PPL-FI Requirements changing with EASA?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here and there
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPL-FI Requirements changing with EASA?
Afternoon chaps,
I'd very much like to do my FI rating so that I could instruct at weekends for the fun of it in addition to my full time ops job, but at the moment I can't see the point in spending 12 months doing my ATPL theory exams considering that I plan to start the CPL ME/IR MCC training in three years time, and thus my exams would have lapsed by then! Now I heard somewhere that the introduiction of EASA will drop the requirement for a PPL wanting to undertake an FI rating to have completed either the CPL or ATPL theoretical knowledge exams. Is this truly the case? If so, when can we expect to see this change implemented? If this does come about I would certainly undertake an FI rating!
Cheers,
Ox
I'd very much like to do my FI rating so that I could instruct at weekends for the fun of it in addition to my full time ops job, but at the moment I can't see the point in spending 12 months doing my ATPL theory exams considering that I plan to start the CPL ME/IR MCC training in three years time, and thus my exams would have lapsed by then! Now I heard somewhere that the introduiction of EASA will drop the requirement for a PPL wanting to undertake an FI rating to have completed either the CPL or ATPL theoretical knowledge exams. Is this truly the case? If so, when can we expect to see this change implemented? If this does come about I would certainly undertake an FI rating!
Cheers,
Ox
1-2 years, perhaps.
As I understand it, to instruct at PPL level you will no longer be required to have passed the CPL or ATPL exams, you will not be required to hold a Class 1 medical - and EASA intends to file a variance from ICAO in allowing PPL/FIs to instruct for remuneration.
However, there will still be experience requirements to meet and the FIC to pass - no chnages in instructional standards will be accepted.
This should allow more experienced PPL holders to become part-time FIs and reduce the industry's dependence on pre-airline hours builders.
As I understand it, to instruct at PPL level you will no longer be required to have passed the CPL or ATPL exams, you will not be required to hold a Class 1 medical - and EASA intends to file a variance from ICAO in allowing PPL/FIs to instruct for remuneration.
However, there will still be experience requirements to meet and the FIC to pass - no chnages in instructional standards will be accepted.
This should allow more experienced PPL holders to become part-time FIs and reduce the industry's dependence on pre-airline hours builders.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Near Penrith
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and in the process, dropping salaries which FI's can expect, as every T,D and H will go and do an FI rating. Maybe?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle,
I may be wrong but I recall reading that the EASA proposal was to permit "PPL FI" instructors to instruct to LAPL (or whatever the licence will be called) level only and that instructors teaching for the "EASA PPL" (again, whatever it will be called!) would still require CPL theory.
Have the minutes of the last FCL1 sub-committee meeting been published anywhere yet?
2close
I may be wrong but I recall reading that the EASA proposal was to permit "PPL FI" instructors to instruct to LAPL (or whatever the licence will be called) level only and that instructors teaching for the "EASA PPL" (again, whatever it will be called!) would still require CPL theory.
Have the minutes of the last FCL1 sub-committee meeting been published anywhere yet?
2close
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I'd certainly instruct if I could but at 57 years old there's no way I can justify the enormous expenditure in both time and effort to do the CPL exams.
I've just started a career as FI. I know one school where the CFI and deputy CFI are both well over 65 and still going strong.
You're right, it is a big effort, then you have to do the FI course which I found to be the hardest flying I've ever done, but I'm glad I made it.
TheOddOne
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London / Florence
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd certainly instruct if I could but at 57 years old there's no way I can justify the enormous expenditure in both time and effort to do the CPL exams.
Just finished my CPL / FIC and turned 59! Go for it, you will find it fun/challenging/rewarding
Touchngo
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Near Penrith
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest, it's the hassle factor that puts me off 
. The nearest schools that do the CPL are nowhere near here and Gatwick is almost 400 miles away. By the time you've added in overnight accommodation you've spent several hundred quid more for each trip down there. It's just 
bonkers having to do so much travelling to take a bunch of exams that, for the most part have no relevance to the job at hand. The cost is outrageous too.
The longer people put up with this ridiculous situation, the longer it will be before the much needed changes are implemented.
