F/I's with PPLS
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: oz
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F/I's with PPLS
CASA has unveiled the wonderful idea of allowing PPL holders to be flight instructors. Think what that's going to do...lots of unpaid inexperienced PPL holders instructing. There goes the idea of an actual CAREER in instructing. No motivation without renumeration...
http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/newrule...61/dp0202a.pdf[/URL]
Of course its only a proposal so if you want to express your displeasure, contact:
mailto:[email protected]
No self interest involved here at all....
http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/newrule...61/dp0202a.pdf[/URL]
Of course its only a proposal so if you want to express your displeasure, contact:
mailto:[email protected]
No self interest involved here at all....
This used to happen in the UK, I don't know if it still does.
We already have gliding instructors in that position.
Go to page 155 paragraph 1.6.......which says that although PPL holders will be permitted to have an Instructor Rating, the ICAO knowledge standard and aeronautical experience for a CPL will apply.
Remember that at present an ab initio student can gain a CPL in 150 hours, then do the 50 hour Instructor course and voila a 200 hour Grade 3 Instructor.
Now what about a PPL holder with 500 hours, lots of multi and good a knowledge base. All they have to do at present to gain a CPL is the theory exams and be recommended for a flight test, there is no course of training required, so provided they meet the hour minimums eg IF etc then they go for a fly with the CFI who says "that was great I hereby recommend you for your CPL test".
The proposal also says that there will be a no remuneration prohibition on PPL Instructors.
If the PPL holder has demonstrated the skills to gain an Instructor rating why shouldn't they? The big BUT is that it devalues career FIs and unscrupulous operators will run flying schools using PPL holders.
We already have gliding instructors in that position.
Go to page 155 paragraph 1.6.......which says that although PPL holders will be permitted to have an Instructor Rating, the ICAO knowledge standard and aeronautical experience for a CPL will apply.
Remember that at present an ab initio student can gain a CPL in 150 hours, then do the 50 hour Instructor course and voila a 200 hour Grade 3 Instructor.
Now what about a PPL holder with 500 hours, lots of multi and good a knowledge base. All they have to do at present to gain a CPL is the theory exams and be recommended for a flight test, there is no course of training required, so provided they meet the hour minimums eg IF etc then they go for a fly with the CFI who says "that was great I hereby recommend you for your CPL test".
The proposal also says that there will be a no remuneration prohibition on PPL Instructors.
If the PPL holder has demonstrated the skills to gain an Instructor rating why shouldn't they? The big BUT is that it devalues career FIs and unscrupulous operators will run flying schools using PPL holders.
Last edited by Icarus2001; 20th May 2002 at 10:15.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: FNQ
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you go get a PPL and come out with 55hrs (Worse case) then do 40hrs on the instructor rating and look out you got a 95 hour instructor.
Surely they will put a min hour requirement on it???
There are of course some very experienced PPL's out there that would make good instructors, but with enough opperators not paying CPL's this can't be a good thing.
Surely they will put a min hour requirement on it???
There are of course some very experienced PPL's out there that would make good instructors, but with enough opperators not paying CPL's this can't be a good thing.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was thinking about this today.
I cant imagine CASA allowing low time PPLs to start instructing but rather I would say it was their aim to allow those highly experienced PPL holders to instruct (000's of hours etc). Not a bad idea if you consider the basics behind it...but... My feeling is, if you have someone with that much time and with the supposed ability to instruct then it would only be a matter of sitting a CPL flight test (already meeting the 200hr requirement) and then doing the instructor rating. I cant see whats so hard about that. One flight test and if you are good enought to be instructing with "such a valuable lot of experience" then you should have no trouble passing the CPL flight test.
Another intersting side topic here is are CASA going to allow the PPL holders to be paid for doing a commercial job - ie: making money for a company?? Or are the instructors to work for free and therefore undermine those instructors out there looking to make a quid out of aviation.
I have a feeling thought that anyone who would want decent commercial training or even effective PPL training will go to the schools that employ Commercial Instructors.
My opinion - If you like to fly stay private. If you want to do it for a job (casual or otherwise) then do the professional thing and do the CPL flight test first - its not that hard really, and they fail it are they the people you want teaching other pilots???
