Restricted FI(A) versus CRI

[Duchess_Driver]

JAR FCL 1.325 details the privilages and restrictions of a newly minted FI(A).

The privilages of a CRI allow for the training for issue of type / class ratngs.

Am I correct in reading that, even though a FI(A) has undergone significantly more training than a CRI (and we're talking SEP) and may have as much or more experience he cannot perform type conversion unless he's supervised by an unresticted instructor?

If I am correct...how wierd is that? Can someone explain the logic?

[BEagle]

Because a CRI may only provide Class Rating instruction to a pilot who already holds a valid pilot licence.

[Duchess_Driver]

I understand that Beags......but why, if I'm reading correctly, can't a restricted FI(A) do the same job as a CRI.

My question is where is the logic if this is the case?

My argument is, and this is in no way meant as demeaning the CRI, the FI will go through more detailed training to undertake 'flying' instruction so why can't he teach someone who already has a licence - unsupervised?

I'm missing something! What?

[Whopity]

There is no logic however, the original purpose of the CRI rating was to replace the TRI for single pilot aeroplanes. In essence this would be a company pilot conducting class and type conversions in an AOC environment where it was considered that such a person did not need to be a FI if they were experienced company pilots training other qualified pilots.

The privileges of the FI(R) were copied from the UK AFI rating and it was considered that they would only be conducting basic PPL training hence the need for a level of supervision. Any class rating conversions would most likely be in a club environment rather than a company environment. The original version of JAR-FCL 1 stated that the privileges of the FI(R) included those of a CRI (SE) but that disappeared quite early on.

Use of the CRI qualification in the UK has developed in a very different way to that anticipated and consequently, this anomaly has arisen. As nobody has raised the issue with the JAA it has not been considered in any of the NPAs. The same situation will exist under EASA-FCL so you now have an issue that you can raise as part of the current consultation.

[Duchess_Driver]

Thanks Whopity.

[easy307]

So, what privileges does a resticted FI(A) have when not associated with a FTO or RTF ?

Could they fly with a ppl who falls outside of the 90 day rule, and needs some guidance with their 3 take offs and landings ?
Could they conduct the 2 yearly SEP revalidation ?
Or, conduct differences training for complex types ?

Can a restricted FI(A) be "supervised" outside of a FTO or RTF ?

[Whopity]

So, what privileges does a resticted FI(A) have when not associated with a FTO or RTF ?

None whatsoever!

JAR–FCL 1.325 FI(A) – Restricted
privileges
(a) Restricted period. Until the holder of a
FI(A) rating has completed at least 100 hours
flight instruction and, in addition, has supervised
at least 25 student solo flights, the privileges of
the rating are restricted. The restrictions will be
removed from the rating when the above
requirements have been met and on the
recommendation of the supervising FI(A).

(b) Restrictions. The privileges are
restricted to carrying out under the supervision
of a FI(A) approved for this purpose:

All approved FIs are notified to the CAA by the RF or FTO.

[r44flyer]

Can the CAA be notified of your approved FI status by more than one FTO?

If not, you can't be self-employed, no?

[Whopity]

FIs working at more than one FTO need the approval of the Authority however FIs can be notified as working at any number of RFs without any restriction.

[eph6]

RTF to FTO

Really interesting thread. As an FI it's bewildering to realise how little flexibility and independence you have.

Slightly off topic. Would you know the requirements and procedure for a flying club to upgrade from an RTF to an FTO to offer CPL, IR etc training.? I was asked this question today. We have students leaving N. Ireland for far off places for lack of an FTO.

[ifitaintboeing]

Slightly off topic. Would you know the requirements and procedure for a flying club to upgrade from an RTF to an FTO to offer CPL, IR etc training.? I was asked this question today. We have students leaving N. Ireland for far off places for lack of an FTO.

See Standards Doc 35

In terms of paperwork, instead of a Flying Order Book, you require an Operations Manual and a Training Manual.

Your aircraft will be individually audited and approved by the CAA for the courses you are offering. Your facilities are also checked, as are the staff who are to provide the course(s).

The cost of FTO approval is here.

[Mickey Kaye]

Those charges look horrific. No wonder it costs so much to train in the UK. With costs like that I'm surprised we have any training going on at all - but seeing how quite Oxford is these days perhaps we haven't.

