FI(R) Course Pre-Entry Flight Test
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In The Overhead
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FI(R) Course Pre-Entry Flight Test
I've searched the forum and LASORS but can't find the answer...
Is it possible to combine the FI(R) course pre-entry flight test with a CPL skills test? If so, is this laid down anywhere in writing please?
Thanks in advance for any replies.
Is it possible to combine the FI(R) course pre-entry flight test with a CPL skills test? If so, is this laid down anywhere in writing please?
Thanks in advance for any replies.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In The Overhead
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose-x,
Many thanks for the reply. I agree two important tests = two lots of stress.
The reason i asked was I'm sure in the past I had read or been told if your CPL examiner is also an FIE, is made aware of the requirement before the test, and certifies you as meeting the standard for the FI pre-entry test, it would be accepted in lieu of a further flight test.
Hence, I was simply seeking clarification, but obviously this isn't the case.
Thanks again.
Many thanks for the reply. I agree two important tests = two lots of stress.
The reason i asked was I'm sure in the past I had read or been told if your CPL examiner is also an FIE, is made aware of the requirement before the test, and certifies you as meeting the standard for the FI pre-entry test, it would be accepted in lieu of a further flight test.
Hence, I was simply seeking clarification, but obviously this isn't the case.
Thanks again.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In The Overhead
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose-x,
Thanks, that'd be much appreciated, but only if it's no trouble.
Did a fair bit of PPL and IMC training in Northants - with NSOF at Sibson.
manxcat
Thanks, that'd be much appreciated, but only if it's no trouble.
Did a fair bit of PPL and IMC training in Northants - with NSOF at Sibson.
manxcat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
manxcat. You are dead right. Both myself and a colleague did skills test during our CPL training with FIE's. They both signed us off respectively for the pre entry FI course check ride. Just remember that you have to start the FI rating within 6 months of pre entry checkride.
Also the CAA were a bit funny about it in LGW when we went to get the rating added to the licence. They additionally require a reference letter from the FIE stating that he or she is happy you meet all requirements.
Good move doing the CPL with an FIE, it'll save you the extra cash needed to do the pre entry FI test. You shouldn't have to do any additional flying, the skills test itself satisfys the pre entry requirements.... so no need to stress about 2 tests! Good luck
Also the CAA were a bit funny about it in LGW when we went to get the rating added to the licence. They additionally require a reference letter from the FIE stating that he or she is happy you meet all requirements.
Good move doing the CPL with an FIE, it'll save you the extra cash needed to do the pre entry FI test. You shouldn't have to do any additional flying, the skills test itself satisfys the pre entry requirements.... so no need to stress about 2 tests! Good luck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In The Overhead
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mixmaster,
Thanks for this. Is it laid down in writing anywhere that this is possible? I asked one of the larger FTOs yesterday and they said it was a no go?
Cheers.
Thanks for this. Is it laid down in writing anywhere that this is possible? I asked one of the larger FTOs yesterday and they said it was a no go?
Cheers.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just be careful when that your CPL examiner / instructor can actually sign off the pre entry flight test.
Not all CPL examiners / instructors hold FIC Authorisations.
This pre-entry flight test really isn't a major stressor.
(f) passed a specific pre-entry flight test
with an FI qualified as in JAR–FCL 1.330(f) based
upon the proficiency check as set out in Appendix
3 to JAR–FCL 1.240
with an FI qualified as in JAR–FCL 1.330(f) based
upon the proficiency check as set out in Appendix
3 to JAR–FCL 1.240
This pre-entry flight test really isn't a major stressor.
Manxcat
I think you are missing the point of the pre-entry test. Whilst it can be done by any FIC instructor, if you came to me for a FI course and said you had passed the pre-entry test with someone else, then I'd refer you back to them for the training.
The test is there to allow an FIC instructor to get a snapshot of a potential candidate and assess the training task ahead. That cannot be achieved by a third party!
I think you are missing the point of the pre-entry test. Whilst it can be done by any FIC instructor, if you came to me for a FI course and said you had passed the pre-entry test with someone else, then I'd refer you back to them for the training.
