NPPL FI
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'I' in the sky,
I’d just like to make a few more points to try and convince you that an NPPL FI rating would not be all bad.
Rather than a lowering of understanding we could call it a re-focusing of understanding. FI’s that teach the PPL should know the syllabus inside out. If this means an extended FIC then so be it, but the ATPL is not the answer.
I like your idea about independent examiners and I would have no issue with this. I would also support ongoing regular assessment of instructors provided that this was done within a body such as the PFA so that costs could be kept down.
I assume from your earlier comments that you gained your ratings under the old UK system (which you support). Take it as a given that we can’t go back to that system. What should we do now? Accept the current JAR debacle or push for a better system. Or maybe you just don’t care because you’re all right jack!
I’d just like to make a few more points to try and convince you that an NPPL FI rating would not be all bad.
Rather than a lowering of understanding we could call it a re-focusing of understanding. FI’s that teach the PPL should know the syllabus inside out. If this means an extended FIC then so be it, but the ATPL is not the answer.
I like your idea about independent examiners and I would have no issue with this. I would also support ongoing regular assessment of instructors provided that this was done within a body such as the PFA so that costs could be kept down.
I assume from your earlier comments that you gained your ratings under the old UK system (which you support). Take it as a given that we can’t go back to that system. What should we do now? Accept the current JAR debacle or push for a better system. Or maybe you just don’t care because you’re all right jack!
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I'd only done the PPL exams I knew that you could get carb icing at 14 degrees C, and also that flaps create both lift and drag. I didn't need an instructor to tell me; a basic book would do. Now I've done the CPL exams I've supposedly learned a lot of stuff about machmeters and jet streams, but since it'll be no use whatsoever to me as a heli instructor on R22s I'm proposing to forget it as quickly as possible.
"I", the instructor you give as an example is an idiot with a bad memory, but that could have happened just as much with a CPL qualified instructor who's forgotten all the stuff he learned on a crammer and churned out two days later for the exams. I've known a lot of instructors, both good and bad, and their qualifications seem to make very little difference either way; I can give you examples of both.
Don't forget, the requirement for instructors to have CPLs is VERY recent - were all PPLs before a couple of years ago badly taught?
"I", the instructor you give as an example is an idiot with a bad memory, but that could have happened just as much with a CPL qualified instructor who's forgotten all the stuff he learned on a crammer and churned out two days later for the exams. I've known a lot of instructors, both good and bad, and their qualifications seem to make very little difference either way; I can give you examples of both.
Don't forget, the requirement for instructors to have CPLs is VERY recent - were all PPLs before a couple of years ago badly taught?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who the hell is DAH DAH??
And what planet is he/she from??
He/She wouldn't have a background in any of the following areas by any chance
Microlights,PFA??
These are the only guys that I have come across that so relentlessly persue the shortcut, easy option to a real licence.
And what planet is he/she from??
He/She wouldn't have a background in any of the following areas by any chance
Microlights,PFA??
These are the only guys that I have come across that so relentlessly persue the shortcut, easy option to a real licence.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK/Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silverfox.
Possibly a bit harsh considering his response to my last.I can accept the principle of an extended FIC course to compensate for less written exams. Having said that, even the current FIC instructors show a lot of variation in what they emphasise. There has to be a common core somewhere. Would people who did have all the writtens get a reduction in the extended course ?
However I will still take issue with the use of Private Cat aircraft. An aircraft used to teach members of the public for an NPPL is like it or not still being used to transport members of the public.
Unliceneced strips ? I can see no reason to differentiate between an aircraft carrying an NPPL student and the same plane carrying a PPL student.
Possibly a bit harsh considering his response to my last.I can accept the principle of an extended FIC course to compensate for less written exams. Having said that, even the current FIC instructors show a lot of variation in what they emphasise. There has to be a common core somewhere. Would people who did have all the writtens get a reduction in the extended course ?
However I will still take issue with the use of Private Cat aircraft. An aircraft used to teach members of the public for an NPPL is like it or not still being used to transport members of the public.
Unliceneced strips ? I can see no reason to differentiate between an aircraft carrying an NPPL student and the same plane carrying a PPL student.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like this forum, you get to converse with such charming individuals! I think I’ll join the pro hunting lobby. Tally Ho! 
