EASA planning to relax CPL requirement for instructors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Over the hills and far away
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EASA planning to relax CPL requirement for instructors
According to April's FTN print and website
"European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) have given formal support to a regulation that will remove the requirement for pilots to hold a professional licence before becoming a PPL instructor."
Article continues...
"Under the new proposal, which is due to be published on EASA’s website as part of a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) for Flight Crew Licensing (FCL), individuals wishing to become PPL instructors will now only be required to hold a PPL, 200 hours of flying time and to have successfully completed an Instructor Course."
"European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) have given formal support to a regulation that will remove the requirement for pilots to hold a professional licence before becoming a PPL instructor."
Article continues...
"Under the new proposal, which is due to be published on EASA’s website as part of a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) for Flight Crew Licensing (FCL), individuals wishing to become PPL instructors will now only be required to hold a PPL, 200 hours of flying time and to have successfully completed an Instructor Course."
Last edited by wokkaboy; 7th Apr 2008 at 19:16.
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
Great news! Let's just hope this doesn't create an influx of retired rich bastards who will work for nothing tho - let's keep the job a paid one eh lads? For the sake of dignity and club stability please charge a nominal fee for your work.
VFE.
VFE.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, will it see the next level of instructor - to teach CPL IR etc - dry up. Will commercially orientated guys only look at the airlines, and not full time professional instructing?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: AUH
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AVCP,
I had the very same thought when I heard this. It's great news for clubs, but can only make the CPL and ME/IR instructor shortage even worse.
One might assume a good uptake of instructor jobs by PPL holders who had previously been put off from instructing by the requirement to hold CPL exam credits. With fewer openings for the restricted FI to get to 500 hours TT and the restriction lifted, there will be little or no through flow of CPL/IR hour building instructors on their way to airline jobs.
On the other hand, if the MPL takes off, will there be a need for advanced instructors?
waterpau
I had the very same thought when I heard this. It's great news for clubs, but can only make the CPL and ME/IR instructor shortage even worse.
One might assume a good uptake of instructor jobs by PPL holders who had previously been put off from instructing by the requirement to hold CPL exam credits. With fewer openings for the restricted FI to get to 500 hours TT and the restriction lifted, there will be little or no through flow of CPL/IR hour building instructors on their way to airline jobs.
On the other hand, if the MPL takes off, will there be a need for advanced instructors?
waterpau
Nothing in that FTN release indicates that PPL/FIs will be allowed to receive remuneration and there is some difference in understanding of this issue between different members of the EASA FCL001 group.
It would be utterly pointless to make the changes EASA intends unless it includes the right to receive remuneration.
It would be utterly pointless to make the changes EASA intends unless it includes the right to receive remuneration.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paid PPL Instructing.
I thought if you had an instructors rating but no CPL, you could instruct without pay.
The only change suggested is that PPL instructors can be paid if they do not hold a CPL.
So I understand if you want to be an unpaid instructor then this is currently possible without a CPL.
The only change suggested is that PPL instructors can be paid if they do not hold a CPL.
So I understand if you want to be an unpaid instructor then this is currently possible without a CPL.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the other hand, if the MPL takes off, will there be a need for advanced instructors?
It looks as if it could be the end of the commercial flight instructor. As most of the training is sim based and MCC orientated, the minimum instructor requirement will be 1500 hours of multicrew flying.
Professional instructors will either be doing single engine PPL stuff, or Sim based MCC, having had airline experience themselves
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professional Instructors?
OK so who trains PPL IR when the current guys and gals retire? Aerial work will not disappear and a CPL will still need to exist and in which case advanced instruction will still be needed but not so much as now. Is the average 200 hr PPL going to prevent the future's PPL accident rate from increasing? I believe PPL instruction should be given higher priority especially if the modular route remains a reality. What about air taxi on CPL/IR too?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instructors will still need to hold the license and rating for which they instruct, so there will still be some demand for instructors holding those ratings.
But for every 100 pilots graduating with a single pilot CPL/IR today, how many will only ever be doing single pilot work? I guess only a handful. In 10 years time if the MPL takes off, I think the vast majority will have MPL licences.
