EASA planning to relax CPL requirement for instructors
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone have 'chapter and verse' on what the changes actually are and when they will come into effect?
AOPA's April magazine suggests that the requirement for FI's to have passed the CPL theory exams has already been removed.
The report also suggests that a PPL/FI instructing for a LAPL (equivalent to NPPL I think) may be paid but a LAPL/LAFI instructing for a LAPL may not, but doesn't say when this change is to be made.
Also the report is silent about whether a PPL/FI instructing for a PPL may be paid. Previously I have seen views expressed on this forum that this change was also going to be made. Can anyone clarify this please?
By the way please don't anyone misinterpret this post as a 'dig' at AOPA, it most certainly is not. I have the greatest respect for AOPA and their efforts on our behalf on a range of issues. However, the reported situation on PPL/FI is a bit confusing - to me at least - particularly as we seem to have 3 or 4 changes all being worked on at the same time. I'm hoping someone who knows - and can understand EASA and CAA language - will be able to explain it all for me!
AOPA's April magazine suggests that the requirement for FI's to have passed the CPL theory exams has already been removed.
The report also suggests that a PPL/FI instructing for a LAPL (equivalent to NPPL I think) may be paid but a LAPL/LAFI instructing for a LAPL may not, but doesn't say when this change is to be made.
Also the report is silent about whether a PPL/FI instructing for a PPL may be paid. Previously I have seen views expressed on this forum that this change was also going to be made. Can anyone clarify this please?
By the way please don't anyone misinterpret this post as a 'dig' at AOPA, it most certainly is not. I have the greatest respect for AOPA and their efforts on our behalf on a range of issues. However, the reported situation on PPL/FI is a bit confusing - to me at least - particularly as we seem to have 3 or 4 changes all being worked on at the same time. I'm hoping someone who knows - and can understand EASA and CAA language - will be able to explain it all for me!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: ?
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't belive it!!!
Why they don’t make sure that existing instructors are treated as professionals and human beings rather than giving the rating away??The shortage of instructors is caused by the lack of respect toward the job and the inhumane conditions in some clubs and schools!!
I don’t think a PPL holder should teach, especially to modular students that need higher level of instruction even at PPL level.
After PPL+ HOURS BUILDING+CPL+IR MULTI+MCC+ FIC I’m still learning from my mistakes , every day, I wouldn’t let my brother taking lessons from an instructor with just a PPL.I think it is unsafe and unfair toward who can’t afford unpaid or cheap concurrence.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Il Vate,
Sorry old chum but you sound like a wannabe skygod who thinks that PPL drivers are lower than you............
Most of the people who will happily take the course and see it thro are the ones that have no passion to fly a 738 or have flown long enough and have a stable job that they can afford to spend 3 days a week driving a desk to earn excellent money whilst spending 2+ days a week flying for beer money... whats the going rate for FI's? 15 / 20 ph?
PPL FI's will be far more stable for the club environment, they will create relationships with eventual licence holders who will still be there when the stude has 300+ hrs and his own VLJ - standards if anything will get better, incidents should fall and fleet renewals to new aircraft types should flourish...
Im 37 and went solo on my 16th birthday gliding, then 17th for PPL blah, blah, blah, and still flying today and have an excellent industry job. My passion is flying Stearmans and Super Cubs and the instructors that taught me back in the old days were all PPL FI's in the late 80's - I have never forgotten their gentle words and reminders about flying, co-ordination, look-out, and round out....!!!
A very far cry from today's 747 circuit bashing, wannabe 738 driver that only has 300hrs himself teaching someone - where's the logic ever been in that??? ............ Flying is an art that will never be mastered by any one individual, currency and experience play a major part in keeping you safe.
The most critical element of anyones flying career is what they learn from their masters in the first 40hrs, these instructors should be passionate about flying, and be excellent communicators that know how to make a student enjoy the lesson and feel accomplishment at the same time - they should not be "Passing Through" on their way to a shiny LCC......
They should be Ambassadors
Ambassadors can be PPL's, they can have a better understanding and fly better than you.......... Slagging off people who you have no knowledge of is a little short sighted....as if you think about it - it should make the job hunting easier for you......... their wont be so many coming up behind you...