. The nearest schools that do the CPL are nowhere near here and Gatwick is almost 400 miles away. By the time you've added in overnight accommodation you've spent several hundred quid more for each trip down there. It's just bonkers having to do so much travelling to take a bunch of exams that, for the most part have no relevance to the job at hand. The cost is outrageous too. The longer people put up with this ridiculous situation, the longer it will be before the much needed changes are implemented.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who has had to jump through all the hoops to work as an instructor under the current system and has paid vast sums of money to various flight training institutions to achieve this, I have a very negative view of allowing PPL's to instruct for renumeration. The only reason that the GA industry are now bleeting is that they can no longer have a ready supply of eager wannabe airline pilots willing to work for peanuts just to get that first interview. As we all know 700 hours in a Cessna no longer does it for the airlines. They would rather take someone who has paid for a type rating. The problem for the local flying club (and the CFI) who may post here, is that they don't have much to offer someone who wants to be an airline pilot anymore. i.e. who wants to pay £6000 to earn £12000 a year? They will have even less to offer when the new multicrew licence comes in. I've got a good idea, let's let Jim who is a PPL at the club with lots of money pay us £6000 to do the course then we can pay him peanuts, as he is rich already so doesn't need the money.
I don't recall any of my training institutions telling me what a tragedy it was that I had to pay them to obtain a CPL in order to work as a flying instructor. Strangely their view seems to have changed now.
As for those who say it is too expensive and too much hastle to obtain a CPL this doesn't ring true either. How do you get to be an experienced PPL without money? If you can't put up with the hastle of studying the subject you wish to teach should you really be doing it?
BEagle, how many hours and how many hours of doing what, as a PPL do you think would be sufficient to start an FI(R) course?
If anyone thinks there will be a quality filter, where those who fall short of the standard required will be refused the ticket, I suggest this is wishful thinking. As we all know, if you are FI trained by Bloggs (£6000) you will be sent to Bloggs 2 for your test (£200 ish). Bloggs 2 will also send his students to Bloggs 1 to be tested. Gentleman's agreement you know! How many people reading this know of someone who failed their instructor course or test? I don't.
Sorry, but I feel there has been a slant on this forum which suggests that the whole of the GA world think that it is a good idea for PPL's to be able to instruct for money. In case you didn't realise, I don't.
I don't recall any of my training institutions telling me what a tragedy it was that I had to pay them to obtain a CPL in order to work as a flying instructor. Strangely their view seems to have changed now.
As for those who say it is too expensive and too much hastle to obtain a CPL this doesn't ring true either. How do you get to be an experienced PPL without money? If you can't put up with the hastle of studying the subject you wish to teach should you really be doing it?
BEagle, how many hours and how many hours of doing what, as a PPL do you think would be sufficient to start an FI(R) course?
If anyone thinks there will be a quality filter, where those who fall short of the standard required will be refused the ticket, I suggest this is wishful thinking. As we all know, if you are FI trained by Bloggs (£6000) you will be sent to Bloggs 2 for your test (£200 ish). Bloggs 2 will also send his students to Bloggs 1 to be tested. Gentleman's agreement you know! How many people reading this know of someone who failed their instructor course or test? I don't.
Sorry, but I feel there has been a slant on this forum which suggests that the whole of the GA world think that it is a good idea for PPL's to be able to instruct for money. In case you didn't realise, I don't.
Pringle1, as you are a professional pilot, you will doubtless know the answer - or be able to find it in LASORS.....
In case you can't:
Have at least a CPL(A) or completed at least 200
hours of flight time of which 150 hours as
Pilot-in-Command if holding a PPL(A).
i. Completed 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.
ii. Completed 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.
iii. Completed 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.
iv. 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.
PPL/FIs were quite happily providing remunerated flight instruction at PPL level years ago. The industry valued their experience.
However, under the new proposals, there is nothing to prevent people-tube wannabees from hours building as FIs - the difference being that schools will probably have a wider choice of applicants to choose between.
In case you can't:
Have at least a CPL(A) or completed at least 200
hours of flight time of which 150 hours as
Pilot-in-Command if holding a PPL(A).
i. Completed 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.
ii. Completed 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.
iii. Completed 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.
iv. 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.
