Restricted FI
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Restricted FI
Hi
I am aware that under the JAA system a restricted FI can only remove the restriction when they complete at least 100 hours of flight instruction and have supervised at least 25 student solo flights.
Around the world this appears to be different under different regulators.
Does anyone know where I would find an overview of this?
Thanks
I am aware that under the JAA system a restricted FI can only remove the restriction when they complete at least 100 hours of flight instruction and have supervised at least 25 student solo flights.
Around the world this appears to be different under different regulators.
Does anyone know where I would find an overview of this?
Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also the important requirement to have a recomendation for the restriction to be removed.
One could have supervised 250 solo exercises and have 1000 hours instruction but until one is recomended one will remain restricted.
This seems to be forgotten in some places.
One could have supervised 250 solo exercises and have 1000 hours instruction but until one is recomended one will remain restricted.
This seems to be forgotten in some places.
One of the shortfalls of the JAA system is that a lot of part time instructors seldom get the opportunity to supervise student solos. I have come across FI(R)s with hundreds of hours but who can't get the 25 solo sign offs.
The old UK system was 200 hours instruction plus an upgrade (IRI) course and test. And if you didn't upgrade you did a flight test every 13 months.
The old UK system was 200 hours instruction plus an upgrade (IRI) course and test. And if you didn't upgrade you did a flight test every 13 months.
One downside to the solo sign-offs is that sometimes FI(R)'s judgement is distorted by the need to acheive the 25. I have seen solo flights sent when either the conditions were less than ideal, or the subject themselves were close to the limit of their ability.
It's a flight safety hazard.
It's a flight safety hazard.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Likewise it's perfectly OK for the student to do 3 circuits, come in for a coffee, go again = 3 x 20 min circuit trips in a day, earning the FI(R) 3 sign offs rather than 1 sign off from a hour trips!
An upgrade test would be far more useful.
An upgrade test would be far more useful.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen solo flights sent when either the conditions were less than ideal, or the subject themselves were close to the limit of their ability.
The Restricted FI is learning how to do the job. They need to receive appropriate training and be given the opportunity to practice what they learn. Even if they are part time, if they do not get the opportunity to supervise solo flights then they are being let down by the person / organisation that has agreed to give them "on the job training".
Failings in the JAR-FCL system are simply a result of the people involved - The CAA, Training Providers and Supervising Instructors intentionally running the system in the least safe manner to make a political point.
The old UK system - 200 hours of exercise 3 and an easy course and off to teach instrument flying at their own school with all of 20 hours instrument flying (under the hood) in the logbook. Love it.
Likewise it's perfectly OK for the student to do 3 circuits, come in for a coffee, go again = 3 x 20 min circuit trips in a day, earning the FI(R) 3 sign offs rather than 1 sign off from a hour trips!
An upgrade test would be far more useful.
An upgrade test would be far more useful.
On observing the above I would simply ask to sit in on the de-briefing and the briefing for the next flight. There may be a valid reason for having the student stop and come in for a chat.
Perhaps you could expand on how you think a test would be more usefull and just what problem it cures?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is the supervising FI that makes the recomendation not the CFI (unless they are doing the supervision).
People who do not demonstrate the required standard should not be recomended;
This applies just as much to the Student with 45 hours but not demonstrating the required standard not being recomended fro PPL flight test as it does to the restricted FI who has the required hours and solo supervisions to be released.
Provided that appropriate supervision and guidance is provided to the new instructor once it is explained to them where they need to improve and how that is to be acheived they should not have a problem. If they do then that tells a whole story in itself.
Blagger, are you the type of person who thinks that every student sould get a licence at 45 hours regardless of ability? If No then why do you believe that restricted instructors should have the restriction removed despite a clear lack of ability?
Standards anyone?
People who do not demonstrate the required standard should not be recomended;
This applies just as much to the Student with 45 hours but not demonstrating the required standard not being recomended fro PPL flight test as it does to the restricted FI who has the required hours and solo supervisions to be released.
Provided that appropriate supervision and guidance is provided to the new instructor once it is explained to them where they need to improve and how that is to be acheived they should not have a problem. If they do then that tells a whole story in itself.
Blagger, are you the type of person who thinks that every student sould get a licence at 45 hours regardless of ability? If No then why do you believe that restricted instructors should have the restriction removed despite a clear lack of ability?
Standards anyone?
Guest
Posts: n/a
FI(R) - hello, mr DFC supervisor. I've just got my last solo sign off and have now got 250hours instruction as it's such a pain to get the 25 solo sign offs. Please sign my recommendation.
mr DFC supervisor - err, actually I don't think your debriefs are up to scratch and your training records are crap, so I don't think you're ready actually.
FI(R) - so why the funster haven't you addressed that before now with me?
In reality, any FI(R) who can't get to FI sign off standard by the time they have the hours / solo sign offs is either a very rare example of someone who is very poor (and prob not the case as they wouldn't get through FI course and test) or has had crap supervision and guidance.
mr DFC supervisor - err, actually I don't think your debriefs are up to scratch and your training records are crap, so I don't think you're ready actually.
FI(R) - so why the funster haven't you addressed that before now with me?
In reality, any FI(R) who can't get to FI sign off standard by the time they have the hours / solo sign offs is either a very rare example of someone who is very poor (and prob not the case as they wouldn't get through FI course and test) or has had crap supervision and guidance.
Actually you asked for an overview. There is no overview that I am aware of, and as expected you have received a few comments regarding the status quo, which was clearly formulated by a committee with no regard for practicality or safety.
Even the current CAA Policy Dept cannot grasp that experience gained as an FI under another regime builds the same level of judgement as training for a JAA licence. They have restricted FIs with up to 2000 hours claiming they are not JAA hours, and then remove the Restriction on the basis of a meaningless sign off from a non existent CFI. All about as stupid as you can get.
The UK issue a Specific FI(Restricted) rating; there is no such thing in JAR-FCL which simply says: "the privileges of the FI rating will be restricted until" In some States it's left to the FI to apply the Restriction, nothing in their licence identifies if it has been done or not!
Even the current CAA Policy Dept cannot grasp that experience gained as an FI under another regime builds the same level of judgement as training for a JAA licence. They have restricted FIs with up to 2000 hours claiming they are not JAA hours, and then remove the Restriction on the basis of a meaningless sign off from a non existent CFI. All about as stupid as you can get.
The UK issue a Specific FI(Restricted) rating; there is no such thing in JAR-FCL which simply says: "the privileges of the FI rating will be restricted until" In some States it's left to the FI to apply the Restriction, nothing in their licence identifies if it has been done or not!
Last edited by Whopity; 2nd Jan 2011 at 23:50.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FI(R) - so why the funster haven't you addressed that before now with me?
You will note how well I have recorded your progress and how you have signed to acknowledge each record. Now let's look at how you record student progress shall we?
If you are at a school that provides no instructor career training then I can have some sympathy however, any decent school would provide the right encouragement, support, guidance and training if required.
The school that cares little about it's instructor standards cares even less about the students.
--------------
Even the current CAA Policy Dept cannot grasp that experience gained as an FI under another regime builds the same level of judgement as training for a JAA licence. They have restricted FIs with up to 2000 hours claiming they are not JAA hours,
Being able to teach the European system and not try and apple for example US system or an abridged system thereby confusing the whole issue is something totally different.
The restricting prevents these people from operating in a situation where they don't have someone experienced looking over their shoulder for some time. I don't see a problem with it and if they are as good as they claim to be then they will get a recomendation as soon as they have the local experience (hours and solo supervisions).