Sorry old chum but you sound like a wannabe skygod who thinks that PPL drivers are lower than you............
Most of the people who will happily take the course and see it thro are the ones that have no passion to fly a 738 or have flown long enough and have a stable job that they can afford to spend 3 days a week driving a desk to earn excellent money whilst spending 2+ days a week flying for beer money... whats the going rate for FI's? 15 / 20 ph?
PPL FI's will be far more stable for the club environment, they will create relationships with eventual licence holders who will still be there when the stude has 300+ hrs and his own VLJ - standards if anything will get better, incidents should fall and fleet renewals to new aircraft types should flourish...
Im 37 and went solo on my 16th birthday gliding, then 17th for PPL blah, blah, blah, and still flying today and have an excellent industry job. My passion is flying Stearmans and Super Cubs and the instructors that taught me back in the old days were all PPL FI's in the late 80's - I have never forgotten their gentle words and reminders about flying, co-ordination, look-out, and round out....!!!
A very far cry from today's 747 circuit bashing, wannabe 738 driver that only has 300hrs himself teaching someone - where's the logic ever been in that??? ............ Flying is an art that will never be mastered by any one individual, currency and experience play a major part in keeping you safe.
The most critical element of anyones flying career is what they learn from their masters in the first 40hrs, these instructors should be passionate about flying, and be excellent communicators that know how to make a student enjoy the lesson and feel accomplishment at the same time - they should not be "Passing Through" on their way to a shiny LCC......
They should be Ambassadors
Ambassadors can be PPL's, they can have a better understanding and fly better than you.......... Slagging off people who you have no knowledge of is a little short sighted....as if you think about it - it should make the job hunting easier for you......... their wont be so many coming up behind you...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear, all that hard work and studying for nothing. You used to have to have 200 hours and a CPL (including all the groundschool) to earn a living, if you can call it that, from instructing. Just as this career/profession or whatever you want to call it, was showing signs of matching pay and conditions with the amount of hard work put in to get the job...guess what .......................a drop in the minimum standard required to become a 'professional' instructor in order to fill vacancies.
If you had a mind that you wanted to be an instructor and had less than 200 hours, why would you do any more than 200 hours before doing the FI course. Yes, there probably is a small base of experienced PPL's our there who have medical /or other reasons why they havn't worked to obtain a CPL, who would make excellent instructors, but they will soon dry up.
It will be interesting to see how the new 200 hour PPL instructors deal with difficult questions from PPL students on the modular route who already have ATPL groundschool in the bag !!!
Pay, working conditions and standards will all fall. I don't think it will stop hours builders either as the PPL instructors will simply build hours before doing the CPL/ATPL course.
So please lets not dream of crusty old PPL's with thousands of hours passing on their wisdom. The clubhouse will still be full of spotty youths looking at their watches and not bothering with the long briefing. The only difference is that they will be doing it on a PPL for half the money (and living at home with mum and dad). Anyone of senior years looking to instuct full time will be priced out of the market.
The future's bright!!!!?
If you had a mind that you wanted to be an instructor and had less than 200 hours, why would you do any more than 200 hours before doing the FI course. Yes, there probably is a small base of experienced PPL's our there who have medical /or other reasons why they havn't worked to obtain a CPL, who would make excellent instructors, but they will soon dry up.
It will be interesting to see how the new 200 hour PPL instructors deal with difficult questions from PPL students on the modular route who already have ATPL groundschool in the bag !!!
Pay, working conditions and standards will all fall. I don't think it will stop hours builders either as the PPL instructors will simply build hours before doing the CPL/ATPL course.
So please lets not dream of crusty old PPL's with thousands of hours passing on their wisdom. The clubhouse will still be full of spotty youths looking at their watches and not bothering with the long briefing. The only difference is that they will be doing it on a PPL for half the money (and living at home with mum and dad). Anyone of senior years looking to instuct full time will be priced out of the market.
The future's bright!!!!?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: ?
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny world!