PPL/FIs were quite happily providing remunerated flight instruction at PPL level years ago. The industry valued their experience.
However, under the new proposals, there is nothing to prevent people-tube wannabees from hours building as FIs - the difference being that schools will probably have a wider choice of applicants to choose between.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Near Penrith
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pringle 1
I'll answer that question directly. I have around 300 hours P1, gained over four years, all in the sort of aircraft that people do ab initio training in. I feel that I have enough experience to have a crack at the pre-entry flight test for the FI course. A year ago I would not have felt ready.
I understand your point of view, essentially it is "I had to do it so everyone else should have to as well". I cannot agree with it.
BEagle, how many hours and how many hours of doing what, as a PPL do you think would be sufficient to start an FI(R) course?
I understand your point of view, essentially it is "I had to do it so everyone else should have to as well". I cannot agree with it.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Pringle 1,
I, too, jumped through all the present hoops to become a FI. However, I can't see an objection to changing the rules to allow suitable PPLs to instruct for a Private Pilot's Licence of whatever flavour or hue (EASA PPL, LAPL, NPPL or whatever). It's FAR more important, in my view, that FIs should be properly trained and tested to ensure they can instruct effectively than whether or not they've attained a certain academic standard at a higher level. This latter probably matters if you're doing the ab initio work on an integrated course, but then if you're doing that the school are going to need you to have a CPL, ME-IR etc so you can instruct to that level, too.
In the short-term at least, I can't see an influx of PPL-only-holding instructors having any effect on the FI market or more importantly on wages, the numbers entering the industry are going to be pretty small.
TheOddOne
I, too, jumped through all the present hoops to become a FI. However, I can't see an objection to changing the rules to allow suitable PPLs to instruct for a Private Pilot's Licence of whatever flavour or hue (EASA PPL, LAPL, NPPL or whatever). It's FAR more important, in my view, that FIs should be properly trained and tested to ensure they can instruct effectively than whether or not they've attained a certain academic standard at a higher level. This latter probably matters if you're doing the ab initio work on an integrated course, but then if you're doing that the school are going to need you to have a CPL, ME-IR etc so you can instruct to that level, too.
In the short-term at least, I can't see an influx of PPL-only-holding instructors having any effect on the FI market or more importantly on wages, the numbers entering the industry are going to be pretty small.
TheOddOne
Having trained a number of FIs who either had 300 hours as a PPL, or had just graduated from an Integrated ATPL course, I'd take the 300 hour PPL any day. Some of the Integrated Course graduates had as little as 50 hours PIC on a single; and appeared to have learned nothing useful from the 700 hours of theoretical training.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I thought, the suggestion is a reduction in the standard required to be able to instruct for money. Yes I know you can become an instructor as a PPL already (hours as Beagle specifies) and I know some PPL's (BCPL's) were rightly given grandfather rights which is of course only fair.
You didn't mention the current requirement to demonstrate knowledge to CPL level even if you are a PPL. Do you think this should be removed? If you do.......the knowledge base level of PPL instructors will reduce.
Yes, I know I am saying, "I had to so so should you." We all tend to look at these things 'selfishly' as demontrated by Westmorland who believes he is ready to start an FI course. He or she may well be of an appropriate standard but how can they demonstrate this. Perhaps a pre entry flight test with the person you are about to pay do the course is not the best way? It's all very subjective.
The current shortage of instructors is what is driving this. As a body of professionals I don't think we are standing up for ourselves. The plumber who fitted my boiler a month ago was able to charge a pretty high price for the job as there is a shortage of plumbers. He didn't get together with his plumber mates and say....lets forget about the Corgi thing and let the builders mate go and quote for jobs. Why not?...... "I had to do it, so so should you. " They are wise enough to realise that standards would drop and ultimately they would all lose money.
Why are existing instructors driving this?
You didn't mention the current requirement to demonstrate knowledge to CPL level even if you are a PPL. Do you think this should be removed? If you do.......the knowledge base level of PPL instructors will reduce.
Yes, I know I am saying, "I had to so so should you." We all tend to look at these things 'selfishly' as demontrated by Westmorland who believes he is ready to start an FI course. He or she may well be of an appropriate standard but how can they demonstrate this. Perhaps a pre entry flight test with the person you are about to pay do the course is not the best way? It's all very subjective.
The current shortage of instructors is what is driving this. As a body of professionals I don't think we are standing up for ourselves. The plumber who fitted my boiler a month ago was able to charge a pretty high price for the job as there is a shortage of plumbers. He didn't get together with his plumber mates and say....lets forget about the Corgi thing and let the builders mate go and quote for jobs. Why not?...... "I had to do it, so so should you. " They are wise enough to realise that standards would drop and ultimately they would all lose money.
Why are existing instructors driving this?
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I find it hard to believe that most integrated school graduates show poor theoretcial knowledge of flying I am definately in the pro-EASA recommendation camp.
A newly qualified CPL holder with around 200 hours is still very inexperienced - they will not have had much P1 experience, especially when making weather calls (which is the primary flight safety decision I find myself making on a daily basis as an instructor) as this decision will have been made by their own instructors during their training. Those with experience know that examining the METARS/TAFS studiously is no comparrison for the kind of met knowledge you gain through flying every day. Also, most CPL holders of recent years have gained their P1 time (and CPL!) in Florida. A totally different environment to the UK!
Therefore, I would like to add one stipulation to the minimum hours requirement in this EASA proposal and that is that all applicants must have completed 200 hours as P1 in the country they wish to instruct in. 150 P1 in the Florida sun means jack sh1t when you fly in the UK and I fear many will start using this route to obtain their PPL FI ticket just as wannabe airline modular students do which is not so much of a problem when the individual wishes to move straight to an airline but when they wish to instruct it adds a whole new worrying dimension. Will schools be that flush with instructors they will be able to turn those less attractive away?
As I see it - Joe Bloggs with zero flying time can sod off to the USA, get his PPL, hours build and then do the FIC (in the USA) and within a coupla months from start to finish be back here in the UK knocking on a flying school's door asking for an FI job. Hmmm.......
VFE.
A newly qualified CPL holder with around 200 hours is still very inexperienced - they will not have had much P1 experience, especially when making weather calls (which is the primary flight safety decision I find myself making on a daily basis as an instructor) as this decision will have been made by their own instructors during their training. Those with experience know that examining the METARS/TAFS studiously is no comparrison for the kind of met knowledge you gain through flying every day. Also, most CPL holders of recent years have gained their P1 time (and CPL!) in Florida. A totally different environment to the UK!
Therefore, I would like to add one stipulation to the minimum hours requirement in this EASA proposal and that is that all applicants must have completed 200 hours as P1 in the country they wish to instruct in. 150 P1 in the Florida sun means jack sh1t when you fly in the UK and I fear many will start using this route to obtain their PPL FI ticket just as wannabe airline modular students do which is not so much of a problem when the individual wishes to move straight to an airline but when they wish to instruct it adds a whole new worrying dimension. Will schools be that flush with instructors they will be able to turn those less attractive away?
As I see it - Joe Bloggs with zero flying time can sod off to the USA, get his PPL, hours build and then do the FIC (in the USA) and within a coupla months from start to finish be back here in the UK knocking on a flying school's door asking for an FI job. Hmmm.......
VFE.
Last edited by VFE; 13th Jan 2008 at 11:03.
Whilst I find it hard to believe that most integrated school graduates show poor theoretcial knowledge of flying
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, the other thing about most new FI's is that the knowledge is recent, by the time a PPL gets "Experienced" or "suitable" its probably 4 or 5 years since they had ground instruction or passed an exam only to a PPL level.
Invariably most/some committed students may be of a technical background pehaps (and only perhaps - b4 I get flamed) an IT or engineering background, it will become the blind leading the blinded.
Some sort of Pre course ground exam needs to be put in place - and it better be bloody difficult, some students crave knowledge and can ask very awkward questions
Invariably most/some committed students may be of a technical background pehaps (and only perhaps - b4 I get flamed) an IT or engineering background, it will become the blind leading the blinded.
Some sort of Pre course ground exam needs to be put in place - and it better be bloody difficult, some students crave knowledge and can ask very awkward questions