The test is there to allow an FIC instructor to get a snapshot of a potential candidate and assess the training task ahead. That cannot be achieved by a third party!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree with whopity's point.
The pre-entry test is just what it says. A test prior to the actual course to see if you have what it takes. It is not part of the FI course. This evaluation can be done by any FI-instructor (a FIFI) long before the actual FI course (5 month I think)
You could argue that if the FI-instructor that runs the course really needs to do the pre-entry test, then this test should have been integrated into the FI-course itself, and not be a "stand alone" test.
Regardless, the very first lesson on the FI course is a "right-seat familiarization", at that is what the FI instructor needs to validate the student.
I actually think that it is optimal to have one FIFI pre-evaluate you, and another to do the course.
and btw.. a CPL test requires you to be in the left seat, and the FI test requires you to be in the right seat. I don't really see how (and why) this could be combined.
The pre-entry test is just what it says. A test prior to the actual course to see if you have what it takes. It is not part of the FI course. This evaluation can be done by any FI-instructor (a FIFI) long before the actual FI course (5 month I think)
You could argue that if the FI-instructor that runs the course really needs to do the pre-entry test, then this test should have been integrated into the FI-course itself, and not be a "stand alone" test.
Regardless, the very first lesson on the FI course is a "right-seat familiarization", at that is what the FI instructor needs to validate the student.
I actually think that it is optimal to have one FIFI pre-evaluate you, and another to do the course.
and btw.. a CPL test requires you to be in the left seat, and the FI test requires you to be in the right seat. I don't really see how (and why) this could be combined.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barcelona
Age: 41
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with all your points bar the last lasseb. The reg's state that the pre entry flight test must be a proficency check. There is no requirement for you to sit in RHS.
Lasseb -
There is nothing to disagree with. Whopity simply said that he would not take on an FI student on the basis of a pre-entry test conducted by someone else. As it happens, neither would I or, for that matter, any other FIC instructor that I know. What you say about the pre-entry test is correct but the final decision rests with the FIC instructor. I would also entirely disagree with your contention that there is any advantage in the pre-entry test being conducted by anyone other than the FIC conducting the course and I know this view is shared by the UK CAA.
Where, in JAR-FCL does it require an FIC candidate to be in the right hand seat for the pre-entry test?
I disagree with whopity's point.
a CPL test requires you to be in the left seat, and the FI test requires you to be in the right seat.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, luckily for the rest of the worl, we do not all have to accept the UK CAA's views ;-)
JAR-FCL clearly states that the pre-entry test has nothing to do with the FI-course, and that it can be taken up to 5 month before the course itself.
That the UK CAA wants it to be included as part of the FI course itself must be there problem. It has never been the practice in any of the schools in scandinavien where I reside, nor the UK school where I did my FI. I doubt that it actually is the UK CAA's official viewpoint. It is not in the LASOR to my knowledge. Where did you get that information?
We could discus for ages weather this is good or bad, without getting anywhere. I, and many of my FI colleges, would both accept and encourage the pre entry test and the FI course to be separate things as layed out in the JAR FCL. You apperently would not. Thats kind of the end of that ;-)
I was reffering to CPL versus the FI test. Not the pre-entry test. But think the JAR FCL vaguely states something about the pre-entry test needing to be similar to the FI test.. haven't got the FCL here, but will look into it.
JAR-FCL clearly states that the pre-entry test has nothing to do with the FI-course, and that it can be taken up to 5 month before the course itself.
That the UK CAA wants it to be included as part of the FI course itself must be there problem. It has never been the practice in any of the schools in scandinavien where I reside, nor the UK school where I did my FI. I doubt that it actually is the UK CAA's official viewpoint. It is not in the LASOR to my knowledge. Where did you get that information?
We could discus for ages weather this is good or bad, without getting anywhere. I, and many of my FI colleges, would both accept and encourage the pre entry test and the FI course to be separate things as layed out in the JAR FCL. You apperently would not. Thats kind of the end of that ;-)
I was reffering to CPL versus the FI test. Not the pre-entry test. But think the JAR FCL vaguely states something about the pre-entry test needing to be similar to the FI test.. haven't got the FCL here, but will look into it.
lasseb
It has nothing to do with the CAAs views. I doubt that they even have a view on the matter!