Permit A/C and unlicensed strips are way behind FI training on the priority list – but they are worthy of discussion.
Permit A/C and unlicensed strips are way behind FI training on the priority list – but they are worthy of discussion.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Essex England
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dah Dah You are completely right about this.
I have just got a class1 medical and have started contacting schools about the ATPL theory just to become an instructor. Having looked at the books the content is largely irrelevant to being an instructor.
Why did we gwt rid of the BCPL when we still have the IMC rating. This is not recognised in Europe-so what? I do not want to instruct in Europe!
People are I believe doing the full ATPL distance learning because there is nothing else available.
I understand there is a possobility that AFT may start a course soon.
Has anyone done the written papers and then the instructors course and not the CPL to instruct unpaid?
The current system is not logical and makes no sense at all.
I have not heard of microlight instructors killing themselves or students for want of 42 weeks worth of study! Many of the current aircraft in this category out perform 150/152s...............
I have just got a class1 medical and have started contacting schools about the ATPL theory just to become an instructor. Having looked at the books the content is largely irrelevant to being an instructor.
Why did we gwt rid of the BCPL when we still have the IMC rating. This is not recognised in Europe-so what? I do not want to instruct in Europe!
People are I believe doing the full ATPL distance learning because there is nothing else available.
I understand there is a possobility that AFT may start a course soon.
Has anyone done the written papers and then the instructors course and not the CPL to instruct unpaid?
The current system is not logical and makes no sense at all.
I have not heard of microlight instructors killing themselves or students for want of 42 weeks worth of study! Many of the current aircraft in this category out perform 150/152s...............
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mickypitch,
I have spoken to AFT and was told that they are considering a distance learning CPL. However; I quote them, “It will not be much less work than the ATPL. You might as well do the ATPL.” Noggin’s comments in an earlier reply question this – but as students, we can only be guided by the training organisations.
There is little or no incentive for trainers to provide a CPL – they obviously make better revenues form the longer ATPL course. A CPL course would also increase the admin overheads as they would have to maintain 2 courses rather than 1. Equally, the flying schools have little incentive to change as long as they continue to attract FI students with the necessary ATPL theoretical knowledge (which they will so long as potential airline pilots use this route to build hours).
Add to the above the fact that an NPPL FIC is probably years away and it all starts to look a bit gloomy.
I have spoken to AFT and was told that they are considering a distance learning CPL. However; I quote them, “It will not be much less work than the ATPL. You might as well do the ATPL.” Noggin’s comments in an earlier reply question this – but as students, we can only be guided by the training organisations.
There is little or no incentive for trainers to provide a CPL – they obviously make better revenues form the longer ATPL course. A CPL course would also increase the admin overheads as they would have to maintain 2 courses rather than 1. Equally, the flying schools have little incentive to change as long as they continue to attract FI students with the necessary ATPL theoretical knowledge (which they will so long as potential airline pilots use this route to build hours).
Add to the above the fact that an NPPL FIC is probably years away and it all starts to look a bit gloomy.
I hate to damage your illusions SilverFox, but microlights and gliders, who don't require CPLs for instructors, have only a very slightly poorer accident record than regulated FW GA, and an identical accident record to CofA RW GA. I've got both microlight and light aircraft PPLs and will say with absolute conviction that the average standard of instruction in a microlight school is much higher than in a light aircraft school.
So, I think that high hour PPLs becoming NPPL instructors will raise standards, not lower them. Who has most to offer, a 50 year old with 2000hrs of PPL flying in 50 types, or a 25 year old with 1000hrs, a frozen ATPL and perhaps a dozen types?
On another subject, there are many people who would benefit from a reasonably cheap CPL. For example, a LAME who wants to be able to do post maintenance air tests, an employee of a manufacturer who wants to be able to do delivery and customer demonstration flights, a flight test engineer who wants to become a test pilot. All of these would benefit from the easier CPL and would have no use at-all for an ATPL. So, why should they jump through so many unnecessary hoops? And why can't the training industry see the market?
