Don't need CPL to instruct?

[cinman]

I understand you don't actually need your CPL to instruct, as long as you have your FI rating (preferably a Night and IMC too) and don't get paid for it?

Is this right?

I am anxious to teach to (a) gain invaluable experience, and (b) to gain invaluable hours - therefore will be happy to do so next year when I've finished the appropriate training (just yesterday got 96% on Aircraft Technical - yippeeeee!)

[Mark 1]

That is right.

You can instruct as a PPL/FI and on a Class 2 medical.

But to meet the pre-course requirement you will have to pass the CPL or ATPL written examinations, and the passes only remain valid for 3 years if you are planning to carry on the CPL route eventually.

[cinman]

OK - so what you're saying is that although I could teach on PPL/FI, to actually get anyone to teach ME the FI rating I would need to take ATPL ground subjects anyway?

Is there anyone out there who could teach FI withOUT the ATPL ground subjects first?

[expedite_climb]

I'm afraid not. The reason is you need to have a greater knowledge than an average ppl in order to teach it. Same reason why Teachers at schools have degrees to teach even just up to GCSE.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/srg_fcl_gid34.pdf


Pre-requisite flight and theoretical requirements as per JAR-FCL 1.335.
Before commencing a Flight Instructors Course (FIC) an applicant must satisfy the course pre-entry requirements as per JAR-FCL 1.335 :-
(1) Hold either a valid UK CAA or JAR-FCL aeroplane pilots licence, which includes a valid Single Engine Piston (Land) Class or single pilot, Single Engine Type Rating.
(2) Meet the knowledge requirements for the grant of a JAR-FCL Commercial Pilot Licence (Aeroplanes) as per AMC FCL 1.470(b).
(3) Have completed at least 200 hours of flight time on aeroplanes of which:
(a) PPL(A) holder shall have at least 150 hours as PIC or
(b) CPL/ATPL(A) holder shall have at least 100 hours as PIC.
(4) PPL/CPL/ATPL(A) holder shall have completed:
(a) At least 30 hours on single engine piston powered aeroplanes of which at least 5 hours shall be in the six months preceding the pre-entry flight test.
(b) At least 10 hours instrument flight instruction in aeroplanes of which not more than 5 hours may be instrument ground time in a FNPT or a flight simulator.
(c) At least 20 hours of cross-country flight as PIC of aeroplanes, including a cross-country flight of at least 540km (300 nm) in the course of which full-stop landings at two aerodromes different from the aerodromes of departure shall be made.
(d) Pass a specific pre-entry flight test with a FI qualified as per JAR-FCL 1.330(f) based upon the proficiency check as per JAR-FCL 1.240(b), within the six months preceding the start of the course.*
*The pre-entry flight test will assess the ability of the applicant to undertake the course.

[distaff_beancounter]

cinman The previous posters have set out the CAA requirements for obtaining the FI rating, but there are further points to consider.

I am not an instructor, only a humble PPL, but as I understand it, the position is as follows:-

There are probably very few "jobs" (unpaid, of course) available for PPL/FIs. The only positions available would be in non profit making "clubs" or "groups", where employment is not subject to the rules for the National Minimum Wage (NMW). Such "jobs" as would be available, are unlikely to provide you with very many hours per year, if you are trying to hours build.

Any PPL flying "school" that charges its students for instruction (as they usually do), can only employ FIs who hold BCPL CPL or ATPL. Furthermore such schools have to pay all instructors the NMW, which would conflict with the CAA rules, for a PPL/FI.

As you will see from reading Pprune, in the present employment market, schools are turning away CPL/FIs & ATPL/FIs with hundreds or even thousands of hours flying in their logbooks. Why would they want to employ a low-houred PPL/FI?

Please don't think that I am being negative - I am just trying to be realistic.

[expedite_climb]

Most Flying Clubs that 'employ' flying instructors don't really employ them. Instructors are usually (alledgely) self employed. Its a get out so the club doesnt pay NI, hence the minimum wage isnt an issue.

Having said this - i have never met a PPL / FI. There are so many instructors around that schools can be picky and hence the most qualified.

[distaff_beancounter]

expedite_climb Point taken.

I should have said, that the NMW may not apply to those Schools/Clubs, which have not had an Inland Revenue PAYE or NMW complience visit, YET! :(

[Maximum]

cinman, apologies if I appear to be on your case again, but as you stated on another thread you presently have 6.3 flying hours.

I therefore wonder at your timetable - you state that "you will be happy" to teach next year when you have "finished the approprate training". You do realise you have to get your PPL, then build 200hrsTT (150hrs PIC) while passing the CPL ground exams, then pass a pre-entry flight test, then do the FI(R) course, at which point you can try to find a job. If you do realise this, then sincerest apologies for being patronising.