In that case supply for air taxi / single pilot ops will dry up, costs increase, and eventually it will be cheaper to employ 2 hour-hungry MPL pilots!
Perhaps single pilot operations can be a rating added to your MPL, after sufficient further advanced training. Who knows?
But for every 100 pilots graduating with a single pilot CPL/IR today, how many will only ever be doing single pilot work? I guess only a handful. In 10 years time if the MPL takes off, I think the vast majority will have MPL licences.
In that case supply for air taxi / single pilot ops will dry up, costs increase, and eventually it will be cheaper to employ 2 hour-hungry MPL pilots!
Perhaps single pilot operations can be a rating added to your MPL, after sufficient further advanced training. Who knows?
Well I'm glad I was taught my PPL by an instructor who held a CPL. While it seems to have worked in the past under the BCPL system, I can only see this leading to a reduction in standards.
Why would an aspiring ATPL fork out for an FIC rating now only to be undercut by 'experienced PPLs' willing to work for free? I know many current FIs use it as a steeping stone to 'better things' but the ones I've flown with have all seemed dedicated to their students.
AVCP is spot on - where are the future CPL/IR instructors going to come from? It will be a long time before MPL is the only show in town, if ever.
Why would an aspiring ATPL fork out for an FIC rating now only to be undercut by 'experienced PPLs' willing to work for free? I know many current FIs use it as a steeping stone to 'better things' but the ones I've flown with have all seemed dedicated to their students.
AVCP is spot on - where are the future CPL/IR instructors going to come from? It will be a long time before MPL is the only show in town, if ever.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wonderful decision this. Rather than the industry taking upon itself the opportunity to finally pay decent wages to instructors so they can make a living and a career from it, we have gone down the route of deciding to get people who are not properly qualified to instruct do so for nothing.
As a CFI recently said to me - the problem with PPL's is half can't fly and the other half know f**k all.
As a CFI recently said to me - the problem with PPL's is half can't fly and the other half know f**k all.
Lets take a typical flying school today with 1 CFI + 2 F/T instructors + 4 P/T instructors (say). Student PPLs can reasonably expect to complete their course with 1, maybe 2 professional instructors and a good level of continuity.
If these changes take effect, economics will dictate that the staff becomes 1 CFI + any number of P/T 'experienced PPL' instructors working for nothing. What will happen to the continuity and standard of instruction then?
If Joe Bloggs can afford £6k for a PPL, he can afford £7-8k allowing instructors to be paid a proper wage. If market forces were allowed to raise pay, there wouldn't a shortage of professional instructors.
Let's not forget a PPL is for many the first step on the ladder to a professional career, not a 'sport flying' license. Let's have PPLs teaching the NPPL and nothing higher.
If these changes take effect, economics will dictate that the staff becomes 1 CFI + any number of P/T 'experienced PPL' instructors working for nothing. What will happen to the continuity and standard of instruction then?
If Joe Bloggs can afford £6k for a PPL, he can afford £7-8k allowing instructors to be paid a proper wage. If market forces were allowed to raise pay, there wouldn't a shortage of professional instructors.
Let's not forget a PPL is for many the first step on the ladder to a professional career, not a 'sport flying' license. Let's have PPLs teaching the NPPL and nothing higher.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instructing Standards
The largest number of Instructors who hold a Frozen ATPL will, i'm sure, have only qualified as an FIr) in order to build hours cheaply toward a job with an airline. They may, just the same, be concientious and do the instructing well. Prior to the JAA formation during 1999 the majority of Instructors will have been PPLs with some being BCPLs.
Prior to the introduction of the BCPL all instructors operated on the PPL privilege and were paid. The cost of becoming an instructor has always been high. Prior to JAA an AFI had to renew by test every 24 months. To become a FI (QFI) the applied instruments instructing course (to teach the IMCr) had to be completed and then an upgrade to FI test passed. Not cheap. Payment for instructing was always expected/demanded. Allowing for inflation I suspect the instructing pay was no lower than it is now.
