FI Renewal Hours
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FI Renewal Hours
Just been completing the SRG 1135 to revalidate my FI rating and in section 8, flying experience I note that the form asks for total flight instruction, rather than flight instruction on SEP/MEP aircraft.
Does this mean that under EASA flight instruction on other types of aircraft now count towards my required renewal totals.
The ANO now points to FCL 940 and although this gives example forms I can't find hours requirements.
Would be nice for us part timers if instructional flown on something like an airbus counted.
Does this mean that under EASA flight instruction on other types of aircraft now count towards my required renewal totals.
The ANO now points to FCL 940 and although this gives example forms I can't find hours requirements.
Would be nice for us part timers if instructional flown on something like an airbus counted.
FCL.940:
From FCL.010 Definitions
That clearly indicates that the experience must be met in the appropriate "Aircraft Category" which is defined as meaning Aeroplanes, Helicopters etc and does not differentiate between SPA or MPA or instructor categories.
If we look at the EASA form for revalidation of a FI rating GM1 FCL.940.FI(a) (2) page 392 in the AMC and GM Instructional experience is simply entered as Single Engine or Multi Engine, no reference to SPA/MPA. Therefore FIs in some EU States will count their Airbus hours towards FI revalidation.
I am not sure if this was a deliberate intention of EASA and looking at SRG1135, the CAA clearly do not see it this way. The CAA form is designed around the various "Instructor Categories" which are blocked out in such a way that hours associated with different instructional privileges are not added together. The CAA interpretation of "Categories" relates to Instructor Categories rather than Aircraft Categories which is published in the legal definition. Whatever the intention, the CAA cannot be more stringent than the basic regulation!
Another example of incompetent regulation.
FCL.940.FI FI — Revalidation and renewal
(a) For revalidation of an FI certificate, the holder shall fulfil 2 of the following 3 requirements:
(1) complete:
(i) in the case of an FI(A) and (H), at least 50 hours of flight instruction in the appropriate aircraft category during the period of validity of the certificate as, FI, TRI, CRI, IRI, MI or examiner. If the privileges to instruct for the IR are to be revalidated, 10 of these hours shall be flight instruction for an IR and shall have been completed within the last 12 months preceding the expiry date of the FI certificate;
(a) For revalidation of an FI certificate, the holder shall fulfil 2 of the following 3 requirements:
(1) complete:
(i) in the case of an FI(A) and (H), at least 50 hours of flight instruction in the appropriate aircraft category during the period of validity of the certificate as, FI, TRI, CRI, IRI, MI or examiner. If the privileges to instruct for the IR are to be revalidated, 10 of these hours shall be flight instruction for an IR and shall have been completed within the last 12 months preceding the expiry date of the FI certificate;
‘Category of aircraft’ means a categorisation of aircraft according to specified basic characteristics, for example aeroplane, powered-lift, helicopter, airship, sailplane, free balloon.
If we look at the EASA form for revalidation of a FI rating GM1 FCL.940.FI(a) (2) page 392 in the AMC and GM Instructional experience is simply entered as Single Engine or Multi Engine, no reference to SPA/MPA. Therefore FIs in some EU States will count their Airbus hours towards FI revalidation.
I am not sure if this was a deliberate intention of EASA and looking at SRG1135, the CAA clearly do not see it this way. The CAA form is designed around the various "Instructor Categories" which are blocked out in such a way that hours associated with different instructional privileges are not added together. The CAA interpretation of "Categories" relates to Instructor Categories rather than Aircraft Categories which is published in the legal definition. Whatever the intention, the CAA cannot be more stringent than the basic regulation!
Another example of incompetent regulation.
The 50 hours can be instruction on any aeroplane, anywhere in the world.
I recently renewed my FI under the 50 hour rule, even though I have never instructed on a SEP, and have never even instructed in EASA land.
I recently renewed my FI under the 50 hour rule, even though I have never instructed on a SEP, and have never even instructed in EASA land.
Last edited by Trim Stab; 5th Nov 2012 at 19:33.
