Different national interpretations of instructor qualifications

[CirrusF]

I was intrigued to learn today from a very experienced Austrian former airline pilot and instructor that according to the Austrian interpretation of FCLs, a qualified FI(A) can give instruction in any qualification that he is qualified himself, after reaching the required hours in that qualification. Thus an FI who holds an Instrument rating (and has 200 hours IFR) automatically can teach instrument flying. An FI who holds a MEP (and at least 50 hours on the class) is automatically a CRI. In the view of the Austrian authority, training for standalone IRI and CRI "specialist" qualifications are only required by those who do not hold a full FI.

I find this argument really quite compelling and logical.

Unfortunately, I hold a French licence and FI rating, and according to my authority, if I wish to teach instrument flying, I have to do an additional specialist course, likewise to become a CRI.

How are the regulations interpreted in other JAR countries? And will it be standardised under EASA?

[Duchess_Driver]

JAR-FCL-1 Subpart H Section 1.330 states that an FI may instruct.....

(d) (1) the issue of an IR(A) provided that the instructor has:
(i) At least 200 hours flight time in accordance with instrument flight rules, of which up to 50 hours may be instrument ground time in a flight simulator or FNPT II; and
(ii) completed as a student an approved course comprising at least 5 hours of flight instruction in an aeroplane, flight simulator or FNPT II (see Appendix 1 to JAR-FCL 1.395 and AMC FCL 1.395) and has passed the appropriate skill test as set out in Appendix 1 to JAR–FCL 1.330 & 1.345;

That, to me, means that you can't teach IR (or IMC for that matter) until you've had the applied instrument restriction removed.

What say others?

[CirrusF]

The Austrian interpretation seems to be that you only have to do the "five hours flight instruction on an aeroplane" if you don't already hold a full FI rating. If you already hold a full FI rating, you have already completed the "five hours instruction", so once you have 200 hours IR you are automatically allowed to teach IR. I have to say I find the argument logical.

[Level 400]

Same is true of examiners qualifications.
In some EU countries e.g. Austria, Italy they do not seem to treat Public Transport and non Public Transport differently. If you are a TRE or CRE you can do LST/LPC/IR and OPC checks without further privileges.

Not so in the UK where you need a Company specific rating to carry out OPC work, even if you are qualified to do the rest.

Harmonisation under EASA would be helpful!!

L400

[Whopity]

you can't teach IR (or IMC for that matter) until you've had the applied instrument restriction removed.

This restriction is only in UK issued licences. It is a hang over from National Ratings. In the rest of Europe they add the IRI qualification rather than remove a homemade "Restriction"

To teach for an IR, you must meet the requirements of JAR-FCL-1 Subpart H Section 1.330

All instruction for an IR you must take place at an approved FTO who are responsible for any standardisation of their staff App 1a to JAR-FCL 1.055

15 The CFI shall be responsible for the supervision of flight and synthetic flight instructors and for the standardisation of all flight instruction and synthetic flight instruction.

Standardisation details must appear in the Operations Manual Section D