Perhaps you don't see why, but to me your attitude comes across as very naive - certainly feel free to ask about becoming an instructor sometime in the future when you have a lot more experience - but don't give the impression it's basically all done and dusted.

Many very experienced pilots are presently unemployed. They support their loved ones by flying for a living. Their source of income has been removed. These are tough times for professional pilots. Many more low time pilots have just completed instructor courses and can't find employment.

It therefore is slightly irritating to hear you say you'll be "happy" to teach next year, when you've got the grand total of 6.3hrs.

If I sound hacked off, it's because I am.

:rolleyes:

[expedite_climb]

Maximum,

I haven't seen the other thread you are talking about, and you are quite correct about market forces. I agree that cinman is unrealistic in expecting to instruct as a PPL/FI, but he is obviously inexperienced in aviation, learning and politely asking questions don't you think ?

Cinman's comment about instructing next year is perhaps optomistic, but bear in mind it is made before having knowledge of how the system works. Nothing wrong with optomism i reckon. On top of that it is not impossible for him to be instructing next year. I went from having a PPL in Jan 97 to being a BCPL (ATPL knowledge) with AFI rating and a job by the end of June that year, so it is possible !!!

[Maximum]

expedite climb, I agree what you did is possible if maybe not the norm.

Thread was on wanabees, page two now, entitled "making the leap from PPL to ATPL."

OK, I may be coming across a little heavy, and perhaps a little old-fashioned, but I believe you've got to serve some sort of apprenticeship if you want to be a professional in this game. That means, when you're a student pilot, just getting on with mastering the next step, and not looking too far ahead. (Sure, you can be thinking about what you'll do when your in the left seat of your 747, but if you express this out loud when you haven't even gone solo, prepare to be shot down in flames.)

I was lucky enough to benefit from a military training, and my initial instructor, an ex Hunter jock with thousands of hours experience, would simply have ridiculed me if I'd told him what I was going to do when I was an instructor like him, with 6.3hours! God help me if I'd made a single error on my next flight.

We held these guys in awe as our flying masters - the idea that we could one day be like them seemed hard to believe. So we got our heads down and just got on with the task at hand.

Strange as it may seem, I'm actually a very easy going person on the whole!:) I just sense that some people have the idea these days that you pay the money, do the course, and that's all there is to it. Gets my goat.

Hope that explains my irritation.

[cinman]

Bit disappointed with "maximum"'s comments, and its good to know there are some level-headed people out there ("expedite_climb") who are not hell-bent on widening the gap between students and qualified personnel.

I have the utmost respect for all those who fly, whether learning, hobbying, improving, or whatever. We've a common interest, and if some people don't think that I can incude myself in "we" yet, then that's their problem - not mine.

I'm not going to apologise for my excuberence, nor my optimism - flying is indeed a serious, professional and testing past time, but we all do it for the same reasons don't we? (or do we? - I am "just" a student after all)

I intend to cover off the maximum flying in my lifetime, and I do indeed understand the difficulties in timeframes/costs/etc. (but only from what information I can glean from yourselves, not from experience yet) but just because one person has had somewhat negative experiences in the past, or some more "trying" time than the rest of us, is no reason to offload those issues onto lesser experienced persons in such a negative tone (in fact, some of Maximum's comments contradict the so-called "professionalism" that he/she speaks so fondly of, but I am not qualified to comment as I don't actually know you personally so will leave it there)

When I fly, its because I love it - I want to train to share this with others, others who deserve my full respect and attention - not some low-life, sub-standard "student" type - there's just no such thing? I bet you give learner drivers a hard time by tailgating them too don't you Maximum?

Anyway, I'm trying to resist the urge to say some things, as this is a professional and damn interesting and useful forum, but I would make this appeal:

Just because one is learning, does not make them any less a person than someone who is qualified. Furthermore, the path taken to become qualified is not a single one, but indeed an infinite number of paths exist - none more right or wrong than the other. As long as the required standard is met (or exceeded, as I intend) then no problem - welcome on board?

[Maximum]

Bit disappointed with "maximum"'s comments, and its good to know there are some level-headed people out there ("expedite_climb") who are not hell-bent on widening the gap between students and qualified personnel.

Well, you see, this is what's getting my back up - there is a gap between students and qualified personnel!! A gap of knowledge, experience and skill-based competence. This gap will gradually close as the student progresses through the course. And the student will make the best progress if he recognises that to start with this is a very big gap indeed.

When I fly, its because I love it - I want to train to share this with others, others who deserve my full respect and attention - not some low-life, sub-standard "student" type - there's just no such thing? I bet you give learner drivers a hard time by tailgating them too don't you Maximum?

Funnily enough, I show learner drivers the utmost courtesy. As I do anyone I'm instructing or checking.