Hi jetscream 32
I apologize if some of the contents of my post weren’t clear; as you may have spotted English is not my first language.
First of all Skygod doesn’t make mistakes!!As I said I make them every day and so new PPL instructors will. The list of my “achievements “ just reminds me that I still know nothing, and so, how much did I know when I had just a PPL?….you do the math.
I don’t think that PPL drivers are lower than me, as I don’t feel lower than my CFI, but when I have some doubt I use his experience and I’m happy that in aviation your idea of equality doesn’t work.
Let forget the safety matter for now, obviously it is not that important anyway, I’m a fulltime instructor, I love what I do, even if in the future I may move on I do it with my heart, and I live with what you call “beer money”, my hourly pay doesn’t get to 15 Pounds, why should I be happy with someone richer than me, you said it, cutting down the value of my work?
I’ve seen some miserable instructors out there, some are 747 wannabe, some are part timer, maybe the problem are miserable people, despite what they do for living, but you will agree with me that in this world you get what you pay for, why the training industry should be an exception? Because, we are the only business where you can find people willing to work for free, in their days off and, surprise, schools waiting for them.
Jetscream what would say if your full time industry was an exception like training?
By the way thanks for your advice about job hunting, do you know what are the common answers to ours applications?
Not enough qualifications and not enough experience!!!!
Funny world!!!
Best regards
I apologize if some of the contents of my post weren’t clear; as you may have spotted English is not my first language.
First of all Skygod doesn’t make mistakes!!As I said I make them every day and so new PPL instructors will. The list of my “achievements “ just reminds me that I still know nothing, and so, how much did I know when I had just a PPL?….you do the math.
I don’t think that PPL drivers are lower than me, as I don’t feel lower than my CFI, but when I have some doubt I use his experience and I’m happy that in aviation your idea of equality doesn’t work.
Let forget the safety matter for now, obviously it is not that important anyway, I’m a fulltime instructor, I love what I do, even if in the future I may move on I do it with my heart, and I live with what you call “beer money”, my hourly pay doesn’t get to 15 Pounds, why should I be happy with someone richer than me, you said it, cutting down the value of my work?
I’ve seen some miserable instructors out there, some are 747 wannabe, some are part timer, maybe the problem are miserable people, despite what they do for living, but you will agree with me that in this world you get what you pay for, why the training industry should be an exception? Because, we are the only business where you can find people willing to work for free, in their days off and, surprise, schools waiting for them.
Jetscream what would say if your full time industry was an exception like training?
By the way thanks for your advice about job hunting, do you know what are the common answers to ours applications?
Not enough qualifications and not enough experience!!!!
Funny world!!!
Best regards
Last edited by IL VATE; 11th Apr 2008 at 17:17.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be interesting to see how the new 200 hour PPL instructors deal with difficult questions from PPL students on the modular route who already have ATPL groundschool in the bag !!!
That's why I see this as a good thing.
I honestly cannot see aspiring airline pilots with 200 hours or so getting their FI rating onto their PPL so they can start instructing for peanuts. To what purpose? At 200 hours their money would be better spent on getting their CPL and IR. Which is what they really want. It would be a pure distraction to get an FI rating. It's still going to be 30 hours flying and a bit of ground school. It's putting the cart before the horse. With 200 hours in your logbook you need to be looking at getting your CPL Multi/IR. MCC etc. So that you in a position to apply to an airline.
corsair, assuming that the PPL+200 is good enough to pass the FI course, he/she can then build hours as a FI and save towards the cost of the CPL/IR later.
And at least have some fun before they start the drudgery of multi-sector slavery for some LoCo.
And at least have some fun before they start the drudgery of multi-sector slavery for some LoCo.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pringle 1
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that a PPL is a pre-requisite to enrolling on an ATPL groundschool course. (I'm on one at the moment, and it certainly was for me).
So, how will the PPL instructors of the future ever be in the position of dealing with a PPL 'student' who already has the ATPL groundschool in the bag??
Please feel free to correct me if I've got this wrong.
ariel
It will be interesting to see how the new 200 hour PPL instructors deal with difficult questions from PPL students on the modular route who already have ATPL groundschool in the bag !!!