G
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]
So, I think that high hour PPLs becoming NPPL instructors will raise standards, not lower them. Who has most to offer, a 50 year old with 2000hrs of PPL flying in 50 types, or a 25 year old with 1000hrs, a frozen ATPL and perhaps a dozen types?
On another subject, there are many people who would benefit from a reasonably cheap CPL. For example, a LAME who wants to be able to do post maintenance air tests, an employee of a manufacturer who wants to be able to do delivery and customer demonstration flights, a flight test engineer who wants to become a test pilot. All of these would benefit from the easier CPL and would have no use at-all for an ATPL. So, why should they jump through so many unnecessary hoops? And why can't the training industry see the market?
G
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Genghis the Engineer ]
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hate to damage your illusions Genghis the Engineer, but some of the best instructors that I have come accross (at PPL level) have been CPL with ATPL level knowledge and only a few hundred hours!!! and only 4 or 5 types to their name!!!
By the way, I operate from an aerodrome that also has microlight operations, so I experience on a daily basis the level of their flying & airmanship-I won't expand on this point but the aerodrome records of incidents speak volumes!!!
By the way, I operate from an aerodrome that also has microlight operations, so I experience on a daily basis the level of their flying & airmanship-I won't expand on this point but the aerodrome records of incidents speak volumes!!!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, one way of looking at things would be to accept that those who instruct for a living, should be professionals, and should hold a professional, commercial, qualification in order to do that, …it’s called a CPL!!!
We are not talking about teaching people to drive here, and even that requires a commercial licence and course of training prior to starting the instructors course!!.
The restrictions applied to microlites etc put them well out-with the realms of what we are talking about here, so lets just leave that particular sport out of the equation ( I do accept that it has some very competent and enthusiastic instructors..in its field)
Mickypitch, to say that you have ‘looked’ at the ATPL course notes (there are around 17 manuals!!), and find ‘little of relevance’ for instructors is frightening…. in the extreme!!!
If you guys think that you know enough to teach after reading your Trevor Thom books and passing your PPL ground exams , then heaven help us all! The level of prior knowledge required to get through your FIC is a lot greater than you seem to think,in fact it is staggering,... and so it should be.
Now even under the old CAA system there was not a vast difference between CPL and ATPL ground exams so don’t think you are going to be in for an easy ride when someone finally does offer a long overdue CPL theory course, (and yes, there should be one, for the reasons outlined by Genghis)
Before you make any more assumptions about the level of knowledge required to teach effectively, sit down with an instructor and find out just how much he/she knows, and how often that knowledge is used.
We are not talking about teaching people to drive here, and even that requires a commercial licence and course of training prior to starting the instructors course!!.
The restrictions applied to microlites etc put them well out-with the realms of what we are talking about here, so lets just leave that particular sport out of the equation ( I do accept that it has some very competent and enthusiastic instructors..in its field)
Mickypitch, to say that you have ‘looked’ at the ATPL course notes (there are around 17 manuals!!), and find ‘little of relevance’ for instructors is frightening…. in the extreme!!!
If you guys think that you know enough to teach after reading your Trevor Thom books and passing your PPL ground exams , then heaven help us all! The level of prior knowledge required to get through your FIC is a lot greater than you seem to think,in fact it is staggering,... and so it should be.
Now even under the old CAA system there was not a vast difference between CPL and ATPL ground exams so don’t think you are going to be in for an easy ride when someone finally does offer a long overdue CPL theory course, (and yes, there should be one, for the reasons outlined by Genghis)
Before you make any more assumptions about the level of knowledge required to teach effectively, sit down with an instructor and find out just how much he/she knows, and how often that knowledge is used.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ClearProp,
I object to your suggestion that those of us that support a national FIC are looking for an easy ride. What we would like is course of training that is relevant to the job in hand.
Have you completed the JAR ATPL exams? If so, what percentage is actually relevant to teaching at PPL level? The JAA say only 30%. If you think it’s higher, can you justify your reasoning?
As a supporter of the current system, you might like to explain the logic behind CPL Flight Training in relation to remuneration. Surely an FI is either competent to instruct or he is not, and if he is, why shouldn’t he be rewarded?
Dah Dah
I object to your suggestion that those of us that support a national FIC are looking for an easy ride. What we would like is course of training that is relevant to the job in hand.
