Route to becoming an FIC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Route to becoming an FIC
Can anyone enlighten me on the route to becoming an FIC?
Standards doc 10 talks about "higher than average" levels of instructional ability and experience, then outlines training and assesment requirements
JAR FCL 1.330(f) says 500hrs Instruction and demonstrate ability to an FI(E)
... but what are the "real world" requirements? If I apply with 500hrs instructional experience am I likely to be accepted, or is the bar set higher in reality? Can I become an FIC independently, or do I need to be sponsored by an FTO?
Any real-world experience appreciated!
Standards doc 10 talks about "higher than average" levels of instructional ability and experience, then outlines training and assesment requirements
JAR FCL 1.330(f) says 500hrs Instruction and demonstrate ability to an FI(E)
... but what are the "real world" requirements? If I apply with 500hrs instructional experience am I likely to be accepted, or is the bar set higher in reality? Can I become an FIC independently, or do I need to be sponsored by an FTO?
Any real-world experience appreciated!
Last edited by shy ted; 25th Mar 2011 at 07:08. Reason: typos
Under the present system you need to meet the requirements of Standards Doc 10. As the FI revalidation forms no longer contain a level i.e average; above average etc (They did pre 1999 but no longer PC) then you are required to apply to the CAA and then attend a selection interview where the panel will determine if indeed you are above average. Following the interview and subject to a recommendation, you complete a 2 day course with a FIE and then take a test with an FIE who was one of the members of the selection panel.
You do not need to be sponsored by a FTO, but the approval of the individual is tied to a nominated FTO.
Under EASA things may well be different, if you meet the experience requirements and pass a test with an FIE then the CAA will have to authorise you without adding their own requirements. The standard will inevitably lower and there will be more FIC instructors. The way of Europe!
You do not need to be sponsored by a FTO, but the approval of the individual is tied to a nominated FTO.
Under EASA things may well be different, if you meet the experience requirements and pass a test with an FIE then the CAA will have to authorise you without adding their own requirements. The standard will inevitably lower and there will be more FIC instructors. The way of Europe!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your responses.
I guess I just can't quite imagine an FI with, say, 12 months experience and 500 hours of instructional time in his/her log book turning up for a panel interview and the panel thinking anything other than "no" before he/she even opens their mouth - so if that is the case (which I suspect it well may be) then what experience levels are they actually going to look for?
I guess I just can't quite imagine an FI with, say, 12 months experience and 500 hours of instructional time in his/her log book turning up for a panel interview and the panel thinking anything other than "no" before he/she even opens their mouth - so if that is the case (which I suspect it well may be) then what experience levels are they actually going to look for?
Typically you are looking for around 1500 hours and ideally should have sat in on a FI Course as an observer to see haow its done, because you will get a fair few questions about how you would run an FI Course.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whopity
Interesting how things are likely to change with EASA. The system in the U.S. is similar - no selection or training is required and an FI with two years instructional experience may teach student FI's. I have in the past spent time being "instructed" by a recently "qualified" instructor trainer and his standard was horrible - lot's of masking of the stick and feet on the pedals etc. with absolutely no emphasis on teaching technique or training philosophy. If we go the same way I'm afraid we will have lost a valuable and important tool and future students and trainee instructors will have been done a great disservice. Very sad.
Interesting how things are likely to change with EASA. The system in the U.S. is similar - no selection or training is required and an FI with two years instructional experience may teach student FI's. I have in the past spent time being "instructed" by a recently "qualified" instructor trainer and his standard was horrible - lot's of masking of the stick and feet on the pedals etc. with absolutely no emphasis on teaching technique or training philosophy. If we go the same way I'm afraid we will have lost a valuable and important tool and future students and trainee instructors will have been done a great disservice. Very sad.
The UK phylosophy has always been that the simplest way to control the standard of PPLs is by controling those who train the instructors. That is too elitist for Europe, and we are now expected to believe that overburdening the schools with meaningless paperwork and allowing anyone with the minimum hours to do the training will somehow be better! But of course its all deceided by a bunch of clerks with no real world aviation experience.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or you could argue that it is good to see the old boys club comprised of ex RAF crew on second pensions having their stranglehold broken on the UK flight training industry?
Elitist snobbery comes to mind.
Elitist snobbery comes to mind.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bose - that is complete hoop. There are many senior and well respected individuals in UK FTOs that have never been near the RAF. Equally, CFS has long been recognised as a world leader in flying instruction techniques and standards so it is no surprise that many ex-RAF CFS types are prominent in the industry.