So, how will the PPL instructors of the future ever be in the position of dealing with a PPL 'student' who already has the ATPL groundschool in the bag??
Please feel free to correct me if I've got this wrong.
ariel
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your point being??????
If you are teaching a PPL then you teach PPL required knowledge and good airmanship, if "Stude" asks a question that is ATPL knowledge then you refer the question to an ATPL qualified instructor or driver.... plenty of them around normally... so no real dramas
Move along......!!
If you are teaching a PPL then you teach PPL required knowledge and good airmanship, if "Stude" asks a question that is ATPL knowledge then you refer the question to an ATPL qualified instructor or driver.... plenty of them around normally... so no real dramas
Move along......!!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Knowledge
Ariel
Because, quite simply, the PPL/FI will have sufficient knowledge to instruct for the PPL. The PPL/FI will not be required to explain the functions of 'strap down' INS nor the difference between N1 and N2.
The PPL/FI will no doubt have more than sufficient knowledge, to stretch the PPL student who has passed ATPL exams, with regard to the course being undertaken, which is much more to the point.
The ATPL writtens graduate will discover much more once flying than the writtens may previously have suggested. Any such person will do well to mkeep their mouth firmly closed and continue to learn.
Because, quite simply, the PPL/FI will have sufficient knowledge to instruct for the PPL. The PPL/FI will not be required to explain the functions of 'strap down' INS nor the difference between N1 and N2.
The PPL/FI will no doubt have more than sufficient knowledge, to stretch the PPL student who has passed ATPL exams, with regard to the course being undertaken, which is much more to the point.
The ATPL writtens graduate will discover much more once flying than the writtens may previously have suggested. Any such person will do well to mkeep their mouth firmly closed and continue to learn.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Homeguard
I for one would love to see a return to the PPL/FI, but I still don't quite get the following:
Can someone please clarify how a PPL STUDENT has passed ATPL exams during a modular couse? My understanding, as explained in my previous post, is that an individual has to have an issued PPL before they can start on an ATPL groundschool course.
I am aware that integrated will take an individual from zero to frozen ATPL, but surely training at the PPL stage here will be undertaken by the FTO who will also provide the more advanced training afterwards?
So the situation described by Pringle 1, (PPL/FI giving tuition to PPL STUDENT with ATPL groundschool completed), should not arise?
I'm simply trying to clear up my own interpretation of the rules here, not enter into the PPL/FI instructor debate. (BEagle, can you clarify)?
However, now I've mentioned the debate ... I for one am waiting with baited breath for the documentation to be released on this one, (plus the timescale).
If it happens, it will be brilliant news for the GA community. (IMHO).
After all, who needs grid navigation knowledge to instruct to PPL level on a C150?
I for one would love to see a return to the PPL/FI, but I still don't quite get the following:
The PPL/FI will no doubt have more than sufficient knowledge, to stretch the PPL student who has passed ATPL exams, with regard to the course being undertaken, which is much more to the point.
I am aware that integrated will take an individual from zero to frozen ATPL, but surely training at the PPL stage here will be undertaken by the FTO who will also provide the more advanced training afterwards?
So the situation described by Pringle 1, (PPL/FI giving tuition to PPL STUDENT with ATPL groundschool completed), should not arise?
I'm simply trying to clear up my own interpretation of the rules here, not enter into the PPL/FI instructor debate. (BEagle, can you clarify)?
However, now I've mentioned the debate ... I for one am waiting with baited breath for the documentation to be released on this one, (plus the timescale).
If it happens, it will be brilliant news for the GA community. (IMHO).
After all, who needs grid navigation knowledge to instruct to PPL level on a C150?
Last edited by ariel; 11th Apr 2008 at 13:41.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ariel,
you are quite correct. A prerequisite of enrollment to a modular theory atpl course is that the candidate must already be in possession of a valid PPL. Or at the very least - must have passed the ppl skills test and have applied for licence issue.
you are quite correct. A prerequisite of enrollment to a modular theory atpl course is that the candidate must already be in possession of a valid PPL. Or at the very least - must have passed the ppl skills test and have applied for licence issue.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you really sure about the enrollment requirement? Is that a UK special?