Look, it's sort of like going up to a novelist and telling them you're going to write a book as well one day. And then you're going to teach writing. Until you actually do, surely you'd expect them to view you with some cynicism, wouldn't you?

Just because one is learning, does not make them any less a person than someone who is qualified.

I never implied it did.

Furthermore, the path taken to become qualified is not a single one, but indeed an infinite number of paths exist - none more right or wrong than the other.

Not sure what this means in flying terms. Infinite - doubtful.
None more right or wrong than the other? Doubtful again when applied to flying I would say.

I honestly wish you nothing but success, and I'm glad flying brings happiness to your life. Feel free to think of my comments as the inane ramblings of a grumpy old/young git if you like. However, I can assure you I am sweetness and light itself compared to many you will meet if you follow a career path into professional aviation.

You have been warned!!

;) ;)

[cinman]

Thank you for your feedback Maximum.

I think I hear where you're coming from following your last comments, and I'd be lying if your last paragraph or two didn't worry me a little :confused:

Anyway - take it easy and the best of luck to you in your aviation career.

[Maximum]

Don't get too worried! But I do know from experience that the way you see flying now, and the way you'll see it with more experience under your belt will be different. Doesn't mean that it's a bad thing, but simply when your investing so much time and money in something it's probably a good idea to listen to the more negative opinions as well, just to give yourself a more balanced viewpoint. You can then hand on heart tell yourself you understand the downside, but you still want to go ahead. As the saying goes, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Anyway, best of luck to you as well cinman, and I hope you achieve everything you want to with your flying.


Maximum.
:)

[cinman]

Thanks for your feedback Maximum, and I understand what you're saying. I'm already faced with (much smaller) issues with my FTO as to what to best do/say in the presence of certain situations ...

For example, the electric Fuel Pump switch has the rocker-cover missing, and I mentioned that maybe we should make a note of that in the technical log following the flight, along with the intermittent vacuum guague, and I was reminded that it does not warrant the effort nor expense of repair. :( At that stage, its difficult to know how to behave when I'm anxious to get in the hours, but if I get on the wrong side of the instructor for being seemingly too pushy, etc., then I can go to the bottom of the queue when a free timeslot appears ...

Anyway, thanks for your comments and feedback - and it IS always good to hear feedback, from both sides of the fence. Thanks for your honesty and frankness.

[distaff_beancounter]

cinman have you tried the Pprune Private Flying forum?

It caters for everyone, from those still thinking about the first trial lesson, up to those who have held a PPL for more years than they care to admit to.

Regular posters also include a lot of people, whose "day job" is in another part of aviation, eg instructors & examiners, air traffic controllers, CAA persons, aircraft engineers, administrators (&, dare I say it, accountants like me :D ) There are also commercial pilots, who obviously don't get sufficient flying in the big jets, so still play around in the puddle-jumpers, on their days off.

On the whole they are a very friendly, supportive & knowledgeable bunch. There seem to be very few questions that don't get useful & informative answers. Even daft questions are treated politely. I should know this, 'cos I have often been the one asking them!:D

Hope to see you there & good luck with the flying :)

[Maximum]

For example, the electric Fuel Pump switch has the rocker-cover missing, and I mentioned that maybe we should make a note of that in the technical log following the flight, along with the intermittent vacuum guague, and I was reminded that it does not warrant the effort nor expense of repair.

You did the right thing in speaking up. If something concerns you, then better to mention it now than regret not doing it later, especially if it's perhaps a safety issue. This is something that's emphasised again and again to new first officers in MCC training. Just might save your life one day.

In this particular case, it may be these items have been entered as allowable carried forward defects, so do not need to be put in the tech log every time. However, if the aircraft was being used for flight in actual instrument conditions, then of course a reliable vacuum guage would be a good idea! A good instructor should explain all this to you.

As a general point, the issue of maintence standards comes up from time to time across all areas of aviation. Commercial realities versus safety. Airliners fly around sometimes with many carried forward defects - but only if legally recognised as such by the relevant authority. So it won't be unusual for you to fly aircraft with things that don't work - however you have to know they're legal and accept them as such as the aircraft commander.

However, the instructors can have pressures (perceived or real) put on them not to stick things in the book in order to save money (or lose their job). I'm not suggesting for a moment this is what was happening with you(!).........but it can happen.

The bottom line is that you're the paying customer - if you don't like something or you're unsure of something or you think something is unsafe - then speak up. Ask questions. Then maybe the answer you get will clear things up. If however you're still not satisfied, then I would think about taking my money elsewhere.

Remember the quality of instruction you receive varies like most other things you pay for in life. There are good instructors, there are bad. Experienced instructors and inexperienced. Sometimes you just get a personality clash. But whatever the reason, if you don't feel your instructor is coming up with the goods, then ask for a change, or go somewhere else. It's your money.

Apologies for rambling on.:)