Continuity was greater than now. Part time instructors normally did a regular day each week. The hour builder required 700hrs pic and therefore would be available to a club for at least 18 months to 2 years. I have had three instructors leave to join an airline over the 6 months, having only worked for us for 3-5 months. This would be quite normal from what most other CFIs tell me. The current requirements are hardly providing continuity.
If anyone saids that a flying club can compete for their services with an airline on pay and prospects then they live in cuckoo land or they are lying!
Prior to the introduction of the BCPL all instructors operated on the PPL privilege and were paid. The cost of becoming an instructor has always been high. Prior to JAA an AFI had to renew by test every 24 months. To become a FI (QFI) the applied instruments instructing course (to teach the IMCr) had to be completed and then an upgrade to FI test passed. Not cheap. Payment for instructing was always expected/demanded. Allowing for inflation I suspect the instructing pay was no lower than it is now.
Continuity was greater than now. Part time instructors normally did a regular day each week. The hour builder required 700hrs pic and therefore would be available to a club for at least 18 months to 2 years. I have had three instructors leave to join an airline over the 6 months, having only worked for us for 3-5 months. This would be quite normal from what most other CFIs tell me. The current requirements are hardly providing continuity.
If anyone saids that a flying club can compete for their services with an airline on pay and prospects then they live in cuckoo land or they are lying!
Parson,
My understanding is that the change will be that PPL instructors will be able to be paid for instructing. That being the case why do you assume that they will in fact work for nothing. They will have paid for their licenses and ratings and will presumably want to see some return for that investment. After all, they are not trying to build hours to make themselves more interesting to an airline recruiter.
As far as continuity is concerned, part time is really irrelevant. The flying club I am a member of has several part time CPL holders instructing on one or two days a week. They all have regular students who have lessons on the same day each week or each fortnight with the same instructor. It matters not to those students whether the instructor works at the flying club on other days. They have continuity of instruction and would still have if those instructors held PPLs.
At the same flying club there are two instructors working part time who hold restricted BCPLs and who presumably under the EASA scheme will revert to a PPL and FI (unrestricted) but will be able to continue to be paid for instructing. I flew with both of them when I did my initial PPL training in the early 1980s and I would guess that they both have between 7 - 10 thousand hours of instructing experience by now. To suggest that they should only be able to instruct NPPL students but a fATPL holder with 250 hrs total time and an FI(r) should be able to instruct to PPL level is just bizarre. Instructing is about being able to solve students problems with judging landings or steep turns or whatever and with experience of instructing that becomes easier for the instructor and more beneficial for the student. It is irrelevant if the instructor rating is contained in a blue, green or brown book. It also again undermines your point about continuity - how many fATPL holders will give a club that sort of length of service either in instructional hours or years? It makes me laugh every time I talk to an airline F/O who says they did loads of instructing and when you ask how much they reply "500hrs". In the old days when everyone started on a PPL 500 hrs instructing wasn't even enough to get you exemptions from the approved CPL course - even though I used it as a stepping stone to a commercial license I instructed full time on a PPL for 7 years and about 4000 hrs instructing giving continuity to plenty of students along the way and never instructing for nothing.
Finally, whilst for some a PPL is the first step on a career ladder for many it is not. There are still a lot of PPL students are in their forties and fifties by the time they can afford to learn to fly, and many of them will find it easier to relate to a part time instructor who has a career outside of aviation than to a 22 year old potential airline pilot, no matter how dedicated an instructor they might be.
Sorry if all that sounds like a rant, but this topic seems to crop up on a regular basis and having held an instructor rating for over 20 years I would suggest that there are good and bad instructors holding PPLs, BCPLs, CPLs and ATPLs. A bit more theoretical knowledge doesn't make a better instructor in a C152 for a PPL, although I would suggest that if the IMC rating remains maybe significant experience in single crew IFR operations or an IR might be a sensible qualification for teaching it.
(edit - sorry homeguard, we were typing at the same time totally agree with you obviously)
My understanding is that the change will be that PPL instructors will be able to be paid for instructing. That being the case why do you assume that they will in fact work for nothing. They will have paid for their licenses and ratings and will presumably want to see some return for that investment. After all, they are not trying to build hours to make themselves more interesting to an airline recruiter.