[MIKECR]

Regards Duchess Drivers original post - is it still the case that restricted FI's must be supervised when carrying out reval's/conversion's, yet a newly qualified CRI can do the needful unsupervised?? The example I would give is this - 172 syndicate member with newly qualified FI(r) rating is asked to do an SEP reval for one of his fellow syndicate member's but has to be 'supervised' to do so. Yet someone with newly minted CRI rating could do it 'unsupervised'?? Almost begs the question of whether its worth(if feesable) applying for a CRI rating at the same time as aplying for the FI(r) rating.

Any thoughts?

[Duchess_Driver]

This was exactly the scenario which raised the original question - had someone in a syndicate wanting to do CRI work but was studying for the full blown FI(R).

I can find nothing in the regs to say that you can't hold an FI(R) and CRI together - but then.....

[MIKECR]

duchess,

sent you a pm

[CirrusF]

There are different national interpretations within JAR of these rules.

For example, Austria follows exactly your logic - an FI(A) is a superior qualification to a CRI. In Austria, once qualified on the type, and having acquired a minimum of 50 hours on it, you are automatically a CRI on that type - this seems very logical to me.

In France (and some other JAR countries), becoming a CRI requires an additional course (requiring payment of fees to the authority), even if your are already an FI(A).

To add to the confusion and lack of professional rigour, France reverts to Austrian logic for TRI qualifications - so if you are a FI(A) and have 200 hours on a type, you automatically become a TRI on that type. Only if you do not hold an FI(A) are you expected to acquire 600 hours on type, and also do some instructional training etc.

[S-Works]

This was exactly the scenario which raised the original question - had someone in a syndicate wanting to do CRI work but was studying for the full blown FI(R).

I can find nothing in the regs to say that you can't hold an FI(R) and CRI together - but then.....

You can hold both at the same time. I hold both an FI and CRI SE/CRI ME. My colleague holds an FI(R) and went and got a CRI SE/CRI ME specifically because he will never be in a position as a company pilot to get the restriction removed.

[TheOddOne]

As I recall, a part of the rationale behind the introduction of the CRI in the UK was to give some official backing to the PFA's system of having pilots experienced on unusual types of a/c helping out less experienced people. It seems to have moved away from that original concept (but see below ref AOPA).

I did the SEP CRI before I embarked upon the FI(R) for a number of reasons. firstly, I didn't have time to do the full FI, Secondly being in a 'syndicate' I wanted to help out newer-qualified pilots from a position of instructional expertise and thirdly to see if I would 'take' to instruction before duing the course. Although the CRI course seems modest in content, done by the right person it can give a great insight to instructional technique. I did mine with the same person with whom I ultimately did my FIC.

Now I've got the restriction removed, I've allowed the CRI to lapse. I no longer see that it offers anything over and above the unrestricted FI.

I read that AOPA are setting up a 'mentoring' scheme. Surely all those putting themselves forward as such will need to do the CRI course and pass the test?? (Or so you'd think!!!)

The Odd One

[DFC]

why can't he teach someone who already has a licence - unsupervised?

What are you going to teach them that requires you to hold an FI or a CRI rating?

Have a look at the very first paragraph of JAR-FCL Subpart H - Instructor Ratings. Are you going to be carrying out flight instruction for the issue of a pilot licence or rating?

No?

Then you don't even need an instructor rating to do it.

The flight will of course not count towards the experience you require to have the rating unrestricted, the other pilot can not use it as the 1 hour with an instructor for rating revalidation and checking the insurance would be a good idea...........oh, and unless you are acting as safety pilot while the other pilot flies under the hood, it is strictly a single pilot operation so only one of you is going to be able to log the flight time.

All the training for which one is required to hold an FI or CRI or TRI rating must be completed at an RTF or FTO or TRTO as appropriate. What restricting the FI rating does from a practical point of view is prevent the new FI from starting their own RTF and offering services on their own. The CRI however does not have such a restriction and there is no requirement to have one.

[jalbert1]

Interesting indeed.I'm just about to start an FI Course.Having considered a CRI I decided the FI offers better long term options.
Now with regard to the discussion above whats to stop one having a CRI issued with the FI(R).After all the 25 hour core teaching element is included as is the 3 hour flying requirement and you pass a Skills Test with an FIE.
So whats the catch?
I wonder if this anomoly has been brought up (AOPA-you listening?) in the EASA consultation.Certainly seems to be illogical as it stands.
Thanks for the help.