Restricted Private Pilot Flight Instructor

[Jay_solo]

IF a PPL holder has an FI (R) rating, obviously they can't earn money from the flight instruction they give. So effectively you can only volunteer your services.

So is it common for flying schools or flying clubs to actually use a PPL qualified flight instructor?

Would there be any worth in gaining the qualification with just your PPL?

I'm just curious as to how it can be used in a meaningful and proactive way, even in a part time capacity, considering you wouldnt be paid. And i'm having a hard time thinking of many commercially operated flight schools that would take you on.

[Whopity]

Instructors are Instructors and you have as much chance of instructing on a PPL as a CPL, at least the school will know you are not there pending an airline job. Commercially operated flight schools probably don't do much PPL training but there are plenty of flying clubs that will be able to use you. Once EASA FCL is enacted (2112) at the latest, you will be able to be remunerated for PPL instruction on the basis of a FI rating on a PPL.

[neilr]

I understood that FI with PPL can only instruct at an RTF and not an FTO - and in addtion only up to PPL level (or in other words only up to the level of their license ... which I guess does make sense)

Neilr

[jamie230985]

you cant instruct in the UK on a PPL with an FI(r), you need a CPL to do so. In Europe it is possible however the CAA have put in a difference & opted out of the ICAO legislation to ensure Instructors have enough training as with just a PPL the experienced gained is not enough to allow you to teach effectively!!

[Islander2]

you cant instruct in the UK on a PPL with an FI(r), you need a CPL to do so

Better ask the CAA to revise the ANO then, it's presumably an oversight on their part that it states otherwise!

[Whopity]

The CAA have put in a difference & opted out of the ICAO legislation

No they haven't, you have always been able to instruct on a PPL in the UK! You do need CPL level "knowledge" but that is a requirement of ICAO Annex 1.

[belowradar]

Yes but you can't be paid

If you are a PPL instructor and unpaid chances are that your student will still pay the same club dual rate for instruction.

Is this ethical or legal ? is my understanding correct ?

[chrisbl]

your point is?

[ewsd02]

I think the forthcoming EASA rules will allow PPL FIs to teach what is now effectively the NPPL. So the scope of clients will be quite limited.

There are plenty of FIs around at the moment with CPL/IRs, and granted not a lot of hrs, but at least they have passed some very difficult flight tests.

Another issue is that to pass an FI course in the UK your SEP flying needs to be 'tip top,' and unless you have a lot of hrs, you are better spending the money on a CPL to get to the correct standard.

[2close]

This is an excerpt from NPA 17b which clearly states that PPL FIs can be paid for teaching to PPL level. Of course, the jury is still out on this.

SECTION 2

Specific requirements for the PPL aeroplanes PPL(A)

FCL.205.A PPL(A) Privileges

(a) The privileges of the holder of a PPL(A) are to act without remuneration as pilotincommand or copilot of aeroplanes engaged in noncommercial
operations.

(b) Notwithstanding the paragraph above, the holder of a PPL(A) may receive remuneration for the provision of flight instruction for the LPL(A) or the PPL(A).

[belowradar]

chrisbl

My point is that if the student has paid the club for dual training at normal dual rate then payment has been made for the instructor

If the instructor cannot be paid then why is the student paying a commercial organisation for training at dual rates?

The club should not charge the student if the instructor cannot be paid?

What normally happens is that instructor is unpaid but club pockets a freebie from unwitting student or club pays instructor "in kin" to keep it under the table. Actually not a large problem as not many PPL iNSTRUCTORS AROUND.

[Legal Beagle]

Belowradar - well, if the EASA NPA gets put in place then PPL instructors will, once again, be able to be paid, as 2close points out, which will sort out this small difficulty.

[Whopity]

belowradar

the club is charging you for a service, what they do with the money is up to them, they do not have to charge everything on a pro-rata basis. If their charges are not competitive they will lose custom.

The PPL FI could well be a ground instructor for which he can be paid, provided it does not relate directly to hours flown. How many schools charge you for ground instruction? I know some do, but most don't. The profit margin on a PPL is small so I really can't get excited about a club making £10 because the FI is a PPL holder. The customer is still getting good value for money.

[belowradar]

Whopity

Sorry but I think that it is unethical in my opinion to charge a client not pay the instructor and pocket the difference. Why not be up front and reduce the charge to the client ?

If money is paid for dual training then instructor should have a CPL anything else makes a nonsense of the regs whatever the historical norm that prevails.

And yes I am familiar with EASA proposals but that is work in progress

Discuss ?

[madlandrover]

The problem with charging different rates is that some students will inevitably gravitate to the cheaper FI purely because they're cheaper. Is that ethical for the CPL holding FIs who are suddenly lean on work?

[belowradar]

I can see arguments both ways

1 - DONATE THE DIFFERENCE TO CHARITY

2 - FLY WITH NON CPL FI TO KEEP COSTS DOWN

Just highlighting the ethical aspect of this, no real axe to grind either way.

I Just think that the current system is unethical where client pays full whack and PPL FI fly's for free (although I suspect that clubs do pay FI regardless of CPL or PPL).

[ewsd02]

Sorry to spread yet more negativity, but I will anyway because this is pprune afterall!

Aside from of the relevant arguments, PPL holding instructors being paid is just about the last thing that flying training & therefore aviation needs just now with:

1. The MPL on the horizon possibly allowing students to bypass most of the aircraft based flight training
2. Lots of instructors chasing few jobs
3. Credit crunch economics hitting flying school bookings hard
4. Fuel costs
5. Major airports forcing out flying training with huge landing fees
6. Environmental protesters
7. Have you seen how many plane crashes there have been in the new over the past few weeks?

To those waiting with hope for the new EASA rules: If you want to instruct, do a CPL. If you are good enough to teach PPL, you'll have no issues passing the CPL.

[belowradar]

Airbus A38

Then I guess we will just ignore the regulations concerning remunerated flight instruction because it is much easier to do that ?

If a club were taken to court how would they prove that they did not charge a customer commercial rates for the services of a non commercial flight instructor.

[XXPLOD]

Belowradar - putting my police officer hat on here....

Take them to court? Under what piece of statute?

Since when has it been any kind of offence, civil or criminal to run a legit business and charge someone money for something that costs nowt?

Years ago, when working in catering if the professional qualified chef was off, I often inflicted my cooking on the paying public. They paid the same money for their meal regardless!

[belowradar]

XXXPLOD

Just because you always did it doesn't make it right. What you are saying is that if a FI who is not allowed to charge for his services operates through a third party then charges can be made.

the ANO is the legislation that applies and it is pretty clear

Now off you go to jail for poisoning half of the local community with your dodgy cooking