Have you completed the JAR ATPL exams? If so, what percentage is actually relevant to teaching at PPL level? The JAA say only 30%. If you think it’s higher, can you justify your reasoning?
As a supporter of the current system, you might like to explain the logic behind CPL Flight Training in relation to remuneration. Surely an FI is either competent to instruct or he is not, and if he is, why shouldn’t he be rewarded?
Dah Dah
I'm sure they speak highly of you too Silverfox. But nobody has a monopoly in poor airmanship, and with the costs of microlight and glider flying, I think you'll find they are flying about 4 times the hours of an SEP license holder on average, so may be more current and experienced than a lot of your club light aircraft pilots.
In the meantime, perhaps we should remember that ATPL knowledge is required of people driving airliners around the globe. What we are discussing here is instructors to train PPLs, who will fly simple aircraft, within UK airspace, in day VMC. There is much knowledge out there, it doesn't necessarily mean that everybody needs it.
G
In the meantime, perhaps we should remember that ATPL knowledge is required of people driving airliners around the globe. What we are discussing here is instructors to train PPLs, who will fly simple aircraft, within UK airspace, in day VMC. There is much knowledge out there, it doesn't necessarily mean that everybody needs it.
G
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Essex England
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clear Prop,
without wanting to get in to an argument about this but....
Having looked at the ATPL syllabus and manuals a lot of what I saw did not appear relevant to flying light aircraft or teaching people to do so. I have a PPL and IMC and fly regularly around the country, now if I did not recognise some of the content in the course and have not required that knowledge to fly safely to date, then why on earth should I need it to teach people to fly in a light aircraft!
Not everyone wants to be an airline pilot or learns to fly to become one.
If the BCPL knowledge was sufficient two years ago why in your opinion is it not now?
It seems to me that as DAH DAH has rightly (in my opinion) pointed out that the whole thing is well overdue a rethink. People posting on this site are airing their own veiws but what great experience do you have to consider them not worthy of discussion or dangerous.......?
Cheers
without wanting to get in to an argument about this but....
Having looked at the ATPL syllabus and manuals a lot of what I saw did not appear relevant to flying light aircraft or teaching people to do so. I have a PPL and IMC and fly regularly around the country, now if I did not recognise some of the content in the course and have not required that knowledge to fly safely to date, then why on earth should I need it to teach people to fly in a light aircraft!
Not everyone wants to be an airline pilot or learns to fly to become one.
If the BCPL knowledge was sufficient two years ago why in your opinion is it not now?
It seems to me that as DAH DAH has rightly (in my opinion) pointed out that the whole thing is well overdue a rethink. People posting on this site are airing their own veiws but what great experience do you have to consider them not worthy of discussion or dangerous.......?
Cheers
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: England
Age: 40
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this proposition for a FI teaching only PPLs that will get paid WITHOUT holding a CPL?
I would be in favour of that.
Currently if a PPL with an FI rating but no CPL teachs someone I know they cant be paid but can they make the student pay for all of the flight or do they have to pay for some of it?
I would be in favour of that.
Currently if a PPL with an FI rating but no CPL teachs someone I know they cant be paid but can they make the student pay for all of the flight or do they have to pay for some of it?
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CPL(H) exams, which I passed earlier this year, are almost identical to those for fixed wing. A large proportion of what you learn is completely irrelevant to someone teaching people to fly light aircraft, fixed wing or rotary. The course is very much based on flying for the airlines. Now, these were the old CAA exams, but JAR hasn't changed them that much. If anyone wants to know about this in more detail, with examples, unfortunately I still remember most of it and can bore you for hours if you really want me to! But the fact that I can do that will not in any way make me a better instructor.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, I think that you are missing the point here!
In order to teach anything (successfully) it is necessary for the teacher/instructor/lecturer to have a substantially higher level of subject knowledge that the level at which he/she is teaching.
I'm sure that you high hour PPL wanabee instructors have an enourmous amount of useful hints & tips that you could pass on to your students based purely on your own experiences over the years.
However, instruct for long enough and your students will inevitably ask you questions which are not directly covered in the PPL syllabus, but are none the less perfectly reasonable questions for the astute student to ask. There are now three options open to you.
