, but may instruct a CPL holder for an additional rating - and the same logic applies to the 'LAPL/FI'.

EASA made this clear several years ago.....

[hollywood285]

Thanks for all the replies , I will be going down the cpl tk and ppl/fi rating , I know I dmwont become a millionaire doing it , but it's the highest I can get due to not being able to get a class 1 due to a slight eyesight defect in the bottom of my left eye

[rarelyathome]

Thanks for all the replies , I will be going down the cpl tk and ppl/fi rating , I know I dmwont become a millionaire doing it , but it's the highest I can get due to not being able to get a class 1 due to a slight eyesight defect in the bottom of my left eye
Good decision although I would still recommend the ATPL TK for the IR TK credit. ATPL v CPL TK isn't really much extra work.

Very best of luck with it.