As far as continuity is concerned, part time is really irrelevant. The flying club I am a member of has several part time CPL holders instructing on one or two days a week. They all have regular students who have lessons on the same day each week or each fortnight with the same instructor. It matters not to those students whether the instructor works at the flying club on other days. They have continuity of instruction and would still have if those instructors held PPLs.
At the same flying club there are two instructors working part time who hold restricted BCPLs and who presumably under the EASA scheme will revert to a PPL and FI (unrestricted) but will be able to continue to be paid for instructing. I flew with both of them when I did my initial PPL training in the early 1980s and I would guess that they both have between 7 - 10 thousand hours of instructing experience by now. To suggest that they should only be able to instruct NPPL students but a fATPL holder with 250 hrs total time and an FI(r) should be able to instruct to PPL level is just bizarre. Instructing is about being able to solve students problems with judging landings or steep turns or whatever and with experience of instructing that becomes easier for the instructor and more beneficial for the student. It is irrelevant if the instructor rating is contained in a blue, green or brown book. It also again undermines your point about continuity - how many fATPL holders will give a club that sort of length of service either in instructional hours or years? It makes me laugh every time I talk to an airline F/O who says they did loads of instructing and when you ask how much they reply "500hrs". In the old days when everyone started on a PPL 500 hrs instructing wasn't even enough to get you exemptions from the approved CPL course - even though I used it as a stepping stone to a commercial license I instructed full time on a PPL for 7 years and about 4000 hrs instructing giving continuity to plenty of students along the way and never instructing for nothing.
Finally, whilst for some a PPL is the first step on a career ladder for many it is not. There are still a lot of PPL students are in their forties and fifties by the time they can afford to learn to fly, and many of them will find it easier to relate to a part time instructor who has a career outside of aviation than to a 22 year old potential airline pilot, no matter how dedicated an instructor they might be.
Sorry if all that sounds like a rant, but this topic seems to crop up on a regular basis and having held an instructor rating for over 20 years I would suggest that there are good and bad instructors holding PPLs, BCPLs, CPLs and ATPLs. A bit more theoretical knowledge doesn't make a better instructor in a C152 for a PPL, although I would suggest that if the IMC rating remains maybe significant experience in single crew IFR operations or an IR might be a sensible qualification for teaching it.
(edit - sorry homeguard, we were typing at the same time totally agree with you obviously)
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing in that FTN release indicates that PPL/FIs will be allowed to receive remuneration
Good news if this is the case.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank goodness - finally we can get back to teaching people how to round out... how to side slip.... and how to operate safely from grass strips... with instructors that just want to fly and be happy to be paid for the love of flying... rather than using it is a stepping stone...
I would even stick my neck out and say the standard of instruction will go up and pilots released to learn for themselves should be better.....
Spend a day @ HH with me and watch the hundred GA movements and see how many are flown correctly.........not many....!!
Good move in my books....
I would even stick my neck out and say the standard of instruction will go up and pilots released to learn for themselves should be better.....
Spend a day @ HH with me and watch the hundred GA movements and see how many are flown correctly.........not many....!!
Good move in my books....
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This instructor shortage was discussed at a meeting at my club last night. Some are of the opinion that with PPL/FI it is all about to go away in a year or so. Others are not. Some said Instructor wages need to go up, others were against it.
There seems to be this misnoma that hundreds of PPL's are just going to be able to become FI's overnight and the whole thing will go away. There are a number of issues that are going to prevent experienced PPL's becoming an FI.
Please correct me if I am wrong on any of the following:
1. Medical. They are going to have to go and do a Class 1 at Gatwick. Some will find they cannot hold a class 1.
2. Financial. I should think you are at present looking at, including test fees and rating issue about £5500 to complete an FI course. That is if you complete in the minimum hours. With the credit crunch at the moment that money maybe hard to come accross for some. On top of this is going to be the cost of getting above mentioned Class 1.