1) Answer the question and offer an explanation as to why that this particular example will not directly effect his PPL VFR flying.
2) Tell him that you don't know the answer because you were not trained to that level of theory.
3) Lie!
Guess which is the prefered option?
I'm sure that if you polled a cross section of PPL sdudents and asked them the following:
"Given the choice, would you prefer your instructor to have been trained to a PPL level of knowledge or a Commercial level of knowledge"
the majority would opt for the latter.
In fact, what I shall do this week is carry out just such a survey and then report back to you ( You have my word that this will be a completely unbiased survey and I will not try to influence the students in any way ).
In order to teach anything (successfully) it is necessary for the teacher/instructor/lecturer to have a substantially higher level of subject knowledge that the level at which he/she is teaching.
I'm sure that you high hour PPL wanabee instructors have an enourmous amount of useful hints & tips that you could pass on to your students based purely on your own experiences over the years.
However, instruct for long enough and your students will inevitably ask you questions which are not directly covered in the PPL syllabus, but are none the less perfectly reasonable questions for the astute student to ask. There are now three options open to you.
1) Answer the question and offer an explanation as to why that this particular example will not directly effect his PPL VFR flying.
2) Tell him that you don't know the answer because you were not trained to that level of theory.
3) Lie!
Guess which is the prefered option?
I'm sure that if you polled a cross section of PPL sdudents and asked them the following:
"Given the choice, would you prefer your instructor to have been trained to a PPL level of knowledge or a Commercial level of knowledge"
the majority would opt for the latter.
In fact, what I shall do this week is carry out just such a survey and then report back to you ( You have my word that this will be a completely unbiased survey and I will not try to influence the students in any way ).
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sentiments entirely Silver.
As in any teaching situation it is the ability to understand the big picture which lets you teach the smaller one effectively.
Those who currently teach the FIC have a hard enough time teaching the syllabus to those with knowledge at CPL/ATPL level. Just how long will it take to train would be instructors with only PPL knowledge?
To look back at Trevor Thom books having done ATPL, makes them look like ‘my first book on planes’!! That is how it should be. Full understanding makes teaching easier and more effective. Yes there is a load of stuff you will never use, but you can say that of any subject. How often do you use most of your university syllabus??.. but you still needed to do it to graduate.
I can guarantee that a good instructor with CPL knowledge will give better ground instruction than one without, simply because he can.
Dah Dah, Sorry if you thought that I suggested that you and the National FI activists were looking for an easy ride.
If you read my post you will see that I was pointing out that the difference between ATPL and CPL theory exams were not that great under CAA, nor would the new ones be under JAR. Therefore anyone thinking that CPL would be an easier ride was mistaken. However there is a need for CPL ground school courses and the JAA/CAA should get their finger out fast!
Now, this NPPL thing. What is the point? …To save money??
As I understand things, there will be a reduction in training hours (5 is it?), for a restricted licence. I suspect that when Mr Joe public realises that he is not going to save vast amounts of money he will opt for a full PPL. If this is the case, NPPL FI's will find themselves with very few pupils and unable to instruct full PPL.
At any rate what areas of instruction can be safely left out of the NPPL?
Given that the vast majority of PPLs take at least an additional 6 hours to complete with fully qualified instructors, I believe that the new NPPL if it happens will end up costing as much,..for less.
In the mean time this is hurting our industry badly. There is a definite downturn in the uptake of PPL training. How much of this is down to potential students holding back, thinking that they will save a fortune?
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: clear prop!!! ]
As in any teaching situation it is the ability to understand the big picture which lets you teach the smaller one effectively.
Those who currently teach the FIC have a hard enough time teaching the syllabus to those with knowledge at CPL/ATPL level. Just how long will it take to train would be instructors with only PPL knowledge?
To look back at Trevor Thom books having done ATPL, makes them look like ‘my first book on planes’!! That is how it should be. Full understanding makes teaching easier and more effective. Yes there is a load of stuff you will never use, but you can say that of any subject. How often do you use most of your university syllabus??.. but you still needed to do it to graduate.
I can guarantee that a good instructor with CPL knowledge will give better ground instruction than one without, simply because he can.