Candidates for FI courses vary greatly in experience and ability. Before training someone it helps to have an idea of of what the training is likely to involve. The Pre-entry test is not a simple pass fail item, it is an opportunity to assess the candidates ability in specific areas and is based upon the content of a SEP class rating proficiency check. The purpose of the test is to assess the applicants ability to undertake the course. (JAR-FCL 1.335(f))
I recall taking on one student that I had not conducted the pre-entry test for; after a number of flights it was very apparent he was wasting his time and mine. If I was going to paint someone's house, I would not do it on the basis of a third party quotation; I consider FIC training much the same. If you don't agree go somewhere else!
It has nothing to do with the CAAs views. I doubt that they even have a view on the matter!
Candidates for FI courses vary greatly in experience and ability. Before training someone it helps to have an idea of of what the training is likely to involve. The Pre-entry test is not a simple pass fail item, it is an opportunity to assess the candidates ability in specific areas and is based upon the content of a SEP class rating proficiency check. The purpose of the test is to assess the applicants ability to undertake the course. (JAR-FCL 1.335(f))
I recall taking on one student that I had not conducted the pre-entry test for; after a number of flights it was very apparent he was wasting his time and mine. If I was going to paint someone's house, I would not do it on the basis of a third party quotation; I consider FIC training much the same. If you don't agree go somewhere else!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it was BilliBob who stated that the UK CAA shared this view, so you have to ask him where he got that from.
As I said we probably will never agree on this matter. I see no reason why a test conducted 6 month before a course must be done by the same instructor as the one doing the course.
Luckily for me, the CAA concurs. We can argue to the end of times and pop up with a 100 examples of this and that, and we'll never agree anyway
.
As I said we probably will never agree on this matter. I see no reason why a test conducted 6 month before a course must be done by the same instructor as the one doing the course.
Luckily for me, the CAA concurs. We can argue to the end of times and pop up with a 100 examples of this and that, and we'll never agree anyway
.
I see no reason why a test conducted 6 month before a course must be done by the same instructor as the one doing the course.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As previously stated the common practice in the flight schools I have been at (mainly Scandinavia/northern Europe) is to have the pre-entry and the course completely separated as specified in JAR-FCL1.
The UK flight schools I have been on / know of in the states (The ones in Florida) uses same practice.
This has not given any problems so far; so yes it's based on experience.
It's admirable that you just want to save the student the money, but making him take another pre-entry test (which is not required by the CAA) is not really a money saver.
The UK flight schools I have been on / know of in the states (The ones in Florida) uses same practice.
This has not given any problems so far; so yes it's based on experience.
It's admirable that you just want to save the student the money, but making him take another pre-entry test (which is not required by the CAA) is not really a money saver.
lasseb
Thanks. I am not saying I would require a candidate to take another pre-entry test, I am simply saying that based upon experience, I would not take on a student I had not assessed. As the purpose defined in JAR-FCL is to determine the candidates suitability to undertake the course, I fail to see how this can be achieved meaningfully by anyone else. I am sure there are those who will happily take the candidates money for a test that has no meaning.
Thanks. I am not saying I would require a candidate to take another pre-entry test, I am simply saying that based upon experience, I would not take on a student I had not assessed. As the purpose defined in JAR-FCL is to determine the candidates suitability to undertake the course, I fail to see how this can be achieved meaningfully by anyone else. I am sure there are those who will happily take the candidates money for a test that has no meaning.
....have the pre-entry and the course completely separated as specified in JAR-FCL1.
Incidentally, I did not mean to suggest by my previous comment that the UK CAA imposes, or even formally projects, a particular view in this area. In many discussions, however, it has been apparent that the CAA's staff examiners share the view with Whopity, myself and others that it is better that the test is conducted by the instructor who is to conduct the course. In any event, either option is compliant with JAR-FCL and so there seems little value to be gained from further argument.