3. Time. A full time six day a week FI course given weather etc is likely to last a month I would say. How many people can afford to take a month of work? Let us suppose they choose the part time route. Maybe four or five months worth of weekends down at an FTO (which may not be local) doing the course. If your in your forties/fifties with family and social commitments is this feasable?
4. Knowledge standard. As part of the FI test there is a two hour oral examination covering a variety of subjects. And the standard required is high. The PoF knowledge level has to be up there at ATPL standard. Some of these PPL's will never have had to do a Performance Exam or Weight and Balance, all of which they will need to study for. And they will not have had the benefit of recently having undertaken ATPL written exams to fall back on. FIE's are not going to give these guys an easier ride then those who have gone down the CPL/IR route.
As one of our old school BCPL instructors said last night "in the old days it was easy to become and Instructor, it is a lot different now".
People in my eyes seem to think Instructing is easy. But there is a big difference bit Instructing and social flying. An 800 hour PPL has probably spent 700 hours of that time flying straight and level. A 800 hour total time FI has probably spent less than 200 hours flying straight and level and that is the big difference.
There seems to be this misnoma that hundreds of PPL's are just going to be able to become FI's overnight and the whole thing will go away. There are a number of issues that are going to prevent experienced PPL's becoming an FI.
Please correct me if I am wrong on any of the following:
1. Medical. They are going to have to go and do a Class 1 at Gatwick. Some will find they cannot hold a class 1.
2. Financial. I should think you are at present looking at, including test fees and rating issue about £5500 to complete an FI course. That is if you complete in the minimum hours. With the credit crunch at the moment that money maybe hard to come accross for some. On top of this is going to be the cost of getting above mentioned Class 1.
3. Time. A full time six day a week FI course given weather etc is likely to last a month I would say. How many people can afford to take a month of work? Let us suppose they choose the part time route. Maybe four or five months worth of weekends down at an FTO (which may not be local) doing the course. If your in your forties/fifties with family and social commitments is this feasable?
4. Knowledge standard. As part of the FI test there is a two hour oral examination covering a variety of subjects. And the standard required is high. The PoF knowledge level has to be up there at ATPL standard. Some of these PPL's will never have had to do a Performance Exam or Weight and Balance, all of which they will need to study for. And they will not have had the benefit of recently having undertaken ATPL written exams to fall back on. FIE's are not going to give these guys an easier ride then those who have gone down the CPL/IR route.
As one of our old school BCPL instructors said last night "in the old days it was easy to become and Instructor, it is a lot different now".
People in my eyes seem to think Instructing is easy. But there is a big difference bit Instructing and social flying. An 800 hour PPL has probably spent 700 hours of that time flying straight and level. A 800 hour total time FI has probably spent less than 200 hours flying straight and level and that is the big difference.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good!
For the first time some good news from EASA! all we need now is a start date for this.
Hopefully it will be before the EASA part M maintenance requirements make it to expensive to fly the aircraft.
Hopefully it will be before the EASA part M maintenance requirements make it to expensive to fly the aircraft.
Excrab,
No need to apologise for the rant. I was not in any way having a go at ppl instructors of the past/present, just making the point that it might have an effect on CPLs wanting to make a living as instructors in the future. If there are a large number of experienced PPLs willing to instruct at a certain club, pure economics mean that rates of pay will be driven down. In reality however, there may be relatively few PPLs willing to fund an FIC course or have the time to do it.
I wasn't implying that instructing pay would ever compete with airlines - of course it wouldn't. But if it was a more sensible wage it may encourage more into F/T instructing and keep up the flow into CPL/IR instruction.
No need to apologise for the rant. I was not in any way having a go at ppl instructors of the past/present, just making the point that it might have an effect on CPLs wanting to make a living as instructors in the future. If there are a large number of experienced PPLs willing to instruct at a certain club, pure economics mean that rates of pay will be driven down. In reality however, there may be relatively few PPLs willing to fund an FIC course or have the time to do it.
I wasn't implying that instructing pay would ever compete with airlines - of course it wouldn't. But if it was a more sensible wage it may encourage more into F/T instructing and keep up the flow into CPL/IR instruction.