Dah Dah, Sorry if you thought that I suggested that you and the National FI activists were looking for an easy ride.
If you read my post you will see that I was pointing out that the difference between ATPL and CPL theory exams were not that great under CAA, nor would the new ones be under JAR. Therefore anyone thinking that CPL would be an easier ride was mistaken. However there is a need for CPL ground school courses and the JAA/CAA should get their finger out fast!
Now, this NPPL thing. What is the point? …To save money??
As I understand things, there will be a reduction in training hours (5 is it?), for a restricted licence. I suspect that when Mr Joe public realises that he is not going to save vast amounts of money he will opt for a full PPL. If this is the case, NPPL FI's will find themselves with very few pupils and unable to instruct full PPL.
At any rate what areas of instruction can be safely left out of the NPPL?
Given that the vast majority of PPLs take at least an additional 6 hours to complete with fully qualified instructors, I believe that the new NPPL if it happens will end up costing as much,..for less.
In the mean time this is hurting our industry badly. There is a definite downturn in the uptake of PPL training. How much of this is down to potential students holding back, thinking that they will save a fortune?
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: clear prop!!! ]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To All,
This has proved to be an interesting debate and I think there have been some very strong arguments put forward from both camps. However, I don’t think we will reach a consensus!
Thanks to everyone for their input. If having read the various replies, you still feel that the current system should be changed, then please contact me.
Finally, let’s NOT turn this thread into a general debate about the NPPL.
This has proved to be an interesting debate and I think there have been some very strong arguments put forward from both camps. However, I don’t think we will reach a consensus!
Thanks to everyone for their input. If having read the various replies, you still feel that the current system should be changed, then please contact me.
Finally, let’s NOT turn this thread into a general debate about the NPPL.
Genghis' further thoughts...
(1) BREADTH of knowledge is largely irrelevant to a PPL instructor, what is needed is great DEPTH of knowledge about PPL type flying. This is not the same as ATPL theory. One example, many PPLs fly PFA permit aircraft, yet the JAR-PPL syllabus covers none of the air-law pertaining to a permit, and neither does the ATPL.
(2) To somebody with a family and mortgage, but trying to realise a long dream of learning to fly, another 10hrs on a PPL syllabus is a lot. I know, I was there.
(3) If as an Engineer I decided to take leave of my senses and do an Art degree, it would be rightly pointed out that I know very little about art. The solution is a "foundation course", and I can't see any reason why a PPL wanting to become an NPPL instructor couldn't have to do the same - a bridging course prior to the FIC covering the elements of CPL theory that they need. This need not include ME theory, airliner systems, INS and many other things of no relevance to training a PPL.
(4) CAA Rules for PPL training restrict flying to licensed airfields. If somebody is going to then buy a kitfox and fly from a farmstrip, the school should have had the option of teaching the chap from his farmstrip. It would make him a much safer pilot.
G
(1) BREADTH of knowledge is largely irrelevant to a PPL instructor, what is needed is great DEPTH of knowledge about PPL type flying. This is not the same as ATPL theory. One example, many PPLs fly PFA permit aircraft, yet the JAR-PPL syllabus covers none of the air-law pertaining to a permit, and neither does the ATPL.
(2) To somebody with a family and mortgage, but trying to realise a long dream of learning to fly, another 10hrs on a PPL syllabus is a lot. I know, I was there.
(3) If as an Engineer I decided to take leave of my senses and do an Art degree, it would be rightly pointed out that I know very little about art. The solution is a "foundation course", and I can't see any reason why a PPL wanting to become an NPPL instructor couldn't have to do the same - a bridging course prior to the FIC covering the elements of CPL theory that they need. This need not include ME theory, airliner systems, INS and many other things of no relevance to training a PPL.
(4) CAA Rules for PPL training restrict flying to licensed airfields. If somebody is going to then buy a kitfox and fly from a farmstrip, the school should have had the option of teaching the chap from his farmstrip. It would make him a much safer pilot.
G
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with every word of that Genghis, and can't even think of anything else to add.
Congratulations on being one of the few people to leave me speechless!
Congratulations on being one of the few people to leave me speechless!