Instructor Renewals with instrument restriction removed ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instructor Renewals with instrument restriction removed ?
Does anyone know what the rules are for renewing my FI rating and keeping my instrument (IMC) teaching ticket ?
In the past under CAA and 13 month QFI rules (aahh, those were the days!) it was once every other test ...... but now with the 3 year/100 hour rule it would be possible to do a seminar every other renewal and a test every 6 years .....
If I choose to do a test on this renewal (last was a revalidation 3 years ago) do I have to also demonstrate an instrument let down ? Or is it valid indefinitely and not tested ?
Thanks
In the past under CAA and 13 month QFI rules (aahh, those were the days!) it was once every other test ...... but now with the 3 year/100 hour rule it would be possible to do a seminar every other renewal and a test every 6 years .....
If I choose to do a test on this renewal (last was a revalidation 3 years ago) do I have to also demonstrate an instrument let down ? Or is it valid indefinitely and not tested ?
Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you do a test, then you'll normally have to demonstrate a procedure of some kind. My last was a VOR approach. This keeps both the I.R privilege up as well as your 'normal' FI rating. The flight will be a bit longer and you will get a few Q's about instrument flying in the debrief session. Nothing to worry about really.
Yes, I know the rules.
You will find the answers in LASORS Section H 1.14 With which you should be familiar if you are a half-decent FI...
There is no requirement to have conducted any IMC rating training within your rating validity period if you wish to maintain IMC rating instructional privileges, whereas there is such a requirement for having conducted IR training if you wish to maintain IR instructional privileges.
You will find the answers in LASORS Section H 1.14 With which you should be familiar if you are a half-decent FI...
There is no requirement to have conducted any IMC rating training within your rating validity period if you wish to maintain IMC rating instructional privileges, whereas there is such a requirement for having conducted IR training if you wish to maintain IR instructional privileges.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle - Yes, I looked in Lasors H1.14 before starting this thread.
Its ambiguous, it makes no reference to what if any demonstration or patter of IF skills are required during a renewal FI test to be able to keep teaching IMC's - (assuming <10 hours IR training hasn't been achieved).
I can only presume that once the 'no instrument training' restriction has been removed from an FI rating that its no longer tested at renewals ? (Same for Aero/Me tickets ?).
Its ambiguous, it makes no reference to what if any demonstration or patter of IF skills are required during a renewal FI test to be able to keep teaching IMC's - (assuming <10 hours IR training hasn't been achieved).
I can only presume that once the 'no instrument training' restriction has been removed from an FI rating that its no longer tested at renewals ? (Same for Aero/Me tickets ?).
The current flavour of the day for FI renewals is the teaching of visual navigation. Back in the days of the 2-yearly revalidation, I was never asked to do that. Usually it was medium turning and stalling, plus my own PFL, spin and IF approach. But in those days there was no SEP Class Rating 'training flight' requirement whereas nowadays there is.
Thus, as far as I'm aware, your own flying skills and IMC skills are validated in the normal way, whereas the FI revalidation proficiency check every 6 years checks instructional techniques. I'm not a FIE, so can't comment on any specific requirements for IMC instructional checks; however, I don't think that there are any.
Personally I think that the 'alternate' FI revalidation proficiency check was pushed through by the FIE panel with a vested financial interest and should have been circulated to industry at large for comment first. I do support a proficincy check for the first revalidation, but it should have been left at that. There won't be non-career FIs who will do 9 years of instructing and thus need to do a revalidation proficiency check - it'll only affect those with considerable experience. Personally I find the seminars much more useful - and it's much easier to guarantee that they'll actually happen on the day as they're unaffected by weather, ac serviceability, illness etc!
Thus, as far as I'm aware, your own flying skills and IMC skills are validated in the normal way, whereas the FI revalidation proficiency check every 6 years checks instructional techniques. I'm not a FIE, so can't comment on any specific requirements for IMC instructional checks; however, I don't think that there are any.
Personally I think that the 'alternate' FI revalidation proficiency check was pushed through by the FIE panel with a vested financial interest and should have been circulated to industry at large for comment first. I do support a proficincy check for the first revalidation, but it should have been left at that. There won't be non-career FIs who will do 9 years of instructing and thus need to do a revalidation proficiency check - it'll only affect those with considerable experience. Personally I find the seminars much more useful - and it's much easier to guarantee that they'll actually happen on the day as they're unaffected by weather, ac serviceability, illness etc!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle - Thanks.
I've had my FI (old QFI) rating for over 12 years now, so much has changed with the system under JAR is hard to keep track with requirements for renewals/revalidations. I instruct part time for pleasure and to give something back to aviation.
Such things as am I legal to sign someone off for complex types becomes a minefield of trudging through AIC's to find the most up to date answer. The CAA/JAR need to be much more proactive in the way in which they promulgate information to instructors.
Considering they spend a lot of money posting GASIL (excellent publication) it wouldn't take a lot of extra effort to enclose updates to the licencing system with that (instead of condesending letters telling FI's to brief students more, as they did recently).
I have the choice to do either a seminar or test this time, for me its easier to drive 3 miles to my local airfield and fly with the FIE based there in my public cat group aeroplane for £50/hr and pay him £200. Rather than spend 2 days away at a seminar.
The last seminar I attended nearly 3 years ago had a very mixed bag of content although I have heard they have moved on a lot the last few years.
I've had my FI (old QFI) rating for over 12 years now, so much has changed with the system under JAR is hard to keep track with requirements for renewals/revalidations. I instruct part time for pleasure and to give something back to aviation.
Such things as am I legal to sign someone off for complex types becomes a minefield of trudging through AIC's to find the most up to date answer. The CAA/JAR need to be much more proactive in the way in which they promulgate information to instructors.
Considering they spend a lot of money posting GASIL (excellent publication) it wouldn't take a lot of extra effort to enclose updates to the licencing system with that (instead of condesending letters telling FI's to brief students more, as they did recently).
I have the choice to do either a seminar or test this time, for me its easier to drive 3 miles to my local airfield and fly with the FIE based there in my public cat group aeroplane for £50/hr and pay him £200. Rather than spend 2 days away at a seminar.
The last seminar I attended nearly 3 years ago had a very mixed bag of content although I have heard they have moved on a lot the last few years.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Examiners Manual Table 10A lists the requirements for an FI Test. If you hold the applied IF qualification, you are required to cover Section 6 which includes: Basic Instrument Flight; Applied IF, Instrument Approach and Limited Panel and UP Recovery.
________________________________________________
Such things as am I legal to sign someone off for complex types becomes a minefield of trudging through AIC's to find the most up to date answer. The CAA/JAR need to be much more proactive in the way in which they promulgate information to instructors.
________________________________________________
All Instructors were sent two pages of stickers for this purpose in the GASIL sent out in June 2003, together with instructions on how to use them!
And we signed a declaration of knowledge of JAR-FCL didn't we!
________________________________________________
Such things as am I legal to sign someone off for complex types becomes a minefield of trudging through AIC's to find the most up to date answer. The CAA/JAR need to be much more proactive in the way in which they promulgate information to instructors.
________________________________________________
All Instructors were sent two pages of stickers for this purpose in the GASIL sent out in June 2003, together with instructions on how to use them!
And we signed a declaration of knowledge of JAR-FCL didn't we!
And Noggin, aka Strateandlevel, aka Blueline, we all know that that FIE-panel revenue-earner requiring mandatory alternate revalidation FI Proficiency Checks has yet to be incorporated into the FEH. Nor has the format of such revalidation Proficiency Checks......
Last edited by BEagle; 21st Mar 2004 at 22:23.