Good on CASA hey - Its amazing to think how f*cked up people get when they sit in an office coming up with sh!t ideas and more ways to f*ck up our industry ... (sorry that was my mandatory rant that i have when i get worked up)
Twin.
edited to delete blantant anti CASA slogan - oops
I cant imagine CASA allowing low time PPLs to start instructing but rather I would say it was their aim to allow those highly experienced PPL holders to instruct (000's of hours etc). Not a bad idea if you consider the basics behind it...but... My feeling is, if you have someone with that much time and with the supposed ability to instruct then it would only be a matter of sitting a CPL flight test (already meeting the 200hr requirement) and then doing the instructor rating. I cant see whats so hard about that. One flight test and if you are good enought to be instructing with "such a valuable lot of experience" then you should have no trouble passing the CPL flight test.
Another intersting side topic here is are CASA going to allow the PPL holders to be paid for doing a commercial job - ie: making money for a company?? Or are the instructors to work for free and therefore undermine those instructors out there looking to make a quid out of aviation.
I have a feeling thought that anyone who would want decent commercial training or even effective PPL training will go to the schools that employ Commercial Instructors.
My opinion - If you like to fly stay private. If you want to do it for a job (casual or otherwise) then do the professional thing and do the CPL flight test first - its not that hard really, and they fail it are they the people you want teaching other pilots???
Good on CASA hey - Its amazing to think how f*cked up people get when they sit in an office coming up with sh!t ideas and more ways to f*ck up our industry ...
(sorry that was my mandatory rant that i have when i get worked up)Twin.
edited to delete blantant anti CASA slogan - oops
Last edited by TwinNDB; 20th May 2002 at 10:26.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icarus makes a good point, while I don't think the PPL F/I is such a good idea, it won't necessarily be any worse than a 200 hr cpl F/I. Don't agree with either idea actually, but as long as this industry continues to go in the direction of lack of remuneration, working for free, and sausage factory pilots, well even pilots gotta eat. Doesn't make it right of course, but...........
Join Date: May 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
150 or 2000 hours - It's still a commercial job and should require a commercial licence to be held.
The hour requirement and low time instructors is another issue which i hold strong feelings about but this is not the topic for them at the moment.
Just make them get a commercial licence
If you're good enough to instruct then you can pass the CPL flight test - simple - argument over - amazing that CASA even have a discussion paper out on it.
Do we want GFPT holders to do local commercial flight just because it may fall into a 10nm radius - I dont think so - So much for CASA looking after the travelling public. Not only will we have people with lower and lower experience levels flying things with burners and heaps of passengers, but they wont have even been trained by a Commercial Pilot.
If it wasnt such a serious issue a guy could break down laughing
The hour requirement and low time instructors is another issue which i hold strong feelings about but this is not the topic for them at the moment.
Just make them get a commercial licence
If you're good enough to instruct then you can pass the CPL flight test - simple - argument over - amazing that CASA even have a discussion paper out on it.
Do we want GFPT holders to do local commercial flight just because it may fall into a 10nm radius - I dont think so - So much for CASA looking after the travelling public. Not only will we have people with lower and lower experience levels flying things with burners and heaps of passengers, but they wont have even been trained by a Commercial Pilot.
If it wasnt such a serious issue a guy could break down laughing
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This practice has been going in Europe for ages, and quite successfully too. The standard of Flight Instruction is much higher and reflects in how our licences are worth overseas.
The idea is to allow people who no longer hold a class 1 Medical to conduct Training, i think to PPL level.
I learned to fly from a 18,000Hr retired Airline Captain who lost his C1 Medical. The oppurtunity to learn from someone with a lifetime of experience sure beats your 300hr Grade 3.
The sooner the curent Flight Instruction regime ends the better. I have seen some woeful instuctors,who only really want a charter job , with very poor knowledge teaching the newest of students. This is very wrong.
The idea is to allow people who no longer hold a class 1 Medical to conduct Training, i think to PPL level.
I learned to fly from a 18,000Hr retired Airline Captain who lost his C1 Medical. The oppurtunity to learn from someone with a lifetime of experience sure beats your 300hr Grade 3.
The sooner the curent Flight Instruction regime ends the better. I have seen some woeful instuctors,who only really want a charter job , with very poor knowledge teaching the newest of students. This is very wrong.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is already a way those who could lose their class 1 can still instruct - its a dispo that allows them to fly with or as a safety pilot.
Its a commercial job leave it that way.
Raise the bar for low time guys and gals, make them have 500 or 1000 hours to instruct - I'm not really fussed about that - but I'm talking about knowing that you are paying for a standard, a certain level that has been obtained.
Its a commercial job leave it that way.
Raise the bar for low time guys and gals, make them have 500 or 1000 hours to instruct - I'm not really fussed about that - but I'm talking about knowing that you are paying for a standard, a certain level that has been obtained.
I think it is part of the polarisation of GA. Along with a Recreational Pilot's Licence and the growth of the AUF with the blurring of VH-AUF registered aircraft eg Jabiru.
Those that want a career will go to one of the few big schools still standing but the system is flexible enough for a farmer to teach his son how to fly the family C152. Not dis similar to driving instruction really.
The PPL guys can instruct their mates but I can see a potential for exploitation.
As I said above read paragraph 1.6 it states that CPL minimum hours and aeronautical knowledge will apply.
Those that want a career will go to one of the few big schools still standing but the system is flexible enough for a farmer to teach his son how to fly the family C152. Not dis similar to driving instruction really.
The PPL guys can instruct their mates but I can see a potential for exploitation.
As I said above read paragraph 1.6 it states that CPL minimum hours and aeronautical knowledge will apply.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will read it when i can - my computer wont let me download the link at the moment - then I will be able to provide more constructive arguments but what I have posted were my feelings on the matter.
Twin
Twin
Grandpa Aerotart
I think the idea of retired pilots who can instruct as per Bboys scenario is a great idea...bring those guys on!!
On the whole I think make the minimum requirement for Instructor Rating 1000 hours... and a pretty comprehensive course/ test procedure.
That way there will be fewer schools producing fewer pilots and better employment prospects for those who do pass through the system. Perhaps just one or two schools in the whole country who are allowed to 'produce instructors' as part of a Uni 'Dip Ed' degree
Half, or a third, of the current number of flying schools and then they can charge reasonable rates to gain a reasonable return on investment and pay the vastly reduced population of Flight Instructors well....thereby making the job more attractive.
Lets face it the vast majority of CPL/Airline aspirants don't make it to first flying job anyway....and a proportion that do shouldn't have.
Anyone who purely wants to fly for fun can do so on a completely different licence...earned in clubs which exist for gliding etc....taught by senior members of the club who may be ATPL holders, or maybe PPL but who do have the required experience to be teaching candidates for that style of licence. Naturally if you hold a 'real' licence you can fly for fun as well...and you could attribute perhaps 30% of your just for fun hours(up to a mximum of 1/2) towards a 'real licence'.
Well it's gotta be an improvement on what happens at the moment
Chuck.
On the whole I think make the minimum requirement for Instructor Rating 1000 hours... and a pretty comprehensive course/ test procedure.
That way there will be fewer schools producing fewer pilots and better employment prospects for those who do pass through the system. Perhaps just one or two schools in the whole country who are allowed to 'produce instructors' as part of a Uni 'Dip Ed' degree
Half, or a third, of the current number of flying schools and then they can charge reasonable rates to gain a reasonable return on investment and pay the vastly reduced population of Flight Instructors well....thereby making the job more attractive.
Lets face it the vast majority of CPL/Airline aspirants don't make it to first flying job anyway....and a proportion that do shouldn't have.
Anyone who purely wants to fly for fun can do so on a completely different licence...earned in clubs which exist for gliding etc....taught by senior members of the club who may be ATPL holders, or maybe PPL but who do have the required experience to be teaching candidates for that style of licence. Naturally if you hold a 'real' licence you can fly for fun as well...and you could attribute perhaps 30% of your just for fun hours(up to a mximum of 1/2) towards a 'real licence'.
Well it's gotta be an improvement on what happens at the moment
Chuck.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Recently my wife expressed an interest in learning to fly so what school/instructor?
a) The one with the instructors with the gold bars (18 yo - 210? hrs), the school has a magnificent brochure, theory for only a few $$$.
b) The nephew of a mate who is desperate for students to add to his 210 hrs (has CPL) school as per a.
c) Ex RAAF CFI (and ex **AF CFI) where a class 1 med is too expensive/difficult, theory - save a lot of time/$ if she has a BAK pass first.
So who would you recommend?
a) The one with the instructors with the gold bars (18 yo - 210? hrs), the school has a magnificent brochure, theory for only a few $$$.
b) The nephew of a mate who is desperate for students to add to his 210 hrs (has CPL) school as per a.
c) Ex RAAF CFI (and ex **AF CFI) where a class 1 med is too expensive/difficult, theory - save a lot of time/$ if she has a BAK pass first.
So who would you recommend?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Three Tors
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's funny, all this coming from an instructor who has no idea about the concept of assymetric lift in SE go arounds for a multi engine a/c.
Look inwards Icurus, you too were saying silly things like that not so long ago.......
As far as I am concerned, the whole process of allowing PPL persons to instruct for hire and/or reward sets a dangerous legal precendent and significantly blurs the line about what is deemed to be a commercial op, and what is private.
So Mr CASA, you actually CAN use your private licence for the purposes of finacial gain?
Don't do it. Instructing is a COMMERCIAL OPERATION and should be treated as such, however the idea of not requiring an AOC (but having to operate to strict guidelines), I feel is a good one.
Have a nice day.
Look inwards Icurus, you too were saying silly things like that not so long ago.......
As far as I am concerned, the whole process of allowing PPL persons to instruct for hire and/or reward sets a dangerous legal precendent and significantly blurs the line about what is deemed to be a commercial op, and what is private.
So Mr CASA, you actually CAN use your private licence for the purposes of finacial gain?
Don't do it. Instructing is a COMMERCIAL OPERATION and should be treated as such, however the idea of not requiring an AOC (but having to operate to strict guidelines), I feel is a good one.
Have a nice day.
Last edited by 429 CJ; 20th May 2002 at 22:47.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well written Chimbu....
I thought I was the only one....... You need a Dip Ed (2 years study minimum) to teach school kids but ****** all to teach people the sciences (physics / aerodynamics, human factors, met, etc ) for a professional career in aviation.
I've seen and experienced the instructors whose knowledge of the CASA theory syllabus stops at regurgitating Trevor Thom page numbers. That old "Why and How?" always had them stumped!
One day (hopefully but not likely it seems) a broom will be put through the system and an instructor rating will be a career for those who genuinly want it. Not those who just want hours at the students' expense for the next progression.
If anything raise the bar, don't lower it!!
I thought I was the only one....... You need a Dip Ed (2 years study minimum) to teach school kids but ****** all to teach people the sciences (physics / aerodynamics, human factors, met, etc ) for a professional career in aviation.
I've seen and experienced the instructors whose knowledge of the CASA theory syllabus stops at regurgitating Trevor Thom page numbers. That old "Why and How?" always had them stumped!
One day (hopefully but not likely it seems) a broom will be put through the system and an instructor rating will be a career for those who genuinly want it. Not those who just want hours at the students' expense for the next progression.
If anything raise the bar, don't lower it!!
Okay 429 CJ I'll bite. I am pretty happy with my understanding of Asymmetric issues in light twins. I have done enough renewals with various ATO's to confirm my knowledge is sound. Without dredging through that thread I seem to recall that the issue was decision height. Anyway I digress...
Once again I say read the proposal. It specifically prohibits paid instructing
You say it
Can you expand on this? What is the danger?
At present glider pilots are taught by other pilots usually for free, driving instruction is available from family members, friends or professional instructors. At the other end of the spectrum Line Check & Training pilots do not always have Instructional skills but have the job by virtue of the much lauded seniority system. Do you have a problem with them Instructing junior pilots?
By the way it is Icarus not Icurus.
As far as I am concerned, the whole process of allowing PPL persons to instruct for hire and/or reward sets a
So Mr CASA, you actually CAN use your private licence for the purposes of finacial gain?
You say it
sets a dangerous legal precendent
At present glider pilots are taught by other pilots usually for free, driving instruction is available from family members, friends or professional instructors. At the other end of the spectrum Line Check & Training pilots do not always have Instructional skills but have the job by virtue of the much lauded seniority system. Do you have a problem with them Instructing junior pilots?
By the way it is Icarus not Icurus.