As far as I know you can enroll and complete the studies but you cannot take the exams for the CAA. I had a fellow student in my ATPL class who gave up on his PPL but did the ATPL course because it would help his job in the OPS department...
Enrolling is one thing. Taking the exams for the issuance of a license is something else.
Oh, I forgot to say, the PPL must be valid when you take the CAA tests.
As far as I know you can enroll and complete the studies but you cannot take the exams for the CAA. I had a fellow student in my ATPL class who gave up on his PPL but did the ATPL course because it would help his job in the OPS department...
Enrolling is one thing. Taking the exams for the issuance of a license is something else.
Oh, I forgot to say, the PPL must be valid when you take the CAA tests.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What first?
Whether or not you need a PPL as a minimum to sit the ATPL exams is not the point. There will be many instances when someone who has ATPL studies or even passes, wishes to do a PPL. An ATPL(H) to PPL fixed wing conversion could be one.
The CAA do require a PPL to be held before sitting ATPL exams but the rule is unlikely to stand up to a legal challenge should someone be bothered.
Will EASA require the same rule is another matter.
The CAA do require a PPL to be held before sitting ATPL exams but the rule is unlikely to stand up to a legal challenge should someone be bothered.
Will EASA require the same rule is another matter.
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
I do love it when these smart arses start mentioning N1 compessors and the number of fire extinguishers on a B747 by way of highlighting their perception on the irrelevance of a FATPL in teaching the PPL but what they fail to realise is the course also covers light aircraft, VFR ops, principles of flight and tonnes of other relevant topics and MORE before the FATPL student arrives at the hopelessly unrelated stuff so let's just think about that for a moment before we start poo poo'ing the FATPL holder eh?
VFE.
VFE.
VFE
That is very true, but I could also say that having held an unfrozen ATPL for 13 years and an instructor rating for 20 something I can't remember when I last had to teach an ab-initio PPL student anything theoretical that I didn't know at the end of my initial instructor course or picked up along the way from reading "flight without formula" and many years ago completing a PPL IR.
The argument about the fATPL against the "experienced" PPL is that many fATPL holders (not all) espcially those coming from an integrated course may have little knowledge of the type of flying most PPL holders undertake in a flying club as opposed to a commercial flying school. They may have excellent handling skills themselves, but do they know how to best clean dried cow sh*t off a fabric aeroplane or get a dodgy hangar door back on its runners (ok I know those are extreme examples but you hopefully get my drift).
Up until now there has always been a requirement for an instructor to hold a licence and rating at least equal to that being taught, so it is unlikely that instructors with PPLs will be teaching modular or integrated courses, so there will always be a need for career CPL instructors. As has been mentioned the biggest threat may well be the MPL as the majority of instructors for that licence will presumably have to meet the 1500 hrs multicrew requirement for TRI/SFI.
That is very true, but I could also say that having held an unfrozen ATPL for 13 years and an instructor rating for 20 something I can't remember when I last had to teach an ab-initio PPL student anything theoretical that I didn't know at the end of my initial instructor course or picked up along the way from reading "flight without formula" and many years ago completing a PPL IR.
The argument about the fATPL against the "experienced" PPL is that many fATPL holders (not all) espcially those coming from an integrated course may have little knowledge of the type of flying most PPL holders undertake in a flying club as opposed to a commercial flying school. They may have excellent handling skills themselves, but do they know how to best clean dried cow sh*t off a fabric aeroplane or get a dodgy hangar door back on its runners (ok I know those are extreme examples but you hopefully get my drift).
Up until now there has always been a requirement for an instructor to hold a licence and rating at least equal to that being taught, so it is unlikely that instructors with PPLs will be teaching modular or integrated courses, so there will always be a need for career CPL instructors. As has been mentioned the biggest threat may well be the MPL as the majority of instructors for that licence will presumably have to meet the 1500 hrs multicrew requirement for